From: Michael Abernathy (mabernat@cub.kcnet.org)
Date: Thu Oct 14 1999 - 23:56:19 EDT
<x-html><!x-stuff-for-pete base="" src="" id="0"><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>While I am interested in the discussion of how to
interpret the Matthean passage on divorce, I feel that the recent
discussions have overlooked some possibilities. Most of us are acquainted
with the two most common interpretations:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>1. Jesus forbids remarriage after divorce for any
reason.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>2. Jesus forbids remarriage after divorce for any reason
except <EM>porneia</EM> with <EM>porneia</EM> being equated either with adultery
or some form of marriage that would be illegal according to Jewish
law.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>A less common interpretation was suggested by Tom Bivins in a
recent posting. <BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>3. Jesus was not forbidding divorce and remarriage but the
abominable practise of sending away a wife without benefit of divorce.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>(While this interpretation has some problems, it does
harmonize with the Aramaic translation of Mt. 5:32 & Lk. 16:18 where the
woman is not divorced but merely sent away. [For those who don't know
Aramaic, see Lamsa's translation of the Four Gospels.] It would also
harmonize with the Caesarean and Western variants of Mark 10:12 which
describes the woman as one who has left but not divorced her
husband.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>4. Jesus was forbidding divorce for the purpose of remarriage.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Brad Young argues that the force of the Hebrew would have
linked the divorce and remarriage together in one continuous motion thus,
translating, "Everyone who divorces his wife [in order] to marry another commits
adultery." ( See <EM>Jesus the Jewish Theologian</EM> p. 115).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>5. Jesus was that divorce and remarriage were not a part of
God's ideal plan for mankind. Therefore, all divorce and remarriage falls
short of perfection, but God because of His love and grace recognized man's
fallen condition and allowed for both divorce and remarriage. Thus,
divorce and remarriage are allowed but they are not encouraged. (See David
Daube, "Concessions to Sinfulness in Jewish Law," <EM>The Journal of Jewish
Studies</EM> vol 10, no 1-2 (1959).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Let me know if I have missed any major interpetations.
Personally, I lean to a combination of 4 and 5. 4 fits the context of the Jewish
leaders testing Jesus in the same area where John the Baptist was arrested for
denouncing the illegal divorce and marriage of Herodias. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Michael Abernathy</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Lock Haven, PA</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:42 EDT