This Laney himself seems to admit when he says that porneia can be used in a broad sense in the New Testament to refer to any kind of unlawful sexual activity.263. While God may have ''allowed'' divorce, that does not mean He ''approves'' of it. Make it better. But we are getting ahead of ourselves. I think it more tortuous to translate a (non-deponent) passive/middle as an active and in such a manner as makes no sense in its own sentence. Since all things belong to the Lord, nobody should take an oath on any of them. How can we explain this? Regarding the first point there is a great deal of disagreement among scholars. 'You have heard the law that says, 'A man can divorce his wife by merely giving her a written notice of divorce.'. Be clean. The Feinbergs, find fault with such references to Malachi.222 They suggest that to do so detracts from the antithetical response of Jesus. 268 His mercy and forgiveness must be seen in the context of forgiveness and the fruits of righteousness. 272 I have already argued that the saying about divorcing an innocent woman is essentially independent of the second saying concerning someone marrying a divorced woman (5:32b). Though it is true that each of the first three sayings in the Sermon implies the disciple is a sinner, a careful reading of verses 31 and 32 shows that the sinner is only a sinner when he divorces, not prior to the divorce. We properly look for such points because Jesus was unlikely to make a general criticism where notorious differences were existent. As noted earlier, the omission of the you have heard clause seems to draw attention to the preceding saying. As an infinitive, it is a verbal substantive. Surely nothing said by Jesus makes it such. VI, pp. 5:17 ). 3. 288 Carson (Matthew, p. 155) rejects Lenskis theorywhich is assigned solely to B. Regarding Deuteronomy 24:1-4, the verse protects the woman by permitting a path of freedom, so that the treacherous abuser is not tempted to abuse the woman in the marriage. They were marriages; that is, they had been contracted in the very way that acceptable unions were. I consider this a possible interpretation, but still question Kilgallens assumption that remarriage of the wife may be assumed on the basis of 5:32b. Second, being as divorce in those times was not a prolonged legal action, as in our own, but rather a rather succinct procedure, and being that on all interpretations the causing relating to adultery is also a concentrated act, I believe that these verbs are to be interpreted as so-called presents as perfects (presents functioning as perfects). Fornication includes adultery but also other unseemly things, such as homosexuality, bestiality, and incest. If one person is committing adultery then the other is as well. In a world in which a woman could be divorced for reasons relating to matters from soup to sex, the woman is clearly prejudiced by the action and as the case usually is with prejudice, inquiring minds will not likely assume that only the soup was burned. It is instructive also to consider the use of kai as a connector in the surrounding saying groups, specifically 5:22 and 39-41. The infinitive in question seems to be the direct object of the main verb, in our case, to make or cause It identifies what the divorcing man makes her to experience. Plan a getaway from time to time to get away from your busy life and spend time together, preferably without the kids. Matthew 5 - Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible - StudyLight.org 1. Play creative imagination games like keeping house, police, firefighters, army, etc. 40-50, and You Mean the Bible Teaches That? It is one thing to ask Gentiles to forgo certain forms of behavior so as not to offend Jews. We later learn that, to them, porneia-based divorce is not to be considered adulterous, but it is still a moral offense unless the husband was forced by his culture to put his unchaste wife away.240 The problem with this view, however, is that it argues from silence. Dont do it. This phrase signals Christs point of disagreement with the rabbinic traditions current in His day. But can we not simply assume that the exception clause may be reversed? But the whole effort to restrict porneia to a technical use is vitiated by expanding the list to include these. Matt. 219 The Feinbergs, in their Ethics (p. 340), contest that I have not paid enough attention to the antithetical relation between the Pharasaical teaching common to the people and the corrective saying of Jesus. "When one seemed to pity a one-eyed man, he told him he had lost one of his enemies, a very thief, that would have stolen away his heart." (Trapp) Proverbs 18:22, 19:14, 21:9, 21:19 Wisdom on marriage. Play hide and go seek. With regard to the possibility that Jesus anticipates intermarriage between Christians and unbelievers, Paul, in his second letter to the Corinthians, does apply the Old Testament principle of separation to the people of the new covenant (chapter 6). When you are poor in spirit, then God can fill you with His riches - the virtues of Christ. The divorce is still wrong, but the guilt for it is charged to the womans account.267. 5:43-48 The Jewish teachers by neighbour understood only those who were of their own country, nation, and religion, whom they were pleased to look upon as their friends. Had Jesus intended to imply that, we may presume that He would have simply said so. Two matters arise: First, it is important to note that these two verb forms are the only ones in 5:32 that are present active indicative. I suspect that I sounded rather convincing; I heard few objections. He forthwith identifies that form as aorist subjunctive middle, translating the Hebrew imperfect Qal construction of the verb. The greatest abuses had arisen in regard to divorce, which was permitted on very trivial grounds. Be a good mother. 232 Carson, Matthew p. 415. Assuming the Leviticus material to be ceremonial in nature, Laney argues that since porneia means incest in Acts 15 it could mean the same in the exception clauses. J, which summarized my more extended approach to the Biblical comments on the Ten Commandments. They cared little for the rights of either men or women who got in the way of their lust. Finally, this view creates an interesting ethical dilemma. The likely result will be that the side who keeps committing adultery will seek a divorce on his/her own. Divorce is sin However, believers need to aim much higher than just not getting a divorce. Many couples go through life in a practical cold war state. In this passage Mark 10:1-10 contains a more complete passage on Jesus teaching of marriage and divorce so we will use that as the basis for studying this passage. Why Should Teolology Matter to Christians? How does divorce effect the picture of marriage between husband of wife as an allegory of Christ and the church? are united in their approval of divorce as a discipline. Understanding Matthew 5:31-32: Divorce. They insert remarriage into the discussion by means of an expansive explanation of how men, anticipating their former wives would remarry sought solace of conscience in a divorce writ. Why allege fault where none is stated by the text? The structure of the Sermon is simple but subtle. ( Matt 5:31-32 WEB) Divorce over dinner? Some would suggest yes, insofar as Jesus professed to have come only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They claim that I admit that I hold my view (presumably my insistence on translating the infinitive with passive force) because of Malachi 2 and Deut. Thus, we will look at the first clause as an independent saying, to be interpreted in its own right. Matthew 25:31-46 NIV - The Sheep and the Goats - "When the - Bible Gateway Myth, p. 70. There is some controversy on this point. You are wrong. If he is just back from a long day it work and very tired it may not be the right time to dump all of your days difficulties on him. As for the interpretation set forth in this book, i.e., that Jesus is condemning men who thought they had Mosaic right to cast their wives away for no reason but with a writ, that fits the context to a T. More specifically, to say that a writ is not sufficient to render the groundless divorcer innocent of adultery (regardless of whether or not the former wife remarries) (5:32a), is clearly in context with that which Jesus attacks as false interpretation of Gods Law. Matthew 5:31-37 Jesus' Sermon On The Mount: About Divorce, . He then states that it should be translated in the sense of an active verb form (to commit adultery). It was said, Whoever sends his wife away (Apolyo, to send away), let him give her a certificate of divorce (Apostasion, to sever). Moses taught that when a man sends his wife out of his house he must give her a certificate of divorce verifying that she is no longer married to her husband. The form of a writing of divorcement, as given by Maimonides F7, is as follows: Would you choose to have one of these bills, filled up in proper form, take it in manner F8 following. It showed everyone that the woman who was sent away from her former husband was now available to be remarried. Rather, the traditional view is that she commits adultery because she remarries. 11:9).270 This earlier verb is full of the connotation of indirect cause the other person stumbles, but you caused it. Given the context of the word in Leviticus 20:10, this is by far the most likely choice. Ask her how she is doing. In fact, the section seems to be comments on the last six of the commandments: murder, 21-26; adultery, 27-30; theft, 31-32; false witness, 33-37; coveting and defrauding, 38-42; and then fold backward to the Fifth Commandment in re parents, 43-48.209 The weakest element in this interpretation of the structure of the subsection rests in the fact that the crucial thirty-first and thirty-second verses are missing their you have heard, giving rise to the suggestion that Jesus intended to include them with the teaching on adultery (vv. The tense of the infinitive is aorist. 165-66. The verb moikeuthanai in the text of Matthew 5:32 is an aorist passive/middle infinitive. But these legal marriages of the apostates were unacceptable to the Mosaic legislation. Although this is true, it too misses the point that the Jewish mind would have seen inclusion of betrothal unfaithfulness as a foregone conclusion had the discussion become more specific. A leading proponent (in America) of the incest interpretation of porneia is Carl Laney. Are there any other Old Testament passages on divorce? ).268 Second, it is highly questionable to interpret Matthew as saying, He who divorces his wife is guilty of adultery unless he is forced to do so because his wife has committed adultery, in which case she is responsible for the sin that such divorce instances. About the best that can be said for this interpretation is that it would be in harmony with the absolute prohibition of divorce already held to by Heth/Wenham. Be kind and sweet and gracious to your children. It would be unjust for God to have lowered His standard of righteousness in Moses day to accommodate sinful men. We must consider both the lexicon and the prior biblical context in deciding the issue. Kilgallen, Exception, pp. Yet here, in the first instance of Jesus speaking directly to the subject of the meaning of Deuteronomy 24, Jesus seeks to correct an interpretation which doesnt even mention the remarriage. The betrothal view is one that holds that Jesus employs porneia in a technical sense, restricting its use from its usual broad meaning to betrothal unfaithfulness. It also includes the Salt and Light statements, which give structural direction to the body of the Sermon. It shows her that you prize and value her. 96-98. And he is a man, not a child (even though he may act like one sometimes). Heth and Wenham, however, controvert this use of Ezra by casting doubt over the validity of interfaith marriages. Pick up after yourself. Proud member 208 Note that 5:16 is conceptually different from 5:13-15. Second, they all interpreted that passage as a provision on behalf of the husband. But in Gods perfect will and natural design a husband and wife should not divorce. In His great Sermon, Jesus explicitly sets about to rectify contemporary ethics, which He sees as debased by Pharasaical Scripture-twisting (Matt. Matthew 5:31-32 Commentary | Precept Austin What are some practical things which singles can do to prepare for a strong marriage? 68-69. Start doing it. Many of their challenges were centered on common controversies of that time. Marriage and Divorce in the Teaching of Jesus | Catholic Answers This standard is unchastity. Clearly, the ethics of divorce/remarriage were in a state of disarray in the days of Jesus. 280 This natural appears to me to be grammatically unnatural.. An example of such a use is in Matthew 26:45, where Christ comments about His pending betrayal using the present tense, even though the exact act was yet a bit in the future. Grammatically, there are other options for the present indicative. Offer to cook and watch the kids while she goes out to have her hair done, nails done, get a massage, or go shopping, etc. Their point is that the exception clause deals with real marriages, whereas interfaith marriages were possibly seen as only fornicating relationships. 19? Do not make big decisions or spend lots of money without talking to your husband first (husbands should also talk to wives first before doing this). Resting on Bruce Metzgers A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament,228 Laney notes the simple fact that there are no Greek manuscripts that omit the exceptions.229, In dealing with our subject we shall find it helpful to break it down further into a study of the concept of exception, and then a study of the meaning of porneia, the Greek word for unchastity or fornication.. That Law needed clarification on the point of the womans unfaithfulness, insofar as the execution strictures (Deut. 13 "You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? Actually, the verb form moikeusatai appears twice in that verse. Or perhaps we should not see the two as synonyms after all; perhaps it is that the woman who suffers adultery becomes defiled (i.e., morally off-limits) with regard to her hardhearted husband when he allows her to marry another rather than seeking reconciliation. The conservative school of Shammai thought the mans right to divorce was limited to the case of a wife who had committed something nearly equal to adultery. 282 It would seem to me that the upshot of this in the Sirach passage would be to see the aorist passive form tied to the context as producing the effect of an aorist middle, by her action she has made herself to suffer adultery. 7:2). As to when the act occurs, that is determined by the main verb, to cause But the tense of the clause is present and must be supplemented by some other wording to identify when this causing is occurring. 218 Murray correctly notes that Deut 24:1-4 has within it the implicit command for a divorcing husband to give his wife a writ This is to say that, aside from questions regarding the right of the husband to divorce her, it is proper for him to clarify the resulting relationship by means of a writ (Divorce, p. 20). This certificate made the divorce official. It is also undisputed that moicheuthenai is not deponent.290 Given these two facts, it is to be expected that a translation of a passive/middle voice infinitive will be given a passive or middle sense unless the context clearly will not allow such. How did the Pharisees attempt to test Jesus this time? 3. Leviticus 18:19-23 includes other offenses that would logically have to be classified as porneia equivalents: adultery, homosexuality, bestiality. He simply used unchastity as a synonym for the argued uncleanness in the Old Testament passage. Nonetheless, the Pharisees were clearly unconcerned with the impact of such a divorce could reflect upon the womans character. for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. He is presenting a kingdom platform, and inviting His disciples to participate in its bounty. This is Jesus kingdom platform. Though it is possible in Matthew 5:32, D. A. Carson notes that such an interpretation plays havoc with the Greek in the Matthew 19:9 parallel, where the preposition (epi, of or for) is preceded by a negation (me, not). The apparent reason for the arbitrary exclusion is that the banished portions show two things that are destructive to Laneys thesis: 1. Would Laney wish to argue that coveting is totally distinct from thefts, or that pride and foolishness are mutually exclusive? For instance, Heth/Wenham, by rather thorough analysis, show that the attempt to limit porneia in Acts 15 to a holiness code item, relevant only to ancient Israel, is fraught with problems. Matthew 5:31-32 meaning | TheBibleSays.com 249 Heth and Wenham further break this option down into those who make the inter-faith marriages Jew-Gentile: J Bonsirven, Le Divorce dans le Nouveau Testament (Paris: Desclee, 1948); H. Baltensweiler, Die Ehe-bruchsklauseln bei Matthus zu Matth. But note that what convinces us about the need to translate these words actively is a context that is significantly different from the one in the Matthean Sermon. Dont just give your kids an ipad and then turn on a movie to watch by yourself. And into this morass of ethical confusion Jesus stepped, spoke a few words on the subject, and, we may presume, in the minds of His disciples eventually cleared up the issues. Matthew 5:31-32 Except for the reason of unfaithfulness. Jesus didnt just quote the canned answers tossed around by the two sides of the debate, but instead offered a fresh and biblical perspective, looking to the heart of the issue. It is ironic that there should be so much controversy over the import of the teaching of Jesus on divorce/remarriage. Since they were legal according to prevailing laws, it would not do to simply ask the men to stop acting like husbands to the women of the land. William F. Luck, Sr. is a former Professor of Bible and Theology at the Moody Bible Institute. 50:1; and Hosea 1 and 2) and the New (Matt. Deuteronomy is not trying to offer a legal way out of a broken marriage; Matthew is not trying to prohibit the legal ending of a broken marriage. What is your wifes favorite food? Let us now devote ourselves to a careful consideration of each of the clauses in this saying. The large crowds included Gentiles from the surrounding nations who had come to be healed of physical illnesses. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. In that instance, the second phrase is understood by the first (all are illumined because the candle was put on the lampstand). Instead be verbally appreciative and supportive. First, Jesus stresses things that were not the surface emphasis of the Old Testament Law. To this they add that in Matthew 5 it is highly unlikely that Jesus is trying to be cryptic, insofar as He is here trying to clarify Pharasaical misinterpretation.234 That is an excellent point. The reader should note that in two other major divorce passages, Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18, similar dual sayings are connected in the say way. 1 Timothy 3:2 Overseer must be husband of one wife. If such an approach to textual criticism were to become popular, the heretic Marcion should make posthumous appeal for better treatment by the early Church. Thus, in the divorce saying too, Jesus is rebuking the Scripture-twisting Pharisees. You are not his mother. 5:31, by allusion, teaches that if she were innocent of allegations of adultery, her husband should bear the guilt; Deut. But as I believe I have shown in chapter 3, the text of Deuteronomy intends nothing of the kind; it was intended to protect the woman from such a man. Instead, Jesus words (v. 32) are antithetical to the common understanding (mentioned in v. 31) of Deut 24, and Deut. It was here that I considered how the concept of stigmatization, which we have come to identify with R.C.H. What is the offense of divorces-not-grounded-in-porneia? Read more here: 20 examples of what it means to be poor in spirit Blessed are those who mourn Translation wise, we would say, He who divorces is the one who makes or causes. Combining these grammatical conclusions, it is fair to say that the act of making is coterminous with the act of divorcing.. But mans wickedness created loopholes in Mosess law. 260 So W. Baur, W. Amdt, F. W. Gingrich, F. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Greek and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed., revised (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), s.v. A second point, and one that is far more questionable, is whether Jesus intended porneia, as a grounds for legitimate divorce, to include male unfaithfulness, in the sense of sexual infidelity. We must remember that in the ancient world it was never the case that a mans sexual activities outside his relationship with his own spouse would be considered adultery against her. That is, their action is durative (the root concept of the present) only in the sense of the state rather than of linear action. 71-77; and F. F. Bruce, Paul: The Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), p 185. Their view ignores the contexts limits. God had intended that only two should be married. The earlier verb is scandalizo, which means cause, obstruct, or offend. Carson notes that its noun form is used originally referring to the trigger of a trap (cf. Jesus initiated a new covenant, where the law was written on the heart (Jeremiah 31:31; Matthew 25:28). A final word needs to be said about the grammar of the verbs in this first saying. (Chicago: Moody, 1974), pp. 287 We know it to be unjust because the angry person is told to be reconcileda word that implies guilt on the part of that person. But to say that the historical context reminds us of illicit intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles is one thing, to suggest that Jesus is, in the Sermon, trying to support ethnic purity is another. For these reasons the idea that Jesus is directly altering Gods Law through Moses, must be rejected. The mind of the reader would have included more in the meaning of porneia than the betrothal view allows, given the common usage of the word, so the burden of proof rests upon the betrothal school. He is always ready to forgive. Jesus, in stressing internal attitudes and non legal interpersonal relations in the Sermon, is picking up a theme of the prophets and expanding upon it greatly. Second, the passages that include both terms retain a sense of the distinctiveness of each when you presume the concentric nature of their definitions. Even his adultery against another mans covenant (i.e., his sexual relations with another mans wife) would not have been considered adultery against his own wife. This allows Him to see their level of understanding and the position they were coming from. another dot 7/8 full, another to 15/16 full, another to 31/32 full, and so on and on. When they grow up they may not be rushing to leave as fast as they can like many teenagers these days. 2 in coming to the translation to be adulterized. Further, at no point do I say that Matthew depended upon either of those texts in choosing the passive form in 5:32a. Why does he skip Leviticus 18:1-5 and 18:19-30? Break up the routine. Arguing for another technical definition of porneia in the exception clauses, Laney offers several points for our consideration.253. If people read only verse 9, they may have an excuse like yes, I shouldnt have divorced, but now that I am already divorced that is a thing of the past and I can marry again. In these verses Jesus makes it clear that divorce and remarriage is committing adultery. 2. To divorce means to put ones wife away from oneself. 24:1 Matthew 5:31 in all English translations Matthew 4 Matthew 6 New International Version (NIV) 19:9, there is only one saying.) After presenting the case for this view, Heth/Wenham reject it for grammatical reasons. 24:1-4. In verse 3, it has the undoubted meaning to divorce. It is unwarranted to understand the same verb a few verses later in some other way.236. The Pharisees, after all, did not argue about that; nor did they misunderstand the rule in that respect. 2. The Erasmian (Erasmus) View: Porneia means adultery or some other sexual offense. 1. 1. But treating your wife to nice things sometimes is not wasteful. 235 Q. Quesnell, Made Themselves Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:12) CBQ 30 (1968):340 ff., G. J. Wenham, May Divorced Christians Remarry? Churchman 95 (1981):150-61; Dupont, Mariage, pp. Play. Two things stand out in any cursory reading of the Sermon. See Deuteronomy 24:1-14. 24:1-4), the historical context (Herod/Herodias), and the more distant contexts, namely backward toward the prophet Malachi and the Law in Deut. This bill being written in twelve lines, neither more nor less, and being sealed by the husband, and signed by the witnesses, was delivered, either by him, or by a messenger, or deputy of his or hers, into her hand, lap, or bosom, in the presence of two persons; after which, she might, if she would, enrol it in the public records, and marry whom she pleased. Guy Duty lists most modern lexicons up to his writing (1967) and adequately shows the standard definition of porneia to be sexual immorality in general.260 This holds true for the Hebrew parallel term zanh and the use of porneia in the Septuagint. Cf. We shall critique each species of this view in turn. Matthew 5:31-32 New International Version Divorce 31 "It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'[ a] 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Why Did Scout Grow Closer To Miss Maudie,
Articles M
matthew 5:31 explained
