Idea
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.3. . . . He also denied the idea that marriage and . . .

Ideal
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.2. . . , said that monogamy was the ideal in the Old Testament./2) . . .

Idealistic
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . other uncompromising and idealistic teaching such as . . .

Ideally
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.6. . . who probably were 'innocent'. Ideally this service occurs . . .

Idols
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . committed adultery with the idols, and stubbornly refused . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . and clothe her lovers, the idols, with whom she also . . .

Ignored
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . Pharisaic rules were often ignored. Also it is uncertain . . .

Illegal
Chap.4 Sect.2 Para.3. . . otherwise. In fact it was illegal for a Roman citizen to . . .

Illegitimate
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . porneia ('indecency') meant 'illegitimate marriage', so . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . porneia ('indecency') meant 'illegitimate marriage', so . . .

Illustrated
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . of God's divorce from Israel illustrated that divorce . . .

Imagine
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.8. . . Jew./To use a modern example, imagine someone asking, "Is it . . .

Immediately
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.4. . . for reasons which are not immediately obvious in . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Matter' divorces, he did not immediately answer the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . meant that one should not immediately seek to divorce an . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . teaching in found in Matthew immediately after the debate . . .

Immorality
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . on the grounds of sexual immorality', or suchlike. . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . porneia meant general sexual immorality, especially . . .

Imperative
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . the verb 'separate' is in the imperative, which indicates a . . .

Implemented
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . offences'. This was implemented in the Divorce

Implications
Chap.5 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Pastoral Implications: The Graeco-Roman . . .

Implicit
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.10. . . added the words which were implicit for any 1st century . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . were recognized as the vows implicit in a marriage . . .

Implied
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . was not uttered or even implied by Jesus. This . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . that Matthew's additions were implied by Jesus' teaching, or . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.5. . . divorce-by-separation, but he implied in v.15 that desertion . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . command 'let no man separate' implied that divorce was . . .

Implies
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . for 'indecency'. This implies that Jesus did not . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.4. . . in both Gospels clearly implies that they were asking . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.4. . . .7.15). Whether or not this implies remarriage (see below) . . .
Chap.3 Sect.5 Para.3. . . to marry Christ./None of this implies that marriage can only . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . 'innocent' can remarry, this implies that breaking marriage . . .

Imply
Chap.1 Sect.2 Para.6. . . divorce. If Paul had meant to imply any distinction, he . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . not separate!'. Both of these imply that it is possible for . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . (as most translations imply) but divorces for 'Any . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . for 'Indecency'" this did not imply that 'Indecency' was the . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . a 'guilty' divorcee might imply that their sin does not . . .

Implying
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . two summaries to his account, implying that the debate went . . .

Importance
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.9. . . had no further practical importance because everyone in . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Jewish teaching, such as the importance of mutual love and . . .

Important
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . , which he considered more important than divorce, and to . . .

Impose
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . the Jews lost the right to impose capital punishment, . . .

Imposed
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . when the death penalty was imposed. He pointed out that . . .

Impossibility
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . as a statement of impossibility, as if it said: . . .

Impossible
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . and cleanliness, and it is impossible to understand . . .
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.6. . . f, Matt.19.12). The second is impossible because, even where . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . argument which makes it impossible for an innocent . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . divorce was possible, not impossible, and the Pauline . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . my experience this is often impossible, because one person . . .

Impractical
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.4. . . concluded that the Bible is impractical and unfair in this . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.2 Para.2. . . centuries. However, they are impractical, and leave a large . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.2. . . regard the Church teaching as impractical./The biblical . . .

Imprisonment
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . , insanity or long terms of imprisonment were introduced . . .

Inability
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.2. . . on a biblical ground?/The inability of 'innocent' . . .

Include
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.1. . . The words which Mark does not include are marked in bold./ . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.2. . . broadened Jesus' exception to include anything which ruined . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . writing for Gentiles, did not include this exception because . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . would not be expected to include this. The Gospels . . .
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.8. . . means that our marriage vows include all the Old Testament . . .

Included
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . , because this one ground included the second ground . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.1. . . Matter' divorces, but this included virtually all . . .

Includes
Chap.4 Sect.2 Para.1. . . the Corinthians that marriage includes the obligations of . . .

Including
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . very wide range of meanings, including anything from a . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.6. . . accounts of this debate, including mention of the other . . .

Indecency
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.2. . . divorces his wife, except for 'Indecency' [Greek porneia], . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.2. . . his wife, except for 'Indecency' [Greek porneia], . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . all. The phrase 'except for indecency' is usually . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . degradation. I have used 'indecency' because this word . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . degradation. I have used 'indecency' because this word . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . the start of 'Any Matter' and 'Indecency' because, as I will . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . start of 'Any Matter' and 'Indecency' because, as I will
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . was forbidden except for 'Indecency' (which was usually . . .
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . was forbidden except for 'Indecency' (which was usually . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . later added the exception for 'indecency'. This implies that . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . added the exception for 'indecency'. This implies that . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . suggested that porneia ('indecency') meant . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . suggested that porneia ('indecency') meant . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.2. . . the Shammaites interpreted as 'Indecency'. Rabbinic . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.2. . . Shammaites interpreted as 'Indecency'. Rabbinic . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.3. . . his wife except if he found indecency in her, since it . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . the phrase 'a matter of indecency' (Hebrew ervat davar . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . for divorce: 'Any Matter' and 'Indecency', whereas the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . divorce: 'Any Matter' and 'Indecency', whereas the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . a single ground for divorce, 'Indecency'. The Hillelite . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . a single ground for divorce, 'Indecency'. The Hillelite . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . included the second ground 'Indecency'. The Shammaites . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . included the second ground 'Indecency'. The Shammaites . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . the phrase 'nothing except Indecency'. Matthew added . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.6. . . divorce for "nothing except 'Indecency'" (the Shammaite . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.6. . . divorce for "nothing except 'Indecency'" (the Shammaite . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.5. . . Moses 'commanded' divorce for 'Indecency', whereas Jesus . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.5. . . 'commanded' divorce for 'Indecency', whereas Jesus said . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . . He allowed divorce for 'Indecency', though he . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . . He allowed divorce for 'Indecency', though he . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.3. . . if he found a matter of 'Indecency' in her, since it . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.3. . . if he found a matter of 'Indecency' in her, since it . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.4. . . his wife except if he found 'Indecency' in her./It is . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.4. . . his wife except if he found 'Indecency' in her./It is . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.5. . . wife, except for a matter of 'Indecency'... (Matt.5.32). . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.5. . . wife, except for a matter of 'Indecency'... (Matt.5.32). . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.5. . . divorces his wife, except for 'Indecency'... (Matt.19.9)/ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.5. . . his wife, except for 'Indecency'... (Matt.19.9)/ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.8. . . only allowed divorce for 'Indecency'. However, we know . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.8. . . only allowed divorce for 'Indecency'. However, we know . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . of all divorces "except for 'Indecency'" this did not . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . of all divorces "except for 'Indecency'" this did not imply . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . " this did not imply that 'Indecency' was the only . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . " this did not imply that 'Indecency' was the only . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . divorce in Deut.24.1 except 'Indecency'". They did not . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . divorce in Deut.24.1 except 'Indecency'". They did not mean . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . in all Scripture, except 'Indecency'". It would be . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . in all Scripture, except 'Indecency'". It would be . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.2. . . in Deuteronomy only meant 'Indecency'. He added that if . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.2. . . in Deuteronomy only meant 'Indecency'. He added that if . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.2. . . (unless it was a matter of 'Indecency') they were not . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.2. . . (unless it was a matter of 'Indecency') they were not . . .

Indecent
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.3. . . says: For he found in her an indecent matter [Deut.24.1]./ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.3. . . says: For he found in her an indecent matter [Dt.24.1]." . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.3. . . says: For he finds in her an indecent matter [Dt.24.1]."/ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.3. . . were:/1) Deut.24.1: 'an indecent matter', i.e. . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . second half of the phrase 'an indecent matter' in Deut.24.1. . . .

Independent
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.2. . . other matters. Jesus was an independent interpreter whose . . .

Indicates
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . is in the imperative, which indicates a command or a plea, . . .
Chap.3 Sect.5 Para.1. . . divorce, and neither of them indicates that death is the . . .

Indiscretion
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . anything from a sexual indiscretion to grievous . . .

Indissolubility
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . ./It is only the indissolubility argument which . . .

Indissoluble
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.6. . . a former spouse lives. If the indissoluble view of marriage . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.4. . . a grave sin'./The concept of indissoluble marriage has very . . .

Infertility
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . repudiated the Jewish use of infertility as a ground for . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.4. . . that this command made infertility a ground for . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . for divorce in Scripture: infertility (Gen.1.22, 28), . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.3. . . a divorce on the grounds of infertility. Jesus did not say . . .

Influential
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.2. . . Sarum, the most complete and influential of the early . . .

Initiate
Chap.1 Sect.2 Para.1. . . that Christians should not initiate a divorce and should . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . , because only men could initiate divorce. However, a . . .

Innocence
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . kind of court to establish innocence and guilt. In my . . .

Innocent
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . to allow remarriage for innocent divorcees./The . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . .4 LXX). Although God was the innocent party in this divorce . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.1. . . church allow remarriage of 'innocent' divorcees after . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.1. . . church allow remarriage of 'innocent' divorcees after . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.2. . . ground?/The inability of 'innocent' divorcees to . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.2. . . ground?/The inability of 'innocent' divorcees to remarry . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . makes it impossible for an innocent divorcee to remarry. . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.3. . . allowed remarriage for the innocent partner, and even . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.4. . . support, and makes even innocent divorcees into guilty . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . matter. However, if only the 'innocent' can remarry, this . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . matter. However, if only the 'innocent' can remarry, this . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . decides to remarry only the 'innocent', it will have to . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . decides to remarry only the 'innocent', it will have to set . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . person is rarely completely innocent./In pastoral practice . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.3. . . whether a divorcee is innocent or guilty and no-one . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.6. . . by those who probably were 'innocent'. Ideally this . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.6. . . by those who probably were 'innocent'. Ideally this . . .

Insanity
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . such as cruelty, desertion, insanity or long terms of . . .

Inscriptions
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.7. . . woman'. The term is found in inscriptions and funeral . . .

Insight
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . have not yet applied this insight to practical theology. . . .

Inspiration
Chap.5 Sect.2 Para.3. . . and the nature of scriptural inspiration. These are more . . .

Inspired
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . those who regard Scripture as inspired, because Matthew . . .

Instance
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . or Graeco-Roman convert. For instance, it is difficult to . . .

Instances
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.2. . . Fathers, there were several instances of Christian . . .

Instead
Chap.3 Sect.2 Para.3. . . on this legalistic approach. Instead of speaking about how . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.4. . . as a basis of their morality instead. This confusion would . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.3. . . grounds for divorce. But instead, he took the pragmatic . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.4 Para.4. . . uncertain doctrine and should instead emphasize the . . .

Institutions
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.9. . . over all legal and religious institutions. Before 70 CE, . . .

Instone-brewer
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.4. . . 1) and other resources at www.Instone-Brewer.com. For a . . .

Intention
Chap.3 Sect.1 Para.2. . . partner had declared their intention to divorce./In the . . .

Interested
Chap.3 Sect.2 Para.1. . . : Paul, like Jesus, was more interested in marriage than . . .

Interpretation
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . virtually unanimous in this interpretation, from Hermas in . . .
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.2. . . followed the traditional interpretation as refined by . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Understood Jesus: 1st Century Interpretation: To understand . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.2. . . . This was based on their interpretation of a phrase in . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.6. . . 'Any Matter'?" (the Hillelite interpretation). He replied, . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.6. . . 'Indecency'" (the Shammaite interpretation). This meant . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . . Since Jesus repudiated this interpretation, he presumably . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . divorce, which relied on this interpretation./ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.1. . . a question concerning the interpretation of Deut.24.1, . . .
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.6. . . not be a womanizer./The first interpretation is contradicted . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . .4 Summary Of The 1st Century Interpretation: 1st century . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2 Para.2. . . reader would have a different interpretation to that of a . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.1. . . believer. This '1st century' interpretation suggests that . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.2. . . synagogue. The traditional interpretation (divorce only . . .

Interpretations
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . Traditional Interpretations: The Church . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.1. . . Modern Interpretations: Pastorally . . .

Interpreted
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . (which was usually interpreted as 'adultery') and . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.2. . . .24.1 which the Shammaites interpreted as 'Indecency'. . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . ). The Hillelite Pharisees interpreted the phrase as two . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.5. . . , whereas the Shammaites interpreted it as a single . . .
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.1. . . one husband'. This has been interpreted in many different . . .

Interpreter
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.2. . . . Jesus was an independent interpreter whose opinion . . .

Interpreters
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.3. . . the saying. This makes many interpreters think that . . .
Chap.1 Sect.2 Para.3. . . is ended by death. Many interpreters have concluded . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.2. . . to a similar degree. Other interpreters suggest that . . .
Chap.3 Sect.4 Para.2. . . a 1st century reader. Modern interpreters have argued . . .

Interpreting
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . highlight the difficulties of interpreting them. The phrase . . .

Introduced
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.2. . . 1st century. The Hillelites introduced a new 'no-fault' . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . new type of divorce which was introduced by the Hillelites. . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.6. . . the 'Any Matter' divorce was introduced, and even a woman . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . terms of imprisonment were introduced in The Matrimonial . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.3. . . the first 'no-fault' bill was introduced in California in 19 . . .

Introduces
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . even implied by Jesus. This introduces a new problem for . . .

Invalid
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . for 'Any Matter' were invalid, so they were still . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.1. . . said that all divorces were invalid, and anyone who . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.1. . . those who remarried after an invalid divorce get divorced . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.2. . . person who remarried after an invalid divorce was . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.2. . . divorced-by-separation (an invalid form of divorce) that . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.4. . . of remarriage after an invalid divorce, in order to . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.4. . . technical adultery, due to an invalid divorce, would not be . . .

Invented
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.5. . . it is possible that Matthew invented it, though it fits . . .

Invention
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.1. . . Century Judaism: Before the invention of 'Any Matter' . . .

Invite
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . partner, but one should invite repentance. However, . . .

Irretrievable
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . that the principle of 'irretrievable breakdown' of . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . that the principle of 'irretrievable breakdown' of . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . Reform Act 1969 which defined 'irretrievable breakdown' by a . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.1 Para.2. . . Act 1969 which defined 'irretrievable breakdown' by a . . .

Irreversible
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.2. . . marriage must therefore be irreversible, just as the . . .
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.2. . . of baptism and ordination are irreversible./Some Reformers, . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.3. . . divorce had happened and was irreversible, so the marriage . . .

Israel
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . divorce. Jeremiah described Israel as God's 'hard-hearted' . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . God eventually had to divorce Israel (see below) but only . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . of God's divorce from Israel by the Old Testament . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . They described God divorcing Israel and later temporarily . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . which God had kept but which Israel had broken: God loved . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . Israel had broken: God loved Israel and he provided food . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . food and clothing, but Israel used them to feed and . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . 16.16-19). Jeremiah said that Israel stubbornly refused to . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . example of God's divorce from Israel illustrated that

Jargon
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . we can understand the legal jargon which Jesus is using, . . .

Jer
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . from Judah (Hos.2.2; Jer.3.1-5; Is.50.1). Ezekiel . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . he called her 'hard-hearted' (Jer.4.4 LXX). Although God was . . .

Jeremiah
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . would probably think about Jeremiah 3-4, because this is . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . of marriage or divorce. Jeremiah described Israel as . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . adultery (Ezek.16.16-19). Jeremiah said that Israel . . .

Jerusalem
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.9. . . obvious. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE resulted in . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.4. . . 1]."/The later account in the Jerusalem Talmud is even . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.2. . . after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the separation . . .

Jesus
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Jesus' teaching on divorce is . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.4. . . as 'for any cause' so that Jesus was asked, in effect, if . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . the legal jargon which Jesus is using, in the way . . .
Chap.1 Sect.2 Para.1. . . 3-5), and he reminded them of Jesus' teaching on divorce. He . . .
Chap.1 Sect.3 Para.1. . . meaning of these texts, that Jesus forbade all divorce, . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.1. . . which were stated by Jesus and Paul, while others . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.2. . . ./David Atkinson broadened Jesus' exception to include . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.2. . . interpreters suggest that Jesus and Paul were simply . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . . This implies that Jesus did not allow any . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.3. . . at all, which fits in with Jesus' other uncompromising . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.4. . . implies that they were asking Jesus his opinion of what the . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.5. . . the Pharisees were asking if Jesus sided with them. When . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . if the Pharisees knew that Jesus forbade all divorce, . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . uttered or even implied by Jesus. This introduces a new . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . changing the teaching of Jesus. Therefore some scholars . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . additions were implied by Jesus' teaching, or could at . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . marriage', so that Jesus allowed remarriage only . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . and adultery. Therefore, if Jesus had meant to give such a . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . ./R. H. Charles argued that Jesus presented his teaching . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . exception in the spirit of Jesus' teaching. However, it . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . by Andrew Cornes, was that Jesus allowed divorce for . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.10. . . Matthew has either changed Jesus' teaching, or he has . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Jews Would Have Understood Jesus: 1st Century . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . it is difficult to understand Jesus' criticisms of the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.6. . . follows:/The Pharisees asked Jesus: "Does the Law (i.e. . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Jesus on Marriage: When Jesus . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Jesus on Marriage: When Jesus was asked his opinion . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . the following areas where Jesus disagreed with . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.2. . . in 1st century Palestine. Jesus, however, said that . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . (i.e. stubbornness). Jesus did not explain what he . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . get her to repent. Presumably Jesus meant that one should . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.4. . . to repent. This agrees with Jesus' teaching that we should . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.5. . . for 'Indecency', whereas Jesus said that Moses merely . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.5. . . compulsory after adultery. Jesus wanted to emphasize that . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . on divorce (Matt.19.10-12). Jesus said that a man may . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . to strive to fulfil. Since Jesus repudiated this . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.1. . . Jesus on Divorce: The . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.1. . . Pharisees eventually brought Jesus back to their question. . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.1. . . Matthew made it clear that Jesus was answering a question . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.2. . . , would have been useful./Jesus made it clear that he . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.2. . . position on other matters. Jesus was an independent . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . matters, as listed above./Jesus' words 'Those whom God . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.4. . . should not do so./Therefore Jesus was not condemning 'any . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.1. . . : The shortest summary of Jesus' teaching (in Luke 16.18 . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.1. . . purposes. Strictly speaking, Jesus only condemned the 'Any . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.1. . . Palestine. So, in effect, Jesus said that all divorces . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.7. . . about. They never record Jesus forbidding polytheism or . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.7. . . a non-Jewish world. But where Jesus disagreed with the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.8. . . , and then consider why Jesus was silent about them./ . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.4. . . repulsive to their partner. Jesus rejected this ground for . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.4. . . was not compulsory (see 'Jesus on Marriage' above)./3) . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.4. . . was not compulsory (see 'Jesus on Marriage' above)./3) . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.1. . . Jesus' silence on other . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.1. . . for divorce: It is clear that Jesus condemned the Hillelite . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.1. . . his silence is so surprising. Jesus was asked about a . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . and Shammaites./When Jesus denied the validity of . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . It would be extraordinary if Jesus meant something . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . of people. It is likely that Jesus, like the Shammaites and . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.3. . . of 'food, clothing or love'./Jesus was silent on these . . .
Chap.3 Sect.2 Para.1. . . Paul on Marriage: Paul, like Jesus, was more interested in . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.2. . . appealed to the teaching of Jesus who condemned the . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.5. . . law and the teaching of Jesus./Did Paul allow the . . .
Chap.3 Sect.5 Para.2. . . 7.1-4 is a metaphor about Jesus and the Law. Paul says . . .
Chap.3 Sect.6 Para.6. . . is contradicted by Paul and Jesus who both speak highly . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Jewish hearers and readers of Jesus' words came to the . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.2. . . matter' in Deut.24.1./Jesus was asked if he agreed . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.3. . . adultery if they remarried./Jesus also disagreed with many . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.3. . . the grounds of infertility. Jesus did not say anything . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.1. . . The overall emphasis of both Jesus and Paul was that . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.1. . . stubbornly unrepentant. Both Jesus and Paul condemned the . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . and consequently thought that Jesus condemned all remarriage . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . . The Jewish background of Jesus' divorce teaching was . . .
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.8. . . vows which were affirmed by Jesus and Paul, and which were . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.2 Para.1. . . abuse, which were affirmed by Jesus and Paul (according to . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.2. . . their original spouse?/Jesus' and Paul's teaching . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.2. . . to give different answers. Jesus said that a person who . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.4. . . , we need to look again at Jesus' conclusion. It is . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.3 Para.4. . . . It is possible that Jesus was merely stating the . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.1. . . interpretation suggests that Jesus and Paul taught against . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.1. . . and emotional neglect. Jesus affirmed the first . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.1. . . their marriage vows, and Jesus suggested that a . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.4. . . , see W. Heth & G. Wenham, Jesus and Divorce (London: . . .

Jew
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . technical legal terms. Any Jew in the 1st century would . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . . For example, a 1st century Jew might think that a . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.7. . . context for any 1st century Jew./To use a modern example, . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.8. . . it. Therefore any 1st century Jew would add the obvious . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.1. . . of 'Any Matter' divorces, a Jew could only get a divorce . . .

Jewish
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.5. . . show below, they are actually Jewish technical legal terms. . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . in both Graeco-Roman and Jewish law. We now know that . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . recent papyrus has shown that Jewish women were able to . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . worldview of a 1st century Jewish or Graeco-Roman convert . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Matthew 23 without studying Jewish laws about tithing and . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.7. . . , because any 1st century Jewish reader would have . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . where he disagreed with his Jewish contemporaries. He may . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . where he agreed with normal Jewish teaching, such as the . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.1. . . disagreed with contemporary Jewish teaching:/1) Marriage . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . also repudiated the Jewish use of infertility as a . . .
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . as such in several ancient Jewish marriage contracts. One . . .
Chap.3 Sect.1 Para.3. . . , the Graeco-Roman and Jewish world were very similar . . .
Chap.3 Sect.1 Para.3. . . only compulsory words on a Jewish get or divorce . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.5. . . adultery, in accordance with Jewish law, Graeco-Roman law . . .
Chap.3 Sect.4 Para.2. . . remind them of the wording in Jewish and Graeco-Roman . . .
Chap.3 Sect.5 Para.2. . . the Law. Paul says that the Jewish convert is like someone . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Interpretation: 1st century Jewish hearers and readers of . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.3. . . disagreed with many other Jewish presuppositions about . . .
Chap.4 Sect.2 Para.3. . . established right, in both Jewish and Graeco-Roman law, . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . had lost all knowledge of the Jewish background of the . . .
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . remarriage as adultery. The Jewish background of Jesus' . . .
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.4. . . and cherish'). Ancient Jewish marriage contracts also . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2 Para.1. . . a marriage ceremony. The Jewish 'Any Matter' divorce . . .
Chap.5 Sect.3 Para.2. . . church lost touch with the Jewish background at a very . . .

Jews
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.5. . . sense, however, if a group of Jews existed which forbade all . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . teaching on divorce while the Jews still had the authority . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.8. . . changed greatly when the Jews lost the right to impose . . .
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.1. . . Ch.2 How 1st Century Jews Would Have Understood . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.7. . . to mention things which all Jews agreed about. They never . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.4. . . fruitful and multiply'. The Jews thought that this command . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . the Shammaites and all other Jews, accepted the validity of . . .
Chap.3 Sect.1 Para.1. . . to a mixture of Greeks and Jews who lived outside . . .

Joined
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.2. . . his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the . . .
Chap.1 Sect.1 Para.2. . . flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . words 'Those whom God has joined, let no-one separate' . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.3. . . it said: 'Those whom God has joined cannot separate'. In . . .

Joseph
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.7. . . the spirit of his teaching./Joseph Bonsirven and others . . .

Judah
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . temporarily separating from Judah (Hos.2.2; Jer.3.1-5; Is. . . .

Judaism
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . , in any case, compulsory in Judaism. They maintained that . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . was not compulsory outside Judaism. However, divorce was . . .
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . Jewish law. We now know that Judaism was extremely diverse . . .
Chap.2 Sect.2 Para.6. . . life - whereas Rabbinic Judaism taught that 'go forth . . .
Chap.2 Sect.3 Para.2. . . with most other branches of Judaism with regard to several . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.7. . . , because all branches of Judaism already condemned . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.8. . . grounds which all branches of Judaism in the 1st century . . .
Chap.2 Sect.5 Para.1. . . for Divorce in 1st Century Judaism: Before the invention . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.1. . . with some or all branches of Judaism (as listed above). In . . .
Chap.3 Sect.3 Para.2. . . the no-fault divorce in Judaism - the Hillelite 'Any . . .
Chap.4 Sect.1 Para.1. . . . All branches of Judaism were agreed that there . . .
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.7. . . a marriage vow in 1st century Judaism and Christianity, . . .

Judge
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.9. . . a divorce had to choose a judge who would allow the type . . .

Keep
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.2. . . man vows to 'esteem, honour, keep, and protect' while the . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.4. . . for the future, to be able to keep the promises which I will . . .

Keeps
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.3. . . ] and cherishes it [lit 'keeps warm', i.e. 'clothes'], . . .
Chap.5 Sect.1 Para.3. . . ] and cherishes it [lit 'keeps warm', i.e. 'clothes'], . . .

Kept
Chap.2 Sect.6 Para.2. . . marriage vows which God had kept but which Israel had . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.4. . . to others which I have not kept. I have promised to love . . .

Kind
Chap.5 Sect.2.5 Para.2. . . , it will have to set up some kind of court to establish . . .

Knew
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.6. . . addition if the Pharisees knew that Jesus forbade all . . .

Know
Chap.1 Sect.4 Para.9. . . and Jewish law. We now know that Judaism was . . .
Chap.2 Sect.4 Para.8. . . for 'Indecency'. However, we know that they also allowed . . .
Chap.2 Sect.7 Para.2. . . the same phrase, and we know that they also allowed . . .

Knowledge
Chap.4 Sect.3 Para.2. . . , the Church had lost all knowledge of the Jewish . . .

Known
Chap.2 Sect.1 Para.9. . . CE, this debate was very well known, because anyone seeking . . .
Chap.5 Sect.2 Para.2. . . presented here has been well known in the scholarly . . .