Participants: Senez Rodriguez (Host), Tom Shepherd
Series Code: HPOV
Program Code: HPOV000043A
|
00:16 Welcome to Heaven's Point of View.
00:18 Again, my name is Dr. Senez Rodriguez 00:20 and we're discussing the Series 00:23 on Love, Marriage, Sex, and Divorce 00:25 according to the New Testament. 00:27 Our special guest and host is Dr. Tom Sheperd 00:31 who is a Professor of New Testament Interpretation 00:34 at Andrews University Seminary. 00:36 Welcome to our program. Thank you. 00:38 Now, I have a question for you, 00:40 so, last time, we started studying Matthew 19, 00:44 where Jesus disputed with the Pharisees, 00:47 summarize, please, for us, what we've discovered. 00:51 Okay, we were looking... 00:52 there was a dispute between Jesus and these Pharisees 00:56 about the question of Divorce. 00:58 He often confronted... was confronted by 01:01 respected religious leaders of His day 01:04 over matters relating to everyday life of Judaism 01:07 and this was one of those matters. 01:09 Dealing with the question of divorce, 01:11 there were two schools of thought 01:13 the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel 01:17 and they approached the question differently. 01:20 Both of the schools agreed that the important text of Scripture 01:25 on this matter was Deuteronomy chapter 24 verses 1 and 2, 01:30 but they had different opinions about what it meant. 01:34 Depending on which part of the verse you emphasized, 01:38 the key phrase was "a matter of indecency" 01:44 okay, or, "nakedness of a matter" 01:48 depending on how you want to translate it 01:50 but so... "a matter of indecency" 01:52 and the School of Hillel focused on that word, "matter," 01:57 and the School of Shammai 02:00 focused on that word, "indecency," 02:03 so the School of Hillel might say, 02:07 "Well, it's a matter of indecency" 02:11 and so, he can divorce his wife for almost anything. 02:14 You know, just... if she has not pleased him 02:18 or she's caused problems, you know, 02:20 he can get rid of her, 02:21 one of them even said, 02:22 "Even if you find somebody that looks prettier" 02:24 but that wasn't the general... kind of a position, 02:27 there was this one guy, you know, 02:28 I feel sorry for his poor wife, 02:30 but the School of Shammai focused on the word, "Indecency" 02:34 so they said it was "a matter of indecency" 02:37 so you emphasize the particular word, 02:40 and for them, that meant somebody 02:43 about committing adultery 02:45 or being unfaithful to their marriage vows 02:47 and sleeping with somebody other than their spouse 02:50 so these two schools... 02:52 both agree that divorce is acceptable 02:56 see... it's just that they're differing on the reasons 03:00 so when they come to Jesus, they say, 03:03 "Can a man divorce his wife for any cause?" 03:08 Which sounds like the position of the School of Hillel 03:12 you know, anything, whatever... 03:15 Jesus kind of surprises them probably He... typically did, 03:19 and He responds with a discussion of Genesis 1 and 2, 03:25 He talks about their hardness of heart but 03:28 He says that the Creation story tells you a different idea, 03:32 he said, in Genesis 1 says that they are male and female 03:36 Genesis 2 tells us that a man leaves his father and mother 03:41 he's joined to his wife so they no longer are two, 03:43 that is male and female but now one, 03:46 all right, so, he responds to that 03:49 and he emphasizes, it seems, the maleness and the femaleness 03:53 of the two and then... that they've come together, 03:55 he concludes that... that there is 03:59 something that God has done when people get married, 04:03 that He yokes them together, He unites them together 04:06 and people shouldn't separate what God has joined, 04:09 so, He has this... very counter to their kind of perspective 04:13 and you think, almost like 04:15 further than what the School of Shammai is saying, 04:18 it really focuses, 04:19 very fairly similar to what we saw 04:22 when we read last time 04:23 from Malachi 2 that God hates divorce 04:26 that God wants you to be faithful 04:30 to the wife of your youth. 04:32 Now, did Jesus' explanation satisfy the Leaders? 04:36 Well, it usually didn't and it didn't here either, 04:41 so, what they do is, they ask Him another question 04:45 but the Pharisees' two positions are 04:48 either the divorce is all right for any reason 04:52 or it's all right just for sexual immorality. 04:56 Jesus' position seems to reject both their ideas. 04:59 The Pharisees immediately challenge his position 05:03 as out of step with Moses' command concerning divorce, so, 05:08 we really need to understand what was the context of this 05:13 and we have to go back to Deuteronomy to do so. 05:16 Deuteronomy 24 and... while it's verses 1 and 2, 05:20 we'll actually read all the way through verse 4 05:24 so you want to turn over to Deuteronomy. 05:25 Deuteronomy chapter 24 and we want to start in verse 1 05:32 and read all the way through verse 4. 05:37 Okay... "When a man hath taken a wife, 05:42 and married her, and it came to pass that 05:46 she find no favor in his eyes, 05:48 because he hath found some uncleanness in her: 05:52 then let him write her a bill of divorcement, 05:56 and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 06:01 And when she is departed out of his house, 06:05 she may go and be another man's wife. 06:09 And if the latter husband hate her, 06:13 and write her a bill of divorcement, 06:17 and give it to her in her hand, 06:20 and sendeth her out of his house; 06:22 or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 06:28 her former husband which sent her away, 06:31 may not take her again to be his wife, 06:35 after that she is defiled; 06:37 for that is abomination before the Lord: 06:41 and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, 06:44 which the Lord thy God give to thee for an inheritance. " 06:50 Hmmm... hmmm... okay, 06:52 thank you for reading that passage. 06:54 Now, we need to 06:58 study Deuteronomy 24 to get this 07:01 and to understand this, we have to understand 07:03 the different kinds of laws 07:06 that were in the Old Testament Pentateuch... 07:09 that's the five books of Moses, 07:10 there were basically two kinds of laws. 07:13 Now, I know, we usually think in terms of... 07:16 Adventists who'll talk about the Moral Law, 07:18 we'll talk about the Ceremonial Law 07:20 we'll talk about the Health Laws 07:21 and Political Laws and so forth, 07:23 we're not thinking in those kinds of terms, 07:25 we're thinking in terms of category of "type of law" 07:29 okay, so they're... the two kinds of laws were 07:33 Apodictic Law and Casuistic Law isn't that beautiful? 07:39 Apodictic Law and Casuistic Law, 07:42 let me explain what those two terms mean 07:45 Apodictic Law is absolute command law, 07:48 this would be like the Ten Commandments, 07:50 you know, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" 07:53 "Thou shalt not steal" it's not... 07:56 it doesn't matter when or where you are, 07:59 you don't do those things, you don't say, 08:03 "Ah well, you can't commit adultery on Tuesday, 08:06 but it's okay on Thursday, 08:07 you can't steal on Sunday 08:09 but it's all right on Wednesday. " 08:11 No... no... this is Apodictic Law, 08:13 it's universal... absolute command law, 08:15 the other kind of law... the Casuistic Law... 08:19 is "case law," rulings on specific cases 08:23 that become the precedent for other decisions, okay, 08:28 so the question is, in Deuteronomy 24, 08:30 which kind of law do we have? 08:32 Is it Apodictic Law 08:34 or is it Casuistic Law, what do you think? 08:36 That's a good question, what do you think? 08:39 Well, if it's Apodictic Law, 08:43 it would be a law that was universal 08:45 for all time... for all people in all situations, 08:49 if it's Casuistic Law, 08:51 it has to do with a particular case or particular situation, 08:55 the question we would have is, "Are there any indications 08:58 in the text, in Deuteronomy 24 09:01 that would lead us one way or another?" 09:03 Let's look back at the text okay? 09:04 Read verse 1. 09:06 Okay, "When a man hath taken a wife, 09:10 and married her, 09:12 and it came to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, 09:16 because he hath found some uncleanness in her: 09:19 then let him write her a bill of divorcement, 09:23 and give it to her in her hand, 09:26 and send her out of his house. " 09:29 Okay, so let me put the question this way, 09:31 this talks about a man taking a wife 09:33 and about the man divorcing the wife, 09:36 okay, is this a universal experience of all people? 09:39 No... No. 09:41 No... I mean there's some people who never marry, right? 09:44 So, Apodictic Law has to apply to everybody at all times 09:48 so this seems to be clearly in the "Case Law" 09:52 Casuistic... kind of a thing... 09:54 there's another kind of indication for that 09:57 and that's the word, "if" or the word "when" 10:01 "if a man marries a woman or when a man marries a woman," 10:06 you see, not all men will marry, 10:08 not all women will marry, so this is limited 10:12 to particular cases, "if a man marries a woman," 10:16 okay... and that "if" statement 10:19 then is usually followed by a "then" statement 10:24 so if I were to say to you, 10:27 "Senez, if I go to town today, 10:30 then I will buy you an ice cream. " 10:34 Thank you. You'd say, "good", right... 10:37 We could talk about the kind of ice cream you might like. 10:40 Now, does that mean I'm going to town 10:42 when I say that? No. 10:44 No, it's possible. Yeah. 10:47 It's a condition, so that first part... 10:49 the "if" part of a sentence, in a conditional sentence, 10:53 is called "the prothesis" that's another beautiful word. 10:57 The prothesis, just think of it as the "if" part of a statement 11:03 of a conditional statement, 11:05 the last part... the "then" part has got the fancy name of 11:09 "Apotheosis" so there's the prothesis and the apotheosis 11:13 the prothesis is the "if" part, 11:15 the apotheosis is the "then" part, 11:18 somebody says, "Why don't you just call it, if and then?" 11:20 Well, I don't know, but linguists have these 11:22 special names and... you know... makes you sound smarter 11:26 I suppose if you were saying, 11:27 "We are talking about the prothesis 11:29 of the sentence today, and we decided the apotheosis 11:32 didn't make sense," so, you know... but... 11:34 it's just technical names that are used for it... 11:37 okay, so, this is a typical Case Law... 11:40 kind of a statement here, and it has a prothesis 11:44 and it has an apotheosis, 11:46 the prothesis is the "if" part 11:49 and the apotheosis is the "then" part, okay, 11:53 so the question is, "Where does the prothesis end?" 12:00 Hmmm... 12:01 Where does the prothesis... now read your text again, 12:04 okay, the prothesis... remember the prothesis is the "if" part. 12:07 Right... All right. 12:08 So where is the prothesis in? 12:09 Chapter 1 right? Hmmm... hmmm... 12:11 "When a man hath taken a wife... " 12:13 It could also be translated with "if. " 12:15 Right, "... and marry her, 12:17 and it came to pass that she finds no favour in his eyes, 12:22 because he hath found some uncleanness in her: 12:26 then let him write her a bill of divorcement, 12:31 and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. " 12:36 Okay. That will be clearer here. 12:38 Yeah, the apotheosis... the prothesis ends in verse 1 12:42 and the apotheosis begins at the same place 12:47 then he gives her the bill of divorce, 12:49 okay, my translation... the ESV doesn't do it that way. 12:53 Yeah, I noticed that some versions translate that verse 12:57 differently, why is that? 13:00 Yeah, 13:02 well, it's a matter of relating to... 13:06 exactly in Hebrew, where the prothesis 13:09 would come to a conclusion 13:11 and actually, that relates to all the questions 13:14 that the Pharisees were asking. 13:16 The King James Version that you read 13:18 illustrates where the Pharisees of Jesus' day stood 13:21 on the meaning of this passage 13:23 the command from Moses, 13:25 starts at the writing of the bill of divorce, 13:28 so, if he does this, 13:29 then he should put the bill of divorce into her hand, 13:32 thus, they maintained that Moses commanded divorce, 13:35 see, so they asked Jesus, 13:37 "Why did Moses command us to do divorce?" 13:39 The difference was not over 13:41 if the divorce was okay but on what grounds? 13:44 And we've already said 13:46 that the School of Shammai said, "only for adultery" 13:48 and the School of Hillel said, "almost anything. " 13:52 Jesus stresses instead the permanence of marriage 13:55 and His statements go along 13:56 with the Shammai School more closely, 13:58 but as we'll see, Jesus even goes further, 14:02 now, the steps in the prothesis, 14:05 if you read a modern translation, 14:06 it goes like this, 14:08 "If a man takes a wife and dwells with her, 14:10 and if she does not find favor before him 14:13 because he found some shameful matter in her 14:16 and if he writes her a bill of divorce 14:18 and puts it into her hand and sends her away 14:23 and if she remarries another man 14:26 and if her last husband hates her 14:29 and he writes her a bill of divorce 14:32 and he gives it into her hand 14:34 and he sends her away from his house 14:37 or if he dies... who took her to be his wife... 14:40 then... then the former husband 14:44 cannot take her back to be his wife. 14:46 That's the way it's usually translated 14:48 in modern translations today, that's the way it is in the ESV, 14:50 the School of Hillel held that the prothesis 14:53 ends after the number 2 point that I made 14:58 she doesn't find favor in his eyes 14:59 and he found some shameful matter in her. 15:02 Then the rest of the points would be: part of the command. 15:05 Thus, divorce should be commanded by Moses, 15:07 the reason given... is at the end for not remarrying 15:10 "she is defiled and would be an abomination, 15:12 you must not defile the land. " 15:14 It's important, however, to understand 15:16 more about Deuteronomy 24, it's clearly Casuistic Law, 15:22 you know, it's got this "if" "then" statements, 15:24 the Case Law here assumes that divorce is already occurring, 15:30 "If he does this... if he does this, 15:32 if he divorcing her and he sends her away, then... " 15:35 That is listed as part of the prothesis 15:37 of the conditional statement 15:39 since the prothesis is conditional, 15:42 it obviously is not commanding that such matters must occur 15:46 so, the divorce was part of the "if," 15:49 it was part of the condition of what was already around, 15:51 the first steps in the case occur 15:54 before the ruling of the Case Law takes place 15:56 or takes effect, the prothesis, 15:59 that "if" part of that looooong sentence 16:01 simply indicates a series of events 16:04 that evidently were already in place, 16:06 the allowance of divorce, the reason for the divorce, 16:09 the giving of the bill of divorce, 16:11 the sequence of events that follow it 16:12 were all part of the Case Law. 16:14 The statement of the Case Law specifies strongly 16:17 that the woman must be handed a bill of divorce. 16:20 This is proof of her release 16:22 from the marriage of the first husband 16:24 and that was very important because if she didn't have 16:28 that Bill of Divorce, she could be accused of adultery 16:32 if she married somebody else. 16:33 Or she could be stoned. 16:35 Or she was going to be stoned, exactly, right, 16:38 so the Case Law limits actually what can be done 16:41 to her, in a very specific way, the only case covered here 16:46 was a woman experiencing two divorces 16:49 or a divorce and remarriage with the second husband dying. 16:55 In this case, the first husband could not remarry the woman. 17:00 Hmmm... 17:01 So we sometimes wonder well, why not? 17:06 Hmmm... hmmm... 17:08 Why couldn't he remarry her? 17:09 The text simply states that she has been defiled 17:12 and that it would be an abomination to the Lord... 17:16 before the Lord for her to be remarried 17:18 and it would defile the land. 17:22 But the question is, 17:24 "Okay, so, what in the world does that suggest?" 17:28 First we can say that the Case Law 17:31 protects the woman from being treated like 17:35 so much luggage, we've been talking in these 17:39 in these studies... we will continue to talk about 17:43 the importance in not treating a person like a "thing," 17:47 all right, this Case Law that Moses came up with 17:51 or that God gave him to give... 17:53 this Case Law protects the woman she's not like luggage 17:56 that she shift back and forth between men. 17:59 She is granted the right of receiving a Bill of Divorce 18:02 as sad and tragic an event as that is 18:07 and it sets her free from the marriage to the first husband 18:12 and protects her from the first husband 18:14 never charging her with adultery if she remarries another man. 18:17 The same is true with the second husband, 18:19 she is released from the marriage 18:21 the husband in each case 18:23 no longer has relationship with her, 18:25 no longer has control over her 18:27 nor can he bring charges of 18:29 adultery against her... she is free. 18:32 So actually the woman did have protection under the Law. 18:37 Exactly, you know, this Law protected the women 18:41 and so many times, in Society, in divorce, 18:45 we know that women... and to divorce today... 18:49 we know that women's power to... 18:52 economic power goes down, the difficulties increase 18:56 and the protections are important for... 19:00 particularly for women... 19:01 for men too but it seems to be more of an issue for women 19:06 protecting them and their economic status 19:08 so, the Law all the way back there... was a protection. 19:13 That's an important kind of point to make 19:16 that this Casuistic Law... this Case Law was primarily 19:20 involved with protecting women. 19:22 All right, now, however, we must address the question of 19:26 how the woman is considered "defiled" 19:29 and why it would be an abomination 19:32 for the first husband and the woman to marry again. 19:36 Well, Commentators disagree over exactly what it means 19:40 but here are several options... 19:43 I have four options that I've come across. 19:47 The first husband... here's the first option... 19:50 The first husband found something indecent in her 19:52 okay, if he wants to take her back, 19:55 he's a hypocrite, all right, 19:59 since he called her "unclean" before 20:01 how can he call her "okay" now? 20:05 He should abide by his word and not be a hypocrite. 20:08 Hmmm... hmmm... 20:09 Number two, here's another possibility, 20:11 perhaps the woman would be considered 20:14 a part of the first husband's family, 20:16 you know, she was married to him before 20:19 and thus to marry her again, would constitute marrying 20:23 a prohibited relative like marrying your sister. 20:26 You know, that's prohibited. 20:27 We prohibit that today, 20:29 perhaps that was the idea, that seems a little... 20:33 less likely to me but... you know, perhaps. 20:36 Number 3, perhaps remarrying the first husband 20:38 would make the second marriage into an adulterous relationship 20:42 and would then bring... would make it possible 20:45 for charges of adultery to be brought against her 20:47 who had been shared by two men. 20:50 The fourth possibility is actually the more likely one. 20:55 The Law is meant to prevent the first husband 20:59 from profiting twice from the woman's dowry. 21:03 The Ketubah... the promissory note 21:06 that a man made when marrying a woman 21:09 that if a divorce took place 21:11 for reasons other than indecency or adultery, 21:13 that he would pay a certain sum of money. 21:15 So, if he paid it out when she left, 21:18 or if they had some dowry that he took with him 21:21 when she went to the other guy, 21:22 she ended up maybe with some more... 21:25 especially if he died, she goes out with that... 21:28 now he gets it all back, so, in the first marriage 21:31 because she was divorced for indecency, 21:33 she did not get to take the Ketubah with her, 21:35 she didn't get to take that extra with her, 21:38 but in the second marriage, she would get it, 21:40 okay, this law prevented the husband from profiting twice 21:44 getting to keep her first Ketubah, 21:46 her first price or first dowry 21:49 and then receiving the second one 21:50 by remarrying the woman. 21:52 So, you know, it prevents against this idea that, 21:56 "Ah, well, maybe really what he's after 21:59 is not her... but the money. " 22:02 See, so again... it's protection of the woman. 22:05 Now, a question... what about the hardness of heart 22:07 that Jesus described in verse number 8 22:10 what is He talking about here? 22:13 Let's go back to that passage, let's go back to Matthew 19 22:17 and maybe we should read verses 7 and 8 and 9. 22:23 Okay, Deuteronomy... 22:25 No, not Deuteronomy but Matthew... 22:27 Okay. 22:28 Matthew 19, verses 7, 8 and 9. 22:34 Seven, eight and nine. Hmmm... hmmm... 22:39 "They say unto Him, why did Moses then command 22:44 to give a writing of divorcement and to put her away? 22:49 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness 22:53 of your heart suffered you to put away your wives: 22:57 but from the beginning it was not so. 23:01 And I say unto you, 23:03 Whosoever shall put away his wife, 23:06 except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, 23:11 committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her 23:14 which is put away doth commit adultery. " 23:18 Okay, so now, we want to look at this and see 23:21 they have raised the question, "Why did Moses command?" 23:24 They're interpreting Deuteronomy 24 23:26 to say that the prothesis... the "if" part, 23:30 ends with him sending her that he finds indecency in her 23:35 then he is to give her the bill of divorce, 23:38 so they're interpreting it that way. 23:39 They said, "Why did Moses command us to do that?" 23:42 And Jesus says, 23:44 "Because of your hardness of heart, 23:47 Moses permitted or allowed... " 23:50 your translation says "suffered," 23:52 but we don't use the word "suffered" much that way anymore 23:55 so, he permitted or he allowed you 23:58 to divorce your wives 23:59 "but from the beginning, it was not so. " 24:02 He draws to... he points them back 24:04 to creation again you know he... 24:06 Jesus is against divorce 24:08 you know, and that kind of comes through 24:10 loud and clear here that... 24:11 he says it wasn't that way in the beginning 24:13 and it was the hardness of your heart... 24:14 but it wasn't like that in the beginning. 24:16 And he's calling people back to that original pattern 24:20 that was given in the Creation stories. 24:25 Now, so the question though is 24:26 "hardness of heart" whose hardness of heart... 24:30 Jesus clearly links the Casuistic Law 24:33 of Deuteronomy 24 24:35 to the hardness of heart of the Jews, 24:38 of the Israelites at the time, we would say, 24:40 the terminology is actually a little ambiguous here. 24:45 What hardness of heart is this talking about? 24:48 So, again, there are several possibilities. 24:51 Number one, the hardness of heart is the woman, 24:53 she was stubborn 24:55 and so divorcing her was allowed on these grounds, 24:58 well, it says, "Your hardness of heart... " 25:01 well... you know, 25:03 is it really the woman's stubbornness? 25:04 The hardness of heart is the Israelites 25:06 who were stubbornly demanding that Moses allow them to divorce 25:10 that seems a little more likely. 25:11 The number 3 option, 25:13 the hardness of heart... is the Israelites were 25:16 stubbornly refusing to give divorce certificates 25:18 to their former wives, 25:19 now that would be a serious matter 25:21 because, if you don't give her a divorce certificate, 25:24 she is at great risk of being charged with adultery. 25:27 Or, perhaps the most likely, 25:30 the hardness of heart is the stubbornness of the person 25:33 who has committed sexual immorality 25:36 who refuses to repent of their sin, 25:38 that parallel is actually the Israel's stubborn refusal 25:42 to turn back to God, Jeremiah 3 25:45 and in Jeremiah 4 verse 4, 25:48 the last option may be the correct one here 25:50 because it parallels Jesus' statement 25:52 in Luke 17 verses 3 and 4 about forgiving your brother 25:56 if he repents... even seven times in one day, 25:59 though option 2 is also possible 26:02 that the Israelites were stubborn 26:04 they demanded that Moses allow them to divorce, 26:06 that's usually, I think, the more common 26:08 position that people take 26:10 that this is because of their stubbornness of heart 26:13 and they were insisting that they be able to divorce 26:15 and Jesus says, you know, 26:17 "That's not what God wanted, 26:19 He wanted you to be faithful to your wives, 26:22 and you just kept insisting and insisting 26:25 so in order to protect the woman, 26:27 in order to keep her from being charged with adultery 26:32 or fear of losing all material support whatsoever, 26:37 he says, "Okay, look, you can... 26:39 you can give her a divorce 26:41 because that gives her an option to remarry, 26:43 and she can have material support in another marriage. " 26:48 So, it seems as though the Law that Moses had developed 26:54 or that God had given Moses, should we say, 26:58 to protect the women had been twisted 27:02 to now... again... harmed the women 27:05 and to cause problems for them 27:08 so the original intent that God had given them all... 27:11 it wasn't being used that way anymore, 27:13 and so Jesus says, "Wait, you've got this wrong, 27:16 you need to go back... back to Creation... 27:18 you need to think about the Creation Order 27:21 and you need to follow the way 27:23 that God originally set things up, 27:25 "What God has joined together let man not put asunder. " 27:28 We come back to that same idea... 27:30 God hates divorce, 27:32 God wants our marriages to be happy, 27:34 He wants us to stay together. 27:36 Well, this has been a wonderful discussion today, 27:40 I'm sorry that we don't have more time to continue 27:44 on this topic, 27:45 but I am sure that this will give you a good opportunity 27:49 to go back into your own Bible 27:51 and reading and meditating about that. 27:54 We invite you for the next opportunity 27:57 when we will have here... Dr. Sheperd 28:00 with this interesting insight. 28:03 Thank you very much 28:04 and we will see you in the next Program. 28:06 Thank you. |
Revised 2016-04-20