Relevant Scriptures continued:
4. Matthew 5:31-32. This is a portion of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, in
the context of “preaching the gospel of the kingdom” (4:23), wherein
Jesus opposes the lax attitudes of the Jewish scribes and Pharisees toward the
divine will (5:20).1 The Lord’s contrasting statement
in 5:32 is in response to what had been “said” (and heard) about divorce among
these Jews. While it was not the time to teach exclusively Christian doctrine
or set aside the Mosaic Law (5:17-29; 7:12), it was necessary to address the
fallacies of their hypocritical leaders (5:20; 6:2, 5, 16; 7:15-20, 29) and
prepare the way for the coming kingdom (cf. 6:10, 33; 7:21). Jesus is
contrasting the traditional misinterpretations of the Law vs. the loftier
conduct expected in God’s kingdom. The Law did not justify unrighteous anger,
or lust, or divorce for any or no reason, or questionable oaths, or senseless
retribution, or hatred, irrespective of what others had “said” to the contrary.
The current Jewish attitude toward divorce (succinctly stated in 5:31) had
apparently become as lax as their attitude toward other moral issues discussed
in this chapter. Jesus affirms that adultery (illegitimate sex) is committed in a
second marriage following a divorce for any reason other than sexual infidelity.
Divorce and subsequent marriage is implicitly allowed to the one betrayed by the other who
violates the very heart of marriage (cf. Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:4-9).
5. Matthew
19:1-10; Mark 10:1-10 [parallel accounts]. The Lord’s directives were
prompted by hostile questions within the circle of Judaism. Matthew’s Gospel
was written with a Jewish audience in mind,2 whereas Mark’s account
was recorded for a Roman audience,3 which helps explain why Mark
incorporates into his record certain parts of the Lord’s discourse that are
omitted in Matthew, and vice versa.4 Jesus affirms that while it is
sinful for a man to divorce his wife, it is not adultery; the sin of adultery
is added to the sin of divorce if the man goes on to marry someone else (Matt.
19:9; Mark 10:11). The words "except for sexual immorality [fornication]" in
Matthew’s account (19:9; cf. 5:32) are absent from Mark. The exceptive phrase
would have had greater significance to Matthew’s audience, seeing that in
Judaism infidelity warranted the death penalty (cf. Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22) and
had become a cruel weapon of ruthless men in their mistreatment of women (cf.
John 8:3-5). Among the Romans this was already understood as sufficient grounds
for divorce.
Mark’s inclusion of the
phrase “against her” (10:11b) is intriguing. Both the Jews and the Romans
understood adultery as sexual intercourse with a married woman. Accordingly,
when a woman committed adultery it was against her own husband, and when a man
committed adultery it was against the woman’s husband. Jesus, however, informs
his Jewish listeners, and Mark in turn informs his Roman readers, that from the
divine perspective adultery is also committed against the innocent wife.
Matthew omits the
following words that Mark has recorded in 10:12, “and if she, having divorced
her husband, marries another, she is committing adultery.” Within the context
of Judaism, since only the husband could initiate a divorce and not the wife,
the applicability of this statement would have been lost among Matthew’s
readers. On the other hand, under Roman law the marriage could be terminated by
either party, so Mark’s inclusion of the statement is most relevant.
Adultery (moichaō) involves voluntary sex
between a married person and someone other than his/her lawful spouse. The two
verbs “divorces” (apolusē) and “marries” (gamēsē) are in the AORIST tense and therefore naturally describe
punctiliar (completed) action. In contrast, the verbal tense is changed to the
PRESENT when “commits adultery” is mentioned, suggesting a different
(incomplete/ongoing) time reference. As long as sexual activity continues in
the second relationship, the adultery continues.
6. Mark 6:17-19. Herod Antipas was tetrarch of Galilee
and Perea (4 BC to AD 39). John the baptizer had confronted the tetrarch about
his unlawful marriage to Herodias, resulting in John’s execution (Matt.
14:3-12; cf. Luke 3:19-20; 9:9). Antipas had divorced his wife Phasaelis, the
daughter of the Nabatean king Aretas IV, in order to marry Herodias, who had
previously been married to his half-brother Philip I (see Josephus, Ant.
18.5.1, 4).5 When Jesus is later asked whether it is “lawful” for a man to
divorce his wife, he is “across the Jordan” in the region governed by Herod
Antipas (Matt. 19:1; Mark 10:1), i.e., a divorced man married to a divorced
woman, a union deemed “unlawful” by John.
7. Luke
16:18. Jesus is speaking to antagonistic Pharisees, and his directives are
in opposition to their lax attitudes toward the divine will (vv. 14-15; cf. Matt.
5:20, 31-32; 15:1-3). Once again Jesus affirms that adultery is committed in
the second marriage following a divorce. The “except for fornication”
phrase (Matt. 5:32; 19:9) is omitted here, probably because those to whom Jesus was
speaking on this occasion were teaching, condoning, or practicing divorce for
other reasons.
8. Romans 7:2-3.
To the saints at Rome Paul affirms that marriage is for life, whereas the
marriage bond is broken when a spouse dies. If a woman marries another man
while her husband is still living, “she will be called an adulteress.” But if
her husband is dead, adultery is not committed in a second marriage.
--Kevin L. Moore
Endnotes:
1
Jesus
is not taking issue with or negating the Mosaic Law but rather opposing
wrongful interpretations of it. Note, “You have heard that it was said ...” (vv. 21, 27, 31, 33, 38,
43), NOT “It is written …” For example, the Law never states, “… hate your
enemy” (v. 43b), but apparently that’s what these Jews had heard from their
teachers (cf.
15:1-3).
2 See K. L. Moore, Matthew's Audience.
5 Josephus: “Herod the tetrarch had married the daughter of Aretas; and had lived with her a great while …. However he fell in love with Herodias, this last Herod’s [Philip’s] wife …. One article of this marriage also was this, that he should divorce Aretas’s daughter…. But Herodias, their [Aristobulus & Agrippa’s] sister, was married to Herod [Philip], the son of Herod the Great …. Herodias took upon her to confound the laws of our country, and divorced her self from her husband, while he was alive, and was married to Herod [Antipas], her husband’s brother by the father’s side. He was tetrarch of Galilee” (Ant. 18.5.1, 4).
Related
Posts: Divorce & Remarriage Part 1, Part 3, Preventing Divorce
No comments:
Post a Comment