Yes you do.
You tried to switch from 'wife' to 'children'.
It's a metaphor Tam,
(Ezk 23:4) The older was named Oholah, and her sister was Oholibah. They were mine and gave birth to sons and daughters. Oholah is Samaria, and Oholibah is Jerusalem.
Samaria was the capital of the Northern Nation (House of Israel), and Jerusalem was the capital of the Southern Nation (House of Judah)
Read Ezk chapter 23, and you will see that the two sisters are a typology for Israel and Judah.
And that is why you shouldn't switch from 'wife' to 'children'.
It's a metaphor. The two sisters are daughters of the same mother. In the metaphor the mother is Israel (all 12 tribes), and the daughters are the two houses (Israel & Judah).
Yet you seem to take this "divorce" literally, as if GOD kept part of His wife that He married, but not the other part of His wife that He married.
Hosea makes it clear that God had no mercy on the House of Israel, scattered the House of Israel, and told the Israelites from the House of Israel that they were not a people. In Jeremiah, we are told that God divorced the House of Israel.
If it was not really a divorce, but just metaphoric talk (which I agree with), then GOD never gave a real bill of divorce to His one wife that he married.
Both Judah and Israel are portrayed as sisters that God is married to. God only divorced Israel, not Judah.
The one wife that He married (metaphorically) was all of Israel.
Yes, but Israel split into two houses.
I don't know why you fight this so much? Ezekiel and Jeremiah make it clear that one day the two houses would be joined together again when the New Covenant was made.
God could not remarry Israel after He divorced her. That would have been an abomination according to Deuteronomy. The only way He could remarry her was by death. That's what happened. The New Covenant was made at the cross, and because of the death, God could remarry the wife He divorced.