Why are the such differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke on Jesus's teaching of divorce?

Question

In Matthew it boils down to you can't divorce your wife unless she is unfaithful. In Mark the teaching could be construed to leave the door open for polygamy. It mentions nothing about a woman being unfaithful. It doesn't say that a man who marries a second women committs adultery. In Luke, the teaching is that a divorced woman cannot remarry. However, the man is free to divorce as long as he doesn't remarry? Luke makes no mention of a woman's unfaithfulness. In all three Gospels, the scenario of a man's unfaithfulness is never considered. Is this subtle misogyny?

Matthew 5: 31-32; 19:9, Mark 10: 11-12, Luke 16:18

Answer 1

That is the reason why all three books are in the Bible. God gives two reasons for divorce, and not even approving it. 1) Continues adultery either from man or women 2) if one is not a believer and will not leave his/her evil ways. And for remarriages - only the one who was not at fault are allowed to remarry.

God does not give permission for this but he knows we are human and will divorce. His will is that even divorce people go back to their partner and reconcile.

Answer 2

InEach one of the Gospels, the writer was answering questions about specific situations that were happening at that time.

It is highly unlikely that they all listened to the same exact words and then rewrote them exactly the same. When we are listening to an explanation of something and we think of a question about that explanation, we tend to miss some of the things being said.

Now if that isnt confusing enough, it really boils down to the fact that God wishes none to be divorced. Divorce causes a multitude of problems.

But if you do get divorced, man or woman, for what ever reason, you are not allowed to remarry.

The rest is in the details.

Yes, Polygamy was culturally accepted, mainly because lets say a womans husband died. She was not allowed to make a living for herself and therefore could not remain an unmarried woman unless she was old enough to be considered a "true" widow (then the church was to care for her). If she were a young widow, it would have been the job of the next brother in her husbands family to marry her. Again, this was culture and accepted.

Mans unfaithfullness was mentioned by Jesus (very strongly). In the story about the woman that had committed adultry, Jesus stopped the men in their tracks by telling them that whomever was without sin to cast the first stone. He then wrote something to each man in the sand. The bible does not say what was written, but it was powerful enough to stop any of the men there from casting the first stone to put this woman to death.

So, I would say from this, that men would know that unfaithfullness on their part would be a huge no no.

Answer 3

In all other Religions there is one Holy Book;The Qur'an in Islam, The Vedas in Hindu, The Avesta in Zoroasters,The Torah in Jews. In Christianity,there are four. Again, the Catholic Bible has 6 more Books than the Protestant Bible;Some groups like Unitarians do not believe it is Book of God but authored by humans...Some have their exclusive book like the Mormons..then there are differences in text in Bible of today as compared with the book of 100 years ago.Divorce is not the only 'issue'.So far, no biblical scholar has answered this question.Some of them should know about the yahoo answers forum.

Answer 4

You show your ignorance of the Bible once again, Mouthbreather. The only scriptural reason for remarriage is unfaithfulness. Put it all together, and it's perfectly clear.

The same goes for the unfaithful man as well. Don't you hate it when you try to read something that says, "He or she can do as he or she sees fit, according to his or her own personal preference"? In English, as in most languages, the male pronoun can be used in reference to a person of unknown gender.

Quit looking for problems in the Bible that aren't there.

Answer 5

The gospels differ on many things. They were written for different audiences. The one thing they all have in common is the authors never met Jesus.

Answer 6

i dont know for sure but i'm thinking that since each man was just a human that each man had his own interpretation...i guess sort of lke me and you could read the same scripture but have different ideas...i would like to hear what others have to say on this though...

Answer 7

Jesus was answering specific questions about some aspect of divorce. He would not have to explain the entire law each time.... they understood the aspects he did not explain..

Answer 8

Because it's all human opinion. They have different ideas, god has nothing to do with it. It's the same all through the Bible. That book has no authority at all.

Answer 9

On top of that there are differences between the King James Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible.

Answer 10

Obviously none of these authors actually knew Jesus. They were simply recording what they had been taught.