Grandpa Lake’s Weblog

We Christians are said to be “people of the book”, that is to say that our faith hinges upon the authority of the written Word of God. While it is true that many Christians base their faith upon what their denomination teaches or their preacher says, behind these two still lies the understanding that the church or preacher is functioning under the authority of God’s Word, the Bible. Of course there are those who, while calling themselves Christians, deprecate the Bible. I’m not addressing these folks or their concerns at all. I’d like to address a concern of those who fear God and want to obey His Word. This concern is how to interpret questionable passages of Scripture.

By questionable, I refer to passages where the meaning is not clear to the casual reader and people who believe that the Bible is God’s Word differ as to how these passages should be read. I want to look at just one of these passages with you. The discussion that we have about it provides us with principles for the reading of God’s Word generally.

The verse that I’d like to look at is Matthew 19:9. In the New King James Version, it reads,

And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.

The basic question raised by this verse is “Can a divorced person remarry without committing adultery?” A very narrow reading of the text “divorces his wife” says that it is addressed to men. I understand that, in Jesus’ day, men could divorce wives, but women could not get a divorce. I am willing to accept the stipulation that the Scripture applies, whichever partner is the one getting the divorce.

It is easy to understand that Christians are not at liberty to divorce and remarry unless the marriage partner has violated the marriage bond. That’s not the problem.

The problem is the second part, after the semicolon, “and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.” Is this second part dependent upon the first part or is it a separate statement?

If a divorcing partner does not remarry, it is pretty clear that the divorced partner should not, either. In this case, the Lord is stating that the marriage bond is intact. Someone who marries the divorced party is “marrying” an already married person, thus committing adultery.

The place where Bible believing Christians differ is that if the second part of that verse is tied to the first part, then the prohibition against remarriage applies to the person whose mate gets a divorce, but does not remarry. The question arises when the divorcing party remarries. Is the divorced person free to remarry or are they required to remain single until the ex-partner dies? If we are going to understand God’s will by textual analysis, the answer to the question hinges on the significance of the semicolon! But, look at the Greek text:

λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν ὅτι ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται.

No semicolon! But let me ask this question. Must a Christian be able to read Greek to understand God’s will? Is that significant? Is there something in the text that would compel a translator to insert the semicolon? I can’t read that text, but I understand that those who are Greek scholars are still divided on this issue.

Well, let’s confuse the issue a little more. As Jesus ministered to His people, he didn’t use Greek. I understand that He spoke Aramaic or Hebrew. Therefore, the tax collector who heard Jesus speak these words had to translate them into Greek in order to write them. That is, unless he related the words to another person who translated them. But, was this translation accurate? We must assume so, for we have no alternative but to dismiss the whole text, which is unacceptable to Bible-believing Christians.

To carry this problem to it’s ridiculous extreme, did Matthew really understand what Jesus said and exactly what He meant? This question isn’t so ridiculous to me, personally, because this argument was used to turn my beloved son away from the Christian faith.

I’d like to suggest that Matthew did understand what Jesus said, because those who heard Him (including Matthew) didn’t like what they heard, but reported it faithfully anyhow.

It appears that we are getting into more and more trouble as we try to understand this text with textual analysis. I think that we’d run into the same difficulty with other texts. I wish to propose an alternative means for understanding difficult texts.

Get to know the Author!

When a person you know well is quoted, you know right away whether or not the quote is consistent with the person you know. There is always the possibility, of course, that you don’t know a person as well as you think you do, but you can get to know our Lord. Receive Him as your Lord, so that a relationship between you exists. Then walk in obedience to Him day by day. Pray and read His Word. Seek the fellowship of others who want to get to know God better. What you don’t understand one day will be clear to you later. The process is called growth. God’s Word will be revealed to your heart as you seek His will. It’s called discernment. He won’t give you enough information to judge others, for He has told you not to do it. But He has given you all you need to know His will for you.

Let me address this specific verse from the viewpoint of knowing Him who made the statement.

Why would Jesus make a statement like this? The context shows that He was being tested by men who used the Law of Moses as a cover for marrying and divorcing for their own convenience, having nothing to do with the wife. Jesus made His point by saying that marriage is an institution created by God. The relationship between husband and wife is important to God. The Pharisees regarded this relationship lightly and broke it easily. Jesus said that this is not God’s way.

Jesus knows God’s way because He is God. As you get to know God, through His Word, you see that He is all about relationships, first between Himself and humans, then between humans. The Ten Commandments help to define these relationships. Our Lord made it clear that we cannot please God by an outward observance of a set of rules. He wants to write His law on our hearts. He wants a living relationship with us. God is love and He wants our love as a response to the love He has given us. He wants us to get to know Him and His heart, for He knows that, if we know Him, we will love Him. If we love Him, we will govern our lives so as to please Him. He has given His Holy Spirit to us, that we might live lives that draw us closer to Him.

Looking at Matthew 19:9 from this perspective, it is reasonable to see that Jesus wants us to value marriage as He does. If a man remains single after divorcing his wife, he is more likely to want to be reconciled to her or to not divorce her in the first place. He wants the woman to be available for reconciliation. Preserve the marriage. But divorces of convenience — no way! But, if he sins by marrying another, the divorced partner is in the situation covered by the “except for sexual immorality” clause. The man’s sin has broken the marriage bond! That shouldn’t be difficult to understand. The whole reason why the divorced person should not remarry is so that the couple might be reconciled and the marriage restored.

If reconciliation cannot be accomplished, what is the point in saying that the divorced partner shouldn’t remarry? Our Lord would have a reason. What is it? Would the God that you love and serve make a mindless, uncaring rule to bind the mate of an unfaithful partner in a lifetime of loneliness, for no expressed purpose? Such a reading of the Scripture tells me more about the person who would make such an interpretation than it does about our Lord Jesus, for such an interpretation is entirely out of character for Him.

I can hear these words challenged with, “How dare you, a nobody, challenge the scholarship of <fill in the blank>, who has degrees in <fill in the blank> from <fill in the blank> University? ” I’ll tell you how I dare. I have walked with my blessed Lord for almost fifty years. This doesn’t refer to the length of time that I’ve studied the Bible or gone to church, although I’ve done these things. It means that I’ve lived a life where my knowledge of Him as a Person has increased with the passing years. I know His love through personal experience as well as “the Bible tells me so”. Scholarship is valuable. Without it, I wouldn’t have the Bible that I can read. But scholarship is not a substitute for getting to know God and His ways. The kingdom of heaven is not for scholars but for those who know the God that they study. Even scholars can get to know God.

…Jesus answered and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight. Matthew 11:25-26