M.A. / Marriage is neither a Jewish nor a Christian invention. Both religions have one thing in common: their origin is traced back to the God of the Bible, who is also the Creator of the universe. While Christianity does not hesitate to trace its origins to Judaism, Judaism perceives it as a perversion of its heritage. Christian ethics have a rich Jewish background. Actually, the very founders of Christianity were Jewish. Jesus and Paul were, first and foremost, Jews. The former was neither a Christian nor did he intend to start a new religion apart from the Jewish faith. He only perceived himself as a Jewish revivalist, and the long-awaited Messiah. The latter was a Jew who got converted to Christianity. The first four books of the New Testament are an attempt, by both eyewitnesses and their disciples, to present a record of the words and deeds of the historical Jesus. Paul interprets the God's plans of salvation as fulfilled in the Jesus of Nazareth. This research paper attempts to compare the teachings of both Paul and Jesus on marriage and divorce. Christian marriage is a marriage in which both partners are Christian believers. Jesus' teaching is generally addressed to a homogenous JeWish Christian community, with few excerptions in the Markan and Lukan versions. In view of Christian marriages, the Law of Christ seems to be binding upon both partners. A problem arose when the Gospel crossed the borders of Palestine into the Gentile lands. Paul became the instrument used by God to put the universality of the Gospel into practice. The issue of mixed marriages comes into place in the Pauline community. In such unions, the Law of Christ would be binding on only one partner, namely, the believer. The apostle finds himself now faced with a real life situation in which there is no direct command of the Lord. His churches looked up to him for answers. Like marriage, divorce is neither Christian nor non-Christian, although many scholars would have us think in terms of their being Christian or non-Christian. Between what is ethically right and wrong, is the twighlight zone of the acceptable or the unacceptable. For the Jew, divorce was custom. The Gentile world also had its own rules governing marriages, which were no better than those held by Jews. Jesus (the synoptics) quotes no code of law for or against the practice of divorce. He bases his argument on the natural order of things - that is, God's original plan at creation. Marriage may be perceived as a pre-fall divine institution, and divorce a post-fall divine concession. In speaking about marriage, Jesus speaks in terms of principles: marriage was meant to be a permanent bond. Man's sinfulness necessitated a compromise on the part of God: to allow for divorce. We propose that the synoptics speak about the ideal. The state of affairs which Jesus propagates is not practical, and cannot be fully realised in the present age of fallen man. Conversely, Paul deals with the practical - the realistic as opposed to the ideal. His teaching reflects the problems of applications in a rather heterogeneous context. The whole law of God reflects the relativised will of God. In Christianity, Jesus seems to be the first person to relativise the very Law of God. In order for us to fully comprehend the perfect will of God, we need to look beyond the code of law, to that state of absolute perfection. The state which man cannot attain in this present life, where sin and the devil are still at large. This seems to have been the approach applied by Jesus in answering questions on marriage and divorce. In the whole record of Jesus' ministry, nowhere was a called to resolve a real marital problem. We thus propose that What Jesus he gives is only a theoretical framework which requires further analysis before it can be applied to real life situations. We also propose both Jewish and Gentile ethical principles need to be readjusted and reinterpreted before they can be adopted into Christianity. The socio-historical context of both the writer and readers will play an important role in our quest for the link between the Pauline and synoptic perspectives on marriage and divorce. The gulf between the ideal and the real seems to be as wide as one between justice and mercy. The following questions raise some of the major concerns in this research: Are there any links between Paul and Jesus (synoptics) on marriage and divorce? If Jesus speaks about the ideal in his absolutist attitude, is there any link between the ideal and the real; between principle and practice?