NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER FIVE

Part VIII

DIVORCE: What is Jesus really saying? In order to understand what is happening, we have to see Jesus dealing with the conflict between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai over the subject of divorce and remarriage. In one Jewish book we read that in the 1^st century AD, the schools of Shammai and Hillel took opposite views of the biblical text in Deuteronomy 24:1 which allowed a man to send his wife away if she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some “unseeming thing” in her. The phrase “unseeming thing” is literally the nakedness of a thing which the school of Shammai explained to mean that a man may not divorce his wife unless he discovered her to be unfaithful to him.¹ Hillel, on the other hand, declared he may divorce her even if she spoiled his cooking. From the words, “… if she find no favor in his eyes,” Rabbi Akiva argued that he may divorce her even if he found another woman more beautiful than she.² The more lenient opinion of Hillel was adopted as law so that in Jesus’ day a man could put away his wife even if he did not like her looks. Dr. Roy B. Blizzard in his book titled, “Mishnah and the Words of Jesus” says, Here we have an example of something Jesus taught when he talked about the scribes and the Pharisees teaching as a commandment the traditions of men. This was not a commandment. In Jesus’ day, Jewish law was very specific. There were reasons whereby a man could put away his wife and a wife could put away a husband. It was specific in law. Everybody knew it…in Jesus’ day there was a certain body of law that specified why a man or a woman would be justified in going to a rabbinic court and being granted a bill of divorcement. The School of Shammai said he could do so only for adultery, and Hillel said he could put away his wife for any reason. In the midst of this controversy, Jesus taught that a man is not to put away his wife for any reason except for the cause of fornication. What does he mean? Fornication is illicit sexual relations by those unmarried. In biblical times, virginity was held in high regard, and the marriage was arranged by the bridegroom and the father of the bride, and the contract, called a ketubah, was written and signed. In the contract, it specified, as many as four times, that the bridegroom was paying such-and-such a price for the virgin daughter of so-and-so in lieu of her virginity. The price was agreed upon. The amount was paid. When the ceremony took place, the bride and groom retired to a special place to consummate their marriage. The marriage would be consummated on a special sheet. The next morning, that sheet would be displayed publicly with blood on it to serve as a testimony to all the guests at the wedding feast that the woman had, indeed, been a virgin. That special sheet was known, from Deuteronomy, Chapter 22, as “the tokens of her virginity.” It would be kept with her for the rest of her life and, according to Jewish law, if at any time the husband accused his wife of not being a virgin when they married, all she had to do was bring out the “tokens of her virginity” and show it to a Rabbi (or his equivalent), and her husband could never divorce her for any reason because he had falsely accused her. Jesus enters into the midst of this argument and He says that the only reason whereby a man who is in a proper relationship with both God and his wife should ever put away his wife is if the marriage contract was falsified which would, in turn, render the union null and void, and that is all He has to say about it. He does not go into all of the exceptions because He does not have to. They are already specified by law. Jesus is not establishing a new law on His own. He is simply engaging in the controversy between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai, and He enters into the controversy by explaining things according to His own unique, divine perspective.³

Verses 33-37: “You have heard that it was said to our people long ago, ‘When you make a vow, you must not break your promise. Keep the vows that you make to the Lord.’ But I tell you, when you make a promise, don’t try to make it stronger with a vow. Don’t make a vow using the name of heaven, because heaven is God’s throne. Don’t make a vow using the name of the earth, because the earth belongs to Him. Don’t make a vow using the name of Jerusalem, because it also belongs to Him, the great King. And don’t even say that your own head is proof that you will keep your promise. You cannot make one hair on your head white or black. Say only “yes” if you mean “yes,” and say only “no” if you mean “no.” If you say more than that, it is from the Evil One.’”

Since the marriage contract was in the form of a vow, our Lord now continues on the same subject of the vows and promises people make. This teaching covers not only taking an oath between individuals, but also incumbent upon those who may be called to witness in a court case. In His reference to what was said to the Jews long ago, Jesus is no doubt referring to the teachings of Moses who said: “If a man makes a special promise to the Lord or makes a promise with an oath, he must not break his promise. He must do everything he said he would do.”⁴ One venerable Jewish teacher points out that such vows are part of the free-willed offerings, they are not mandatory.⁵ While this is admirable, Jesus wants the crowd to know that the qualifier attached to that promise, or vow, must be acceptable to God. Therefore, it should not be predicated upon the virtue or reputation of something other than the person making the vow. It is not unusual to hear someone today saying, “I swear on my mother’s grave.” I’ve even heard some say, “I swear to God.” Jesus says here that this is not acceptable. The Jews knew this, because Moses taught⁶: “You must not use the name of the Lord your God to make empty promises. If you do, the Lord will not let you go unpunished.”⁷

God adds His own prohibition to this: “You must not use my name to make false promises. If you do that, you will show that you don’t respect the name of your God. I am the Lord!”⁸ One should also not use heaven, because as God says: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth is where I rest my feet.”⁹ Our Lord’s statement is in harmony with what was being taught in His day as verbal teachings. In the Mishnah we find the phrase: “By heaven and by earth.” The Rabbis also say that if anyone says: “By Alef-Daleth” (the first two letters of Adonai,” by Yod-He” (the first two letters of YHWH, the sacred name), or “by Shaddai” or “by Sabbath” or “by the Merciful and Gracious” or “by Him that is long-suffering and of great kindness,” or by any substituted name, they are liable.”¹⁰ These are all considered attributes of Almighty God. As the Rabbis taught: “One who curses his father or his mother is not punished unless he curses them by the Divine Name. If he cursed them by referring to an attribute of God such as the Merciful One, Rabbi Meir holds him liable.”¹¹

Also, in the writings of Hebrew philosopher Philo, in which he addresses the Third Commandment, it is clear that swearing at all is to be rejected, since a simple word should be enough, to swear by parents or heaven and the like is better than using God’s name, which many do recklessly. When swearing is necessary the oath must be performed, if it can be lawfully. To call God to witness a falsehood is profane.¹² And Maimonides states: “When a person takes an oath by the heaven and earth, by the sun, or the like, this is not an oath, even though his intent is He who created them. Similarly, one who takes an oath by one of the prophets or by one of the texts of the Holy Scriptures, this is not an oath, even if his intent is He who sent the prophet or gave the commandments in this text. Although these are not oaths, those who take them are subjected to a severe warning and we teach the people not to act frivolously in this manner. Indeed, we make it look as if these are oaths and give them an opening to ask for their absolution and absolve them.”¹³ Apparently this had become a custom and Jesus wanted to point out that a person’s word should be all that’s needed to instill trust and confidence in them.

Our Lord also speaks against the use of the name of Jerusalem because that’s the king’s throne and the King’s headquarters.¹⁴ In the Mishnah, using anything contained in the Temple, including the wood on the altar, the fire-offerings, the altar vessels etc. were not to be used when making a vow.¹⁵ Likewise in the Babylonian Talmud we read: “The whole Mishnah gives Rabbi Judah’s ruling, but this is what is stated: for Rabbi Judah said: ‘He who says Jerusalem has said nothing.’”¹⁶ And one final prohibition, that was not to swear on one’s own head. This too is covered in the Mishnah where we read: “If a man was under the obligation of an oath to his fellow and then this man says to him, ‘Swear to me on your life and I will pay you,’ and he swears, Rabbi Meir holds he may retract his pledge, but the Sages say, He cannot.”¹⁷ So as we can see, keeping one’s head was the same as keeping one’s life.

But Jesus adds a twist, by pointing out that man cannot even control the color of his hair, so why would having him swear on his head add any value to his oath. And we read where a Rabbi was traveling and wanted to stop and pray, so he stepped inside the ruins of a building in Jerusalem. After he finished praying, the spirit of Elijah spoke and asked him why he stopped in this ruin to pray. That he should have prayed out on the road, and then he must swear never to do it again by his life and by his head. That was because the Jews believed that God gets upset when they do so because during the night He sits by those ruins and roars like a lion saying: “Woe to the children, who because of their sins I destroyed My house and burned My Temple and sent them into exile among the nations of the world!”¹⁸