I have had this in the queue for quite
some time, seemingly unable to finish it. However, I am going to post it
unfinished!
It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication , causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Matthew 19:8-9
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you
to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto
you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth
adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
“The exception clause” is a phrase used to name or describe Jesus’s statements in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 about marriage, divorce (putting away), and adultery – “saving for the cause of fornication” / “except it be for fornication.”
Got Questions Ministries explains it this way:
“The meaning of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 is clear. If a person gets a divorce and then remarries, it is considered adultery unless the exception clause is in effect.”
Despite their absolute assurance, it not that “clear” to all interpreters. The passage engenders much discussion and debate. For example, does
“the exception clause” provide an exception for allowing remarriage after a
divorce, or does it provide an exception for not calling the putting away
adultery?[i] David Janzen’s assessment
is more accurate than that of Got Questions.
“It is likely that not a truer word has been written in the field of biblical studies than Ben Witherington’s observation that nearly everything about the two Matthean divorce exception clauses is disputed.”[ii]
There are related passages in Mark 10:10-12 and Luke 16:18 to consider, but they do not specifically address the exception clause.[iii]
Random notes and comments on the exception clause
Verses and words
Jesus is not giving a new teaching about divorce; rather he is restating God’s original design and intent. See Matthew 19:4-6.
Words for further research. Matthew 5:32 (fornication, πορνειας; adultery, μοιχευθηναι, μοιχαται); Matthew 19:9 (fornication, πορνεια; adultery, μοιχευθηναι, μοιχαται); Mark 10:11-12 (adultery, μοιχαται); Luke 16:18 (adultery, μοιχευει). Adultery (moichao), to have unlawful intercourse with another’s spouse. Fornication (porneia), illicit sexual intercourse; adultery, bestiality, fornication, homosexuality, etc.
Matthew 5:32; 19:9. A man would not cause his wife to be an adulteress through divorce, if she were already an adulteress through fornication.
Both Matthew and Mark refer to Herodias as “Philip’s wife,” even though she had divorced Philip and married Herod (Matthew 14:3-4; Mark 6:17-18).
Jesus tells the Samaritan woman at the well “thou hast had five husbands” and “he whom thou now hast is not thy husband” (John 4:16-18). Various inferences have been drawn from this, despite the text not indicating whether she had five husbands lawfully (one after another had died, etc.), whether she had been divorced from every one of them, or some combination of both possibilities.
Baptists in England
Second London Baptist Confession
Baptists of London adapted the Westminster
Confession to use in their own Second London Confession of 1689. The changes
they made can provide some insights into their thinking. When these brethren
built their statement on marriage, they removed the paragraph in the
Westminster permitting divorce and remarriage. Westminster’s Article 24, paragraph
5 states:
Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, gives just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract. In case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce, and after the divorce to marry another, as if the offending party were dead.
The Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 24 is titled, “Of Marriage and Divorce.” It has four paragraphs on marriage and two on divorce. The Second London Baptist Confession Chapter 25 is titled “Of Marriage.” It omits paragraphs four & five on divorce.
John Gill, on Matthew 5:32
…she must be guilty of adultery; since she is his proper wife, the bond of marriage not being dissolved by such a divorce: and
whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery; because the divorced woman he marries, and takes to his bed; is legally the wife of another man…
Early years of church history
William Heth and Gordon Wenham extensively
researched the marriage theology of early Christian writers. They summarize
their research of the views of divorce and remarriage this way:
“In the first five centuries (among Christians) all Greek writers and all Latin writers except one agree that remarriage following divorce for any reason is adulterous. The marriage bond was seen to unite both parties until the death of one of them.”[iv]
Before and after salvation
Some who take a strict view on divorce and
remarriage (and perhaps some who don’t) believe that the New Testament teaching
on the subject of divorce and remarriage is null regarding anything that
happened during a marriage before one became a Christian. In his book on Divorce and Remarriage, Andrew Cornes
addresses this:
Most important of all, it assumes that it is the sin (of divorce) which prevents remarriage. If this sin can be removed, by forgiveness, then no barrier to remarriage remains. This view is so obviously flawed that it is amazing how tenacious it is. If sin is really the barrier, what does the time of conversion to Christ have to do with it? Surely sin committed after conversion can be fully forgiven and removed?...Jesus does not base his prohibition of remarriage on the sin of divorce. He bases it on the fact that remarriage would be legalized adultery. In other words, he bases it on the fact that the marriage bond continues to exist despite the divorce. It is not the (sin of) divorce which makes remarriage impossible for the Christian; it is the (original) marriage. Only death dissolves the marriage bond, and therefore only death sets a person free to remarry”[v]
A marriage pandemic
One claim is that Jesus’s statement allows for remarriage when the reason for the divorce is adultery. Even if this is a correct interpretation, surely we can agree that what was a small moth hole of “exception” has become a gaping gash in the marriage fabric of modern American Christianity! First one exception, then another, then many more. “No-fault divorce” is a plague of pandemic proportions.
[ii] “The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5.32 and 19.9: an Approach From the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Culture,” David Janzen, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Volume 23, Issue 80, March 1, 2001, pp. 66-80 (Citing Ben Witherington in “Matthew 5:32 and 19:9—Exception or Exceptional Situation?” New Testament Studies, No. 31, 1985, p. 571). There is disagreement on what constitutes the exception; disagreement on what is the reason for the exception; disagreement on the meaning of the word porneia; and on and on. (Consider John 7:17 may have some impact on this problem.)
[iii] Mark 10:10-12, putting away or divorcing a spouse and marrying another is adultery. Luke 16:18, putting away (or divorcing) a wife, or marrying one who has been put away is committing adultery.
[iv] Jesus and Divorce, William Heth, Gordon Wenham, Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984, p. 22.
[v] Divorce and Remarriage: Biblical Principles and Pastoral Practice, Andrew Cornes, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993 pp. 246-247).
No comments:
Post a Comment