Betrothal and Matthew 1.19
Scholars of 2nd Temple Judaism are divided on what to make of the Mishnah (compiled around 200-220 AD) as a witness to what was practiced in the days of Jesus or Paul.
Jacob Neusner, SJD Cohen and Edward Sanders while they would allow some connection say it can’t be relied on. Louis Feldman and Herbert Danby who gave us The Mishnah in English took a more positive view of it. Danby says: “It is a matter of extreme difficulty to decide what historical value we should attach to any tradition recorded in the Mishnah” but he goes on to say we should give it some credence for the debates recorded in the Mishnah were attempts to justify established traditions (xiv-xv). Feldman is more assured and Lawrence Schiffman is even more assured.
I want to make the point that when I quote or allude to one of these ancient documents I’m aware that there is some debate about the reliability of the claim made or implied in the quotation.
On the topic of marriage and divorce, these scholars tell us, there was no dispute about the practice of divorce! There was no dispute about the need for a bill of divorce! There was no dispute about the need to give a bill of divorce to a betrothed wife! What you see in the Mishnah is brisk and unsettled arguments relating to the nature and delivery of the bill of divorce and not about the need for one.
The debate in the 1st century that was central (the NT bears witness in support of Jewish studies) was the debate between the followers of Shammai and Hillel. Deuteronomy 24 allows divorce but what was meant by “some indecency”? Shammai and his followers said “unchastity”, Hillel and his followers said “for any cause” and later the famous Akiba said, “Even if he found someone fairer than she.” [Mishnah, Gittin 9.10]
Shammai (died around 30 AD) and Hillel (died around 10-20 AD) were two revered sages who flourished a few years before Jesus. So when in Matthew 19:3 we hear of Pharisees asking Jesus if it was lawful to put away a wife “for any cause” we aren’t surprised.
The question was not: “Is it lawful to divorce your wife without giving her a bill of divorcement?” As far as we can tell from the sources no Jew, claiming to be part of Jewish society, would have dreamed of divorcing his wife without a document—not in light of Deuteronomy 24:1.
It isn’t clear to me that Deuteronomy 24 refers to Jewish men simply sending their wives out of their houses on to the street though they may have been doing this. What is certain is that the text calls for a bill of divorce that proves she is no longer a married wife and this gives her the opportunity to be married to another.
The Mishnah bears witness to ceaseless debate on what the divorce document should say, where it should be signed, from where and how it should be delivered and to whom—and more. What is not debated is the need for a divorce writ.
This was true for betrothed wives. The sources tell us that at betrothal a woman became the man’s “wife”. This doesn’t surprise us for that is what the woman is called in Deuteronomy 22:23-24 and sexual crime with her is a capital crime. If she went along with the actions of the sexual partner (by not crying for help when she could) she is guilty of adultery and the death penalty is pronounced. Such a pronouncement is not given if a virgin who is not betrothed is taken by some man (22:28-29; Exodus 22:16-17). The betrothal makes the difference—the betrothed becomes a “legal wife” though the “one flesh” rights come later (see 1 Corinthians 7:4).
The Mishnah [Kiddushin—Betrothals, 1:1] says the betrothed woman can be freed from her “husband” by his death or by a bill of divorce and in Ketuboth 4.2. we hear of betrothed “widows”. “If a man gave his daughter in betrothal and she was divorced, or if he gave her in betrothal and she was left a widow…”
This gives us some background to Matthew 1:18-20. Mary is said to be “betrothed”, to be Joseph’s “wife” and to have a “husband”. Joseph feels compelled to divorce her and wanted to do it as quietly as such a thing could be done because he didn’t want to make a spectacle of her. The word “apoluo” (send away) is used in numerous ways but in marital contexts it “means” divorce. [A word “means” what the speaker intends it to mean and the word “apoluo” is used in and out of the NT in marital contexts to refer to divorce.]
©2004 Jim McGuiggan. All materials are free to be copied and used as long as money is not being made.
Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, theabidingword.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment