NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER FIVE

Part VII (con’t)

Verses 31-32: “It was also said, ‘Any man who divorces his wife must give her a written notice of divorce.’ But I tell you that any man who divorces his wife, except on the grounds of sexual infidelity, is causing his wife to be guilty of adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman is guilty of adultery.”

Our Lord continues His discourse on adultery, now He points to the role it plays in divorce. But we must also consider what we learn when examining the original manuscript of Matthew’s Gospel in Hebrew. The complete text of Matthew in Hebrew is preserved in a lengthy polemical treatise composed in the 14^th century by Shem Tob ben Isaac (sometimes called Ibn Shaprut). These two verses are rendered as follows: “Again Jesus said to His disciples: You have heard what was said to those of long ago that everyone who leaves his wife and divorces her is to give her a bill of divorce. And I say to you that everyone who leaves his wife is to give her a bill of divorce. But concerning adultery, he is the one who commits adultery and he who takes her commits adultery.”¹ Here we see a different connotation. It suggests that if the woman is not issued the proper bill of divorce, then by not giving it to her the husband is complicit in any act of adultery, especially if she is taken by another man, because she does not possess a bill of divorce, then he becomes guilty of adultery by inaction. We see here that the burden is squarely on the husband.

No doubt Jesus had this teaching of Moses in mind: “A man might marry a woman, and then find some secret thing about her that he does not like. If that man is not pleased with her, he must write the divorce papers and give them to her. Then he must send her from his house. Once she leaves his house, then she is free to go and become another man’s wife.”² After mentioning what Moses said, Jesus then adds: “But I’m telling you.” This may well be what we call today: “Women’s Rights.” Jewish writings confirm this one-sided perk. It tells us, “Dissolution of marriage. The origin of the Jewish law of divorce is found in the constitution of the patriarchal family. The fundamental principle of its government was the absolute authority of the oldest male ascendant; hence the husband, as the head of the family, divorced the wife at his pleasure. The manner in which Hagar was dismissed by Abraham illustrates the exercise of this authority.”³ This reference seems to be quite out of place since Abraham was never formerly married to Hagar, therefore no bill of divorce was required. However, since she bore him a child, this then obligated him to provide child support for her and her child.⁴

Nevertheless, the Jewish teaching goes on: “This ancient right of the husband to divorce his wife at his pleasure is the central thought in the entire system of Jewish divorce law. It was not set aside by the Rabbis, though its severity was tempered by numerous restrictive measures. It was not until the eleventh century that the absolute right of the husband to divorce his wife at will was formally abolished”.⁵ It is obvious that Jesus was not claiming that divorce was impossible for believers, but that it must be based on reason and consideration for all involved. Civilization has tried to compensate the woman by decreeing alimony be paid to help her retain some of her status and rights. As a matter of fact, before the giving of the law to Moses, there existed a document that declared a man must provide sustenance to a woman who has borne him children, so that she can raise them. This law reads as follows: “If a man wishes to separate from a woman who has borne him children, or from his wife who has borne him children: then he shall give that wife her dowry, and a part of the usufruct⁶ of field, garden, and property, so that she can rear her children. When she has brought up her children, a portion of all that is given to the children, equal as that of one son, shall be given to her. She may then marry the man of her heart.”⁷

Professor Craig A. Evans points out something we’ve already mentioned: “When it comes to applying the divorce legislation of Deuteronomy 24:1-4, the verbal teaching of Jesus stands in tension with rabbinic verbal teachings. Major rabbinic figures allowed a man to divorce his wife, if for no other reason than a tasteless dinner.⁸ Not only does Jesus’ stricter views on divorce stand in tension with the more lenient views of the Rabbis, his halakah⁹ in Greek seems even to stand in tension with written Torah itself. Not so in the Hebrew, however; for it reads differently in a very important way: “. “. . . But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife is to give her a certificate of divorce. But concerning adultery, he is the one who commits adultery . . .” The Hebrew version of Matthew makes it clear that the law of Moses is to be followed. Moreover, the absence of this exception clause¹⁰ which scholars suspect may have been a later gloss, may support the antiquity of the Hebrew version of Matthew.”¹¹ All Jewish authorities agreed, including a venerable Rabbi, who puts it very simply: “If her husband desires to divorce her, he must compose a “get” [a formal bill of divorce].”¹² He goes on to give an example of this “get.” This is how the text is supposed to read:

“On this ___ day of the week, on this ___ day of the month, in this ___ year from creation – or according to the chronology employed for legal documents (This refers to the years dating back to the beginning of Alexander the Great’s kingdom) – according to the reckoning that we keep here in [the name of the place where the get is being given], in the following way, I [the husband’s name], the son of [his father’s name], from [the name of his city], (The city in which he currently dwells, not the city in which he was born) or by whatever names or nicknames by which I, my father, my place or his place are called, desire out of independent will without anyone forcing me, to dismiss, to release, to divorce you, [the woman’s name], the daughter of [her father’s name], from [the name of her city], or by whatever names or nicknames you, your father, your place or his place is known. Although previously, you were my wife, now I am dismissing, releasing and divorcing you, so that you have the license and the authority to go and marry any man whom you desire. No one will protest your actions from the present day onward. You are free to marry any man. This will serve you as a bill of divorce, a get dismissing you, and a letter releasing you, from me, according to the faith of Moses and Israel.The witnesses sign below: [The witness’s name], the son of [his father’s name], a witness, [the witness’s name], the son of [his father’s name], a witness.”¹³

What Jesus is teaching here was already a part of Jewish custom on divorce. The Rabbis taught that: “The School Shammai says: ‘A man may not divorce his wife unless he found her guilty of an unseemly moral matter, for it is written: “And it will be that she does not find favor in his eyes because he discovers an unseemly, moral matter in her [- then he should write her a bill of divorce and place it in her hand, thereby sending her away from his household¹⁴.”¹⁵ In other words, immoral conduct of any kind was the only valid cause for divorce. Of course the school of Hillel is more liberal, as we see in this statement: “But School Hillel says: ‘Even if she burned his food.’”¹⁶ It is clear which school Jesus sides with on this topic. With that said, the rest of what Jesus explained must then be understood in that if a man divorces his wife for any other reason than immoral behavior, and does not give her a bill of divorce, if she goes ahead and marries another man and they become intimate, she is committing adultery. Not only that, but since she was previously married, the man that marries her is committing adultery, as well as the man who sent her away without a proper bill of divorcement. We must remember, Jesus was speaking to Jews and focusing on the laws as they existed in His day.

As we will see when our Lord continues, He is speaking about the fact that He had not come to do away with the Law, but was explaining how the Law was viewed under the new covenant. Often scholars have speculated that Jesus spent time with the Essenes, who were a very strict and conservative branch of the Pharisees. In the Dead Sea Scrolls found in the Qumran caves, in the Temple Scroll we find this law written for any new king: “He shall not marry as his wife any daughter of the Gentiles, but shall take a wife for himself from his father’s house, from his father’s family. He shall not take another wife in addition to her, for she alone shall be with him all the time of her life. But if she dies, he may marry another from his father’s house, from his family.”¹⁷ So by these teachings that were recognized in our Lord’s day, He was not being as overly strict as some may claim.