If you haven't read Part 1 and Part 2, you may find it difficult to understand what I'm sharing here.
As mentioned in Part 2, the new interpretation of Matthew 19 where Jesus was addressing the unjust issue of Jewish husbands putting away (apolyos) their wives without a certificate of divorce (apostasion) leads to what is now termed as biblical divorce in the eyes of God. In other words, it is believed (and Scripturally argued) that God permits divorce and doesn't regard it as a sin.
Even the traditional view of Malachi 2:16 is apparently, to be interpreted as follows:
“For the Lord God of Israel says that He hates DIVORCE, for it covers one’s garment with violence,” says the Lord of hosts. "Therefore take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.” (emphasis added)
The word "divorce" in KJV is "putting away". In the Hebrew, the word "divorce" is "shalach", which has the same meaning as the Greek "apolyos". It means "put away."
Hence, it is argued that God doesn't hate divorce. What He hates is husbands PUTTING AWAY their wives without granting them a certificate of divorce. That causes the women to be bound and chained (as agunahs) without any freedom to live their lives. That in itself, is cruelty.
Furthermore, God HIMSELF put away Israel and gave her a certificate of divorce when she persisted in idolatry (spiritual adultery).
Jeremiah 3:8 - And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had PUT her AWAY, and given her a bill of DIVORCE; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. (Emphasis added).
This is it! God Himself divorced Israel. He did the very TWO things in the Torah (the Law) - apolyos AND apostasion.
How can God hate divorce if He Himself divorced His chosen nation? How can God not permit divorce when He Himself did it?
1 Corinthians 7 seems to nail the point if you interpret the word "unmarried" as those who have divorced instead of those who are single.
I believe that this interpretation is due to 1 Corinthians 7:34 (NASB):
"The woman who is UNMARRIED, AND the VIRGIN, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband." (emphasis added)
A virgin is already a single. Thus, it is believed that the unmarried woman must be referred to something else instead of a single.
Many of the English translations have probably translated it wrongly as follows:
"There is a DIFFERENCE between a WIFE and a VIRGIN. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband." (emphasis added)
When I looked into the Greek, I realised that NASB translated the verse closest to its original meaning.
Hence, replacing the word "unmarried" with divorce, 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 will be as follows:
"But I say to the unmarried (divorced) and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion." ("divorced" added)
With this interpretation, it seems to prove that apostle Paul did not forbid re-marrying for the divorced, though he would rather have them remained unmarried.
You may wonder about the following verses that seem to contradict with the above interpretation.
1 Corinthians 7:10-11 - But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
Firstly, "not I, but the Lord" is interpreted as Paul being directed by God to give the instructions. And "I say, not the Lord" (verse 12) is interpreted as Paul giving his own personal view (not directed by God). This is a flawed interpretation that we will talk about later.
Verse 10 and 11 is believed to be talking about separation, not divorce. The context of this interpretation lies in verse 5:
"Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer."
It is believed that the couple is separated to work things out in the marriage for a period of time. Thus, during this separation, Paul did not allow a divorce, in hope that things can be worked out. Long separation is not encouraged, as it may lead to temptation.
With these explanations, on what ground does it warrant a biblical divorce?
Deut 24:1 - When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some UNCLEANNESS in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. (emphasis added)
The word "uncleanness" in Septuagint (Greek translation) is "aschemon" which means "unseemly, indecent."
The Christian Jewish Rabbi said that when Jesus spoke about the exception clause in Matthew 19:9, He was referring to indecent/inappropriate behaviour, pointing back to Deuteronomy 24:1.
"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." (emphasis added)
The word "fornication" is not the best translation. In Greek, it is "porneia", where you get the English word "pornography." Porneia has a wide spectrum of various meanings such as incest, harlotry, idolatry, etc, but it is not adultery. Under the Law, if you commit adultery, you will be stoned to death. So it is believed that Jesus wasn't talking about adultery as the exception clause.
The Jewish Christian Rabbi explained that "porneia" should be pointed back to Deut 24:1, indicating that Jesus was quoting from there. If that is true, it should mean "indecent or inappropriate behaviour."
In other words, there are many grounds for divorce, such as abusing your wife, shaming her in public, etc., because these are indecent and inappropriate behaviours.
Of course, even with this belief, it is taught that divorce should be the last option and couple should work things out carefully in a marriage.
Are all these really what the Word is saying?
It is interesting that some readers thought that what I wrote in Part 2 is actually biblical, which goes to show how strong this view is backed up with Scriptures. I cannot imagine how this is going to open up many divorces in church.
Having presented what seems to be biblical truths in Part 2 and Part 3 (today), it is important to find out what the Word really says IN CONTEXT. We need to give an answer from the Word when there are so many kinds of teachings going around. More so because this is a vital topic that involves families - husbands, wives and children.
To interpret Scriptures (more accurately), we first need the Holy Spirit to illuminate the truth to us. No amount of studying/knowledge can reveal to us the truth except through the Spirit of truth (John 16:13) and the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:10-16). This is why some seminary trained people can still believe in cessation of gifts and other interesting stuff. I'm not saying that seminary is bad. It definitely has its role and purpose. But just as going into the Four Fingers doesn't make me become a Korean fried chicken, going into the seminary doesn't make you become the walking truth. Seeking for truth with the guidance of the Holy Spirit is a life-long journey that we must never stop. Sometimes, what we know can really keep us from what we need to know.
In Part 4, I will share what I personally believe is truth in context against what is being shared in Part 2 and Part 3 (today) by the Jewish Christian Rabbi and other men and women sharing his same view from the pulpit. And yes, I disagree with them from the Word.
We will also be looking at what Jesus really meant in Matthew 19:9 about the exception clause.
Note: There will be a final post on God's heart for the divorced and re-married. He sees them the same way as He sees anyone of us ---- precious sons and daughters. We must NEVER EVER label them. What a loving God we have! Jesus!
#marriage #covenant
P.S: Do bear with me as I lay the foundation to the final point. Truly, truly, I say to you, it shall only tarry for now. But it shall not tarry forever :)
No comments:
Post a Comment