An obvious contradiction?

Deuteronomy 24 allows for divorce and remarriage. When we turn to
Luke 16:18 we see the opposite

Using the ESV version because it’s the most obvious.

17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.
18 "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. - Luke 16:17-18

I know this is a hot topic for some. Many will say God hates divorce and I agree. Many will say Moses allowed for the hardness of your hearts but it wasn’t that way from the beginning and I agree. But trying to stay on track here I’d like to discuss the obvious contradiction. The take away from Deuteronomy 24 is that divorce and remarriage is allowed and then according to the ESV Jesus states it’s easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the law to become void and then he voids the law.

Actually there is no contradiction. What is allowed in Deuteronomy is also allowed in Matthew, although the terminology is not identical.

"SOME UNCLEANNESS"
When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness* in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

*Strong's Concordance
ervah: nakedness
Original Word: עֶרְוָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: ervah
Phonetic Spelling: (er-vaw')

In Luke the exception has not been stated. Therefore all Scriptures regarding a specific subject should be taken into account.
Definition: nakedness

Brown-Driver-Briggs
2 עֶרְוַת דָּבָר nakedness of a thing, i.e. probably indecency, improper behaviour Deuteronomy 23:15; Deuteronomy 24:1(see Dr).

"FORNICATION"
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Jesus has an exception: "except for sexual immorality". This is an issue that has to do with our priesthood before God. If you read Leviticus the standard for the priest was very high. They had to marry a virgin and even they were not allowed to marry a divorced women. This was an issue with Charles Stanley. In his church he would be disqualified from being a pastor if he was divorced. Holiness and consecration with God is important if you want to serve Him and represent Him. For many are called but few are chosen because they are not willing to pay the price to be used by God. This is not a condition for salvation because our salvation is not based on our works. "For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast." (Eph2:8,9)

Actually there is a contradiction. @Nehemiah6

The ESV claims that Jesus stated everyone who marries a divorced person is guilty of adultery, everyone meaning all.

There is no contradiction at all.. In matthew Jesus allowed divorce if the offending partner commited adutry.. And i trust in the KJV not so much the other more ""modern??" translations..

Matthew 5: KJV
32 "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

Pointing to the exception clause does not explain away the contradiction/voiding of the law in Luke.

I’m sorry, I’m not trying to be argumentative but there’s an obvious problem here.

There is even a voiding of law according to the KJV version of the Matthew 5 verse you quoted.
And whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

The Greek word for whosoever is pas: any, all, every...

Everyone who marries a divorced woman is guilty of adultery. Everyone means everyone.

The accounts of Matthew and Luke where both recording the same speech of Jesus... There is a rewason why we have 4 Gospels and that is to fill in what is missing in one account by reading the other 3 accounts.. If there was one comprehensive Gospel that covered all the needed teachings of Jesus then we would only have 1 Gospel in the Bible.. If lets say Matthew had covered all the words and actions of Jesus then we would not need Mark Luke and John..

The obvious problem is not with the Word of God.. The obvious problem is with human beings who are naturally imperfect and limited in understanding attacking the Word of god and declaring His Word to be faulty..

And anyone who marries a divorced woman who has been divorced without cause ( adultery / fornication ) is in fact guilty of adultery because the only divorce acceptable and sanctioned by God is the one where one of the married couple has committed Adultery.. This is the wisdom you get when to combine all the Gospels and take them all as a whole..

Too many people establish doctrine on One verse and doggedly stick to that verse as justification for their belief.. But they refuse to take on board the entire council of the Word of God so they can get a more clear understanding of the actual will of God... In Context..

1 Timothy 3 states the qualifications of our church leaders .. Are all qualified, no

As always the secret to understanding the Word of God is "research"!! Deuteronomy 24:1 does not declare that a man can simply divorce hie wife.
Deu 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
That word "Uncleanness" means and is talking about an act of Indecency or Improper Behavior according to the Strongs and the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew/English Lexicon. In other words Deu. 24:1 is talking about a sexual sin against not only the husband but against God also. So now let us examine Luke 16:18
Luk 16:17-18 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Again research and study always give you insights about the Word of God. Luke 16:17-18 has nothing to do with whether or not the Bible gives permission for a man to divorce his wife, is speaking about how it is a sin to put away your wife for no reason. It looks like you have quoted the wrong scripture and there is no contradiction. However the scripture you are looking for is Mat. 19:9
Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
So in the Word of God the only biblically legal reason a man can divorce his wife is if she has committed an act of "Indecency or Improper Behavior" against her husband.
So the bottom line here is that there is not at all a contradiction and both scriptures are talking about the very same thing. God has never simply allowed a man to divorce his wife for any reason except for committing a sexual act against her husband.

There's really no problem when all the Scriptures are harmonized.

MATTHEW 19:9: THE EXCEPTION CLAUSE (CORRESPONDS TO DEUT 24:1)
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

MARK 10:11,12: THE TOTAL TEACHING (EXCEPTION NOT SHOWN)
And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

LUKE 16:18: THE TOTAL TEACHING (EXCEPTION NOT SHOWN)
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

Since there is no question that Matthew 19:9 is authentic, and both the Critical and the Received Texts have μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ (except for fornication) or as the modern versions have it, sexual immorality, then we must take all three passages together and see that two of them omitted the exception, and one retained it.

I agree with and am in awe of the perfection of God’s word, it’s the translation I have a problem with.

Look at the text guys, try forget what you think you know about the exception clause and answer the question solely based on the text.

Whosoever marries her that is divorced committeth adultery.

If the Duet. 24 law allowed a woman guilty of ervah (uncleanliness) to be divorced and remarry then why does the KJV and ESV claim Jesus says it’s adultery to marry any divorced woman?

Again, I’m not tying to argue for the sake of argument. I’m trying to reveal a largely overlooked problem with the translation. The translation is what causes false understanding of these verses and sadly some very bad doctrine.

Matthew 19:8-9 (KJV) He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

It is important to look at the Text, however one must look at the Text with UNDERSTANDING, elsewise, they will just be confused

In thought, how is it that with things such as this so many here want to only focus on the Law of Moses, while in other matters they discount the need to worry over the Law? IF we are no longer under the Law, and now are under Grace, why do people want to fuss over the Law? Hmm............

Well, there’s a problem with some translations bud and I’m using the fact that the law cannot be voided to show that.
Jesus fulfilled the law and we’re all thankful He did but he never changed a law to mean the exact opposite of the original.
Duet. 24 allows a woman guilty of uncleanliness to remarry, seemingly as many times as she wants just not to the original husband. But according to English translations Jesus states anyone who marries a divorced woman is guilty of adultery. That’s a problem.

The point is that Deut 24 was not God's original intent but a permissive intent on God's part. God's original intent is in Luke 16 and Matt 19 which is the true Word on the matter.

That is not what it is saying.

("technically")

Consider:

Matthew 19:

9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Keep in mind that this verse is describing a scenario that does not include the 'exception'.

Now, pay close attention to the colon and the phrase 'which is put away' - specifically referring to the just-described scenario.

In the context of this verse/passage, the last part of the verse is not generally referring to any woman involved in any divorce.

Because of the way it is worded, the 'exception' applies to the whole verse; the last part of the verse does not "stand alone" in such a way that decribes a separate 'unconditional' scenario.

I hope this explanation makes sense.

Yes - it still leaves a lot "wide-open" for/in that scenario - it is referring to any scenario where the husband divorces his wife "without a good-enough reason" -- but, it does not include the 'exception'.

Therefore, I do not believe that there is a contradiction with Deuteronomy 24:1-2.

By perfection of God's word are you referring unto God's written word or God's spoken word?

The New Covenant replaced the Ten Commandments and their divorce laws.

“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, Not according to the covenant [Ten Commandments] which I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was their Husband, says the Lord. But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, says the Lord, I will put My law within them, and on their hearts will I write it; and I will be their God, and they will be My people.” Jeremiah 31:31–33 (AMP)

Jesus says love fulfills the TC

“In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12 (NET)

James also says. “If indeed you [really] fulfill the royal Law in accordance with the Scripture, You shall love your neighbor as [you love] yourself, you do well.” James 2:8 (AMP)

Divorce is a pagan law based on unforgiveness, not recognized in the New Covenant. There is no provision for divorce in the New Covenant.

Umm no. I find it humorous when people point to Jesus’s words, Moses allowed for the hardness of heart but it wasn’t that way from the beginning. Like Moses made a law that was against God’s intention and God just says meh, not what I wanted Moses but we’ll go with it 🤦‍♂️
Also, you’re implying Jesus changed the law when he clearly did not.