Learning from God's Word

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

Some get confused when their translation has “then let him write” (KJV) or “that he shall write” (ASV), rather than the correct “and writes” or “and he writes” (וְכָ֨תַב [wə·ḵā·ṯaḇ], Deut. 24:1). The same Hebrew word also should be translated consistently “and writes” (Deut. 24:3).

So far, I have not found any version that renders וְכָ֨תַב [wə·ḵā·ṯaḇ] (Deut. 24:1, 3) consistently as “then let him write” or “that he shall write.” The majority of versions I have checked translate the word correctly as “and writes” or “and he writes.” There is no command or favorable permission to divorce within the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy. The text is descriptive. It is not prescriptive.

Those looking for God’s endorsement of divorce will have to look elsewhere in the Hebrew text since it does not exist in Deut. 24:1. Those who try to force an endorsement of divorce into Deut. 24:1 must try to reconcile a supposed endorsement of divorce with God’s hatred of it (Mal. 2:16).

• Miracles #1: What Are We Talking About?
• Miracles #2: The Unique Nature of Miracles
• Miracles #3: How Many Miracles Are in the NT?
• Miracles #4: 35 Miracles of Jesus
• Miracles #5: The Perspective of the New Testament
• Miracles #6: Different Descriptions, Same Purpose
• Miracles #7: Means & Transmission
• Miracles #8: Abuse, False Signs and Nonuse
• Miracles #9: God’s Work Today
• Miracles #10: Confusion Today

Heb. 4:14-5:14 Exegesis & Exposition: https://timothysparks.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/hebrews-4-14-5-14.pdf

Heb. 4:14-5:14 Presentation: https://timothysparks.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/heb-4-14-5-14.pdf

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

This brief study seeks to answer the question, “Who said the things the people heard in the ‘You have heard that it was said’ statements?” Some believe that Jesus refers to statements of God in Scripture. Others believe that Jesus refers to teachings of the scribes and Pharisees. 

As the table below shows, in English translations of Matthew 5, six times Jesus says, “it was said.” “It was said” occurs five of the six times within the phrase “You have heard that it was said.” 

“It was said” translates ἐρρέθη (errethē) six times in Matthew 5. This particular word occurs nowhere else in the Book of Matthew.

As the following table shows, previous to the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5:1ff), references to Scripture are clearly indicated by the “spoken by” and “it is written” statements:

What Jesus taught the multitudes (Mt. 5:1-2) was not a teaching they were to wait to practice in the future. Jesus taught them what they were to do in their present time (Mt. 5:3-16). English translations properly state “blessed are” (Mt. 5:3-11), not “blessed will be.”¹  Jesus did not give them “preparatory teaching” to be practiced in the future. We should understand that Jesus was teaching them the truth of God’s law during their present time.

Matthew 5:17-20 provides the context in which Jesus made the “it was said . . . but I say” statements. If we fail to understand Mt. 5:17-20, we may very well fail to understand Jesus.

The first “it was said . . . but I say” statement (Mt. 5:21-26) immediately follows Jesus’ warning about the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (Mt. 5:20). Could the scribes and Pharisees quote Scripture and misapply it? Yes, and they did. Jesus contrasts the scribes’ and Pharisees’ standard of righteousness (Mt. 5:20)² with the true standard of righteousness revealed in the law and the prophets (Mt. 5:17-19). As the table below shows, the context of “it was said” is not in reference to God’s Word but to the words of the scribes and Pharisees.

The Righteousness Taught by the Scribes and Pharisees Versus the True Righteousness Taught by the Law and the Prophets (Mt. 5:17-48)

____________________

         ¹The present active indicative ἐστε (“are”) occurs in Mt. 5:11.

           ²Similarly, concerning physical Israel, Paul states, “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God” (Rom. 10:1-3, NKJV).

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

Jesus says that a man will leave his father and mother and “will be joined with his wife and the two will become into one flesh” (Mt. 19:5; Vincent notes, “Lit., ‘into one flesh’”).¹  The Greek word translated “will be joined” is from κολλάω (kollaō) which means, “to glue, or weld together.”²  God’s “glue” is so strong that no matter the effort exerted, humans cannot undo God’s glue.

Some maintain that humans can divide, through the action of divorce, what God united. “Divorce” is “the action or an instance of legally dissolving a marriage.”³  Jesus uses the term translated “divorce” (Mt. 19:8) to describe the human action of dismissal, not the action of dividing the one flesh union created by God.

God does not give humans the ability to divide into two what he unites into one (Mt. 19:6). Consider the union of the egg and sperm. Once God unites the two into one, humans cannot divide that union back into the original egg and sperm. In the same way, human divorce cannot divide back into the original two what God united into one. The two, once united, will never be two again (Mt. 19:4-6).⁴

The Pulpit Commentary similarly states, “In marriage there is a moral and physical union, so that two persons become virtually one being. Originally, man contained woman in himself before she was separated from him; she was a corporeal unity with man; or, as others put it, man, as a race, was created male and female, the latter being implicitly contained in the former; the previous unity is thus asserted. In marriage this unity is acknowledged and continued.”⁵  While some believe they have the means and ability to divide God’s one flesh union back into the original two, the truth remains, “You Can’t Undo God’s Glue.”

____________________

         ¹Vincent’s Word Studies, http://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/19-5.htm

           ²https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/kollao

           ³http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divorce

           ⁴See also: https://timothysparks.wordpress.com/2016/03/22/jesus-one-flesh-argument-mt-196

           ⁵Pulpit Commentary, http://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/19-5.htm

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

The pronoun-antecedent agreement allows us to know that to which “what” (Mt. 19:6) refers. How can we know? The way it works in Greek is that “a Greek pronoun agrees with its antecedent in number and gender”  (http://www.motorera.com/greek/lessons/lesson10.html). 

The only identifiable pronoun-antecedent agreement for “what” (neuter singular, Mt. 19:6) are the words “male” (neuter singular, Mt. 19:4) and “female” (neuter singular, Mt. 19:4). Therefore, the “what” is the “male” and the “female.” The same evidence exists in Mk. 10:6, 9.

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

Many try to apply the hermeneutical principle of harmonization while wrestling with the fact that “the exception” appears in Matthew but not elsewhere (not delving into the fact that Matthew is actually “excluding” fornication from the action of divorce). I challenge you to consider whether we should understand the often cited “exceptions” (Mt. 5:32; 19:9) in light of what every other passage in Scripture says or the other way around.

Many harmonize the accounts by saying, “The exception always applies, even if it isn’t stated.” We could also harmonize by saying, “Perhaps, in light of what God says in all the rest of Scripture, this isn’t favorable permission to divorce.”

[Special thanks to my friend Donnie Martin for his insight and contribution concerning this issue.]

See also:

https://timothysparks.wordpress.com/2015/04/02/except-everywhere-necessary-for-divorce-and-remarriage-to-be/

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

For this study, a brief explanation of “present indicative” may be helpful:

“So they are never again two, but one flesh. What therefore God united, a human cannot divide” (Mt. 19:6; unless otherwise stated, translations are mine). 

Presentations covering all 39 books of the Old Testament:

https://timothysparks.wordpress.com/books-of-the-bible/

By Timothy Sparks
tdsparks77@yahoo.com
http://www.timothysparks.com

Paul says, “if the unbeliever separates himself, he is to separate himself” (1 Cor. 7:15).¹ Jesus says, “Therefore what God united, a human cannot divide” (Mt. 19:6; Mk. 10:9). While the unbeliever is able to separate the “who” (“himself”), he is not able to separate the “what.”

It is interesting that Jesus says, “what” (Mt. 19:6; ὃ, neuter singular). The Pulpit Commentary has it correct–“neuter singular, not ‘those whom,’ plural and concrete, that he may make it clear that he is here speaking in the abstract, not specially of Adam and Eve. What he enunciates is true of all wedlock, not simply of the case of our first parents. Let not man put asunder. Man does thus infringe the primitive rule when he divorces his wife. Herein he opposes God and acts against nature. He and his wife are one; they can no more separate from one another than they can from themselves. If we regard our Lord’s language in this passage without prejudice, and not reading into it modern notions, we must consider that he here decrees the indissolubility of the marriage tie. His hearers plainly understood him so to speak, as we see from the objection which they urged” (http://biblehub.com/commentaries/pulpit/matthew/19.htm).

Paul addresses the situation in which the unbeliever separates himself. If the unbeliever separates/departs, the believer is not “enslaved” [δουλόω (douloō)] to leave/depart with the unbeliever (1 Cor. 7:15). Paul uses the perfect tense, indicating that the believer was not and currently is not (never has been) enslaved to the unbeliever. While marriage is for life (Rom. 7:2; 1 Cor. 7:39), husband and wife are not “enslaved” to each other (1 Cor. 7:15).

There is no favorable approval for the believer to initiate divorce either with a believing spouse or with an unbelieving spouse, seen by the two specific words used for both “separate/divide” [χωρίζω (chōrizō)] and “abandon/leave” [ἀφίημι (aphiēmi)] (1 Cor. 7:10-15). If the unbelieving spouse leaves, there is also no favorable approval for the believer to marry another. Jesus explicitly and consistently states, “and marries another commits adultery” (Mt. 19:9; Mk. 10:11-12; Lk. 16:18).

____________________

¹Unless otherwise stated, translations are mine.