What is the meaning of the exception clause in Matthew 5 & 19, "...except for Porneia."?

In this instruction on divorce, it is clear that Christ is not abolishing divorce but as He did with other things like lust and hatred for a brother He strengthen or restricts their current understanding of the topic. The fact that an exception clause is given is proof enough that there is some ground for legitimate divorce. What that case is is a function of understanding the word Porneia Strongs Exhaustive Greek dictionary defines it as:

4202 porneia

from 4203; TDNT - 6:579,918; n f

AV - fornication 26; 26

1) illicit sexual intercourse

1a) adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse

with animals etc.

1b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18

1c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12

2) metaph. the worship of idols

2a) of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the

sacrifices offered to idols

We can see that the definition is a broad one that includes adultery and is certainly not limited to it. If Christ had wanted to say that this exception was only for the case of adultery He could have used the term Moichea

3431 moicheuo {moy-khyoo'-o}

from 3432; TDNT - 4:729,605; v

AV - commit adultery 13, in adultery 1; 14

1) to commit adultery

1a) to be an adulterer

1b) to commit adultery with, have unlawful intercourse with

another's wife

1c) of the wife: to suffer adultery, be debauched

1d) A Hebrew idiom, the word is used of those who at a woman's

solicitation are drawn away to idolatry, i.e. to the eating

of things sacrificed to idols

Although the use of pornea broadens the exceptions for divorce beyond just adultery, it did significantly restrict the popular school of thought that said that a man could divorce his wife for any reason as long as he provided his wife a bill of divorcement. Christ clarifies the understanding that only grounds for divorce would be a sexual sin.

Bethrothal Period

It would be an exercise in isogesis to suppose that the context of this instruction pertained only to the Jewish betrothal period. There is nothing within these contexts to conclude that the exception could be limited to bethrothal. The internal evidence of the verses is that the discussion pertained to marriage not betrothal.

Disciples Reaction

It has been suggested that the disciples reaction to Jesus’ response requires a very narrow construction of the term porneia. What else could account for their hasty conclusion that it would be better if men did not marry? The main problem with this conclusion is that it ignores the explicit context of Jesus’ response which sought His opinion on the Hillelian view of divorce —divorce and remarriage for virtually any reason. Jesus clearly denies this view and in doing so reaffirms and expands upon his earlier teaching that anyone who divorces his wife for reasons other than sexual immorality is guilty of adultery. The disciples response is understandable in that Jesus dramatically narrowed the Hillelian view of acceptable conditions for divorce and therefore signficantly strengthened the moral committment in marriage.

It is also important to note that Matthew does not characterize the disciples reaction as shock or astonishment although that is the emotion many assume they must have felt. If their reaction had truly been one of such intensity, it might be expected for Matthew to describe it as such as he is careful to do 15 verses later in Matthew 19:25. In this verse, Matthew describes their reaction to his teaching on the of the difficulties rich people will face in entering into the kingdom of heaven.

Finally, it is not without significance that Jesus is here for the first time imputing the sin of adultery to the man who divorces and remarries any woman (except for the case of porneia), not just someone who had previously been divorced. His earlier teaching only imputed the sin to the woman for the divorce itself and to the man only if he married one who had previously been divorced. This clarification from Jesus thereby expanded the definition of sin as it pertained to the man only, regardless of which interpretation of porneia one adopts. This could also explain the disciples carefully worded reaction, "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry." (Emphasis added.)

Desertion in Mixed Marriage Not Addressed.

Marriage Designed To Be Permanent - From the Beginning

All sides agree that divorce is not part of God’s ideal for marriage and that divorce always leaves a broken and failed covenant in it’s wake. The disagreement stems from divergent opinions about the implications of original design on egregiously sinful conditions which are experienced in some marriages. Those who argue that marriage is indissoluable in all cases (interpreting porneia in Matthew 19 to refer to breaking off a bethrothal covenant)