Marriage, Divorce and YHWH: Do Matthew and Sirah Contradict?

Marriage, Divorce and YHWH
Do Matthew And Ben Sira Contradict?
By James Trimm ;

It has been alleged in the past that there is a contradiction between Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-9 which allows a man to divorce his wife only for the cause of “fornication”, and Ben Sira who advises his student to divorce the wife who “does not go as you direct” (Ben Sira 25:25-26).

But do these passages truly contradict one another? One basic rule of Hermeneutics (objective rules for understanding the Scriptures) is called Analogia Scriptura. This rule tells us that if we understand two passages in such a way that they contradict each other, then we are misunderstanding one or both of them. Similarly the Sixth Rule of Hillel tells us if two passages seem to conflict, one or more other passages can often resolve the conflict.

To begin with we must understand Yeshua’s teaching on divorce in Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-9 where Yeshua is commenting on Deut. 24:1. The Torah passage in question is:

When a man takes a wife and marries her,
and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes
because he has found some unclean matter in her,
and he writes her a bill of divorcement,
puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,...
(Dt. 24:1)

Here Yeshua presents a Yalemmedenu Homiletic Midrash on Gen. 2:24 &
Deut. 24:1. The keywords for the midrash are: "man"; "put away" and
"wife." The Midrash takes the following format:

Question/dialog:

19:3 And the P'rushim approached him, and tempted him,
saying, "Is it right for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Initial passages:

19:4 And he answered and said to them:
"Have you not read that he who made man the beginning,
'made them male and female' (Gen. 1:27)

19:5 And said,
'Wherefore shall a man shall leave his father
and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one
flesh' (Gen. 2:24)

Exposition:

19:6 And now then, they are no more two but one flesh
only. What therefore Elohim has joined together
man cannot separate."

Further question/second text:

19:7 But they said,
"And why then did Moshe then command
to give a bill of divorcement, and to put her away
if she was not pleasing in his sight?" (Deut. 24:1, 3)

Exposition:

19:8 And he answered them and said,
"Because Moshe on account of the hardness of your hearts,
allowed you to put away your wives,
but from the beginning it was not so.

19:9 And I tell you,
every man that has put away, or shall put away his wife,
except it be for fornication, and takes another,
commits adultery. And whoever takes the divorced also
commits adultery.

Yeshua's midrash is very relevant to first century Jewish halachic
debate on this issue. Yeshua's use of Gen. 1:27 to prove his halachic
position is paralleled in the Dead Sea Scrolls:

...they are caught in two traps:
fornication, by taking two wives in their lifetimes
although the principle of creation is:
"male and female He created them."
(Damascus Document Col. 4 line 20 - Col. 5 line 1)

except for the cause of fornication – This halacha of Yeshua is given
four times in Scripture (Mt. 5:31-32; 19:3-9; Mk. 10:2-9 & Lk. 16:18)
but only in Matthew is this "escape clause" included giving men the
right to divorce their wives in a case of the charge of davar z'not
essentially "a word of fornication".

Again, the Torah passage in question is:

When a man takes a wife and marries her,
and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes
because he has found
some unclean matter (ervat davar) in her,
and he writes her a bill of divorcement,
puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,...
(Dt. 24:1)

In the first century a major debate was ongoing as to the meaning of
the words for "unclean matter" (davar ervat) in this text. (The Hebrew
word davar can mean "word" or idiomatically "matter". The debate is
recorded in the Mishna as follows:

The House of Shamai say,
"A man should divorce his wife only because
he has found grounds for it
in unchastity (davar ervah)
, since it is said,
"Because he has found in her
an unclean matter (ervat davar) in anything (Dt. 24:1)"
And the House of Hillel say,
"Even if she spoiled his dish, since it is said,
"Because he has found in her
an unclean matter in anything (Dt. 24:1)"
Rabbi Akiba says,
"Even if he found someone else prettier than she,
since it is said,
"And it shall be if she find no favor in his eyes (Dt. 24:1)"
(m.Gittin 9:10)

The controversy surrounded the ambiguity of the phrase "matter of
uncleanness." This phrase in Hebrew can be taken literally, or can be
taken as an idiomatic expression for fornication. Yeshua interprets
davar ervat (to mean davar z'not which the Peshitta (both in Matt.
5:31-32 and in Mt. 19:9) literally translates but which the Old Syriac
paraphrases in Mat. 5:31-32 with "it is said against her `adultery'"
and in Mt. 19:9 "a word of adultery".

In the Scriptures YHWH/Messiah is represented as a bridegroom with Israel being His bride (Hosea 2:16; Is. 62:5; 66:5-13; Mk. 2:19; Jn. 3:29; Rev. 18:23; 21:9; Song of Songs). This relationship serves as a model for our own marriages:

Wives be subject to your husbands as to our Adon,
Because the husband is the head of the wife,
Even as the Messiah is head of the Assembly; and he is the life-giver of the body.
But even as the Assembly is subject to the Messiah,
So also wives [should be subject] to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, as also the Messiah loved his Assembly,
And delivered his nefesh for its sake,…
(Eph. 5:22-33 see also 1Cor. 11:3).

After the time of Solomon the Kingdom of Israel split into two kingdoms known as the two Houses of Israel. The Southern Kingdom became known as the Kingdom of Judah. The Northern Kingdom became known as the Kingdom of Israel. This Northern Kingdom was also often called "Ephraim" after its most prominent tribe. 2Kings 17 tells us of how the Assyrian king Sargon II took the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom captive in 723 BCE and resettled them so that "none was left except the tribe of Judah" (17:18). These came to be known as "the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel". They were divorced by YHWH (Jer. 3:8 )

Northern Kingdom rebelled against the rightful king, High Priest and Temple. They established their own non-Davidic King, their own High Priest and their own Temple at a new location in the Northern Kingdom. They were unwilling to submit to YHWH’s headship and go as YHWH directed. They, in effect, started their own new religion.

In Jeremiah Chapter 3 the two houses of Israel are discussed. Notice that Israel and Judah are allegorical sisters in this prophecy (Jer. 3:6-7) In Jer. 3:8 YHWH says:

And I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding Yisra'el
had committed adultery,
I had put her away and given her a certificate of divorce;
yet her treacherous sister Yehudah did not fear,
but went and committed whoring too.
(Jer. 3:8 - The Scriptures Version)

However YHWH did not divorce Judah as well, as that would have left no remnant. Instead the Prophet Hosea compares the two Houses of Israel this way:

"Ephrayim has surrounded Me with lying,
and the house of Yisra'el with deceit.
But Yehudah is still wandering with El,
and is true to the Set-apart One."
(Hosea 11:12 - The Scriptures Version)

YHWH gave the House of Israel a certificate of divorce and sent her away in keeping with Deut. 24:1. The House of Israel had refused to acknowledge his headship and refused to go as YHWH directed.

Now the Hebrew word translated “fornication” in Matt. 5:31-32; 19:3-9 is Z’NOT. This word does not only refer to “fornication”. The Hebrew word z'not can refer to sexual immorality, usually by a woman, but it can have other meanings as well. This word
can refer to one who is an idolater (Lev. 17:7; 20:5-6; Deut. 31:16) or to one that goes astray from YHWH (Ps. 73:27). In fact this word can be translated “going astray”:

For, behold, they that go far from You shall perish;
You do destroy all them THAT GO ASTRAY from you.
(Ps. 73:27)

Husbands hold the same kind of headship over their wives that Messiah holds over the Assembly:

Wives be subject to your husbands as to our Adon,
Because the husband is the head of the wife,
Even as the Messiah is head of the Assembly; and he is the life-giver of the body.
But even as the Assembly is subject to the Messiah,
So also wives [should be subject] to their husbands in everything.
(Eph. 5:22-27 see also Gen. 3:16; Eph. 5:22-27; 1Cor. 11:3; 14:34-35; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:2-5; 1Kefa 3:1-7).

(This authority must never be abused, as the husband is likewise commanded to love the wife, honor her, and treat her as a delicate vessel (Eph. 3:22-31; 1Kefa 3:1-7)).

Just as the House of Israel was guilty of Z’NOT because they had refused to recognize His headship, had gone astray and would not go as He directed, the wife who refuses to acknowledge her husband’s headship “goes astray” (Z’NOT) and does not go as he directs. Thus Ben Sira advises his students:

Allow no outlet to water,
and no boldness of speech in an evil wife.
If she does not go as you direct,
separate yourself from her.
(Ben Sira 25:25-26)

And this in no way contradicts Yeshua’s statement:

…every man that has put away, or shall put away his wife,
except it be for fornication, and takes another,
commits adultery.
(Mat. 19:19 see also 5:31-32)

Don’t forget to support this work with your contributions, tithes and offerings.
Through our free Bible Correspondence course and other free literature and Operation Wake Up Call we are reaching a lost world with Torah and Messiah. Through our blogs, literature and podcasts we are also feeding young believers milk and mature believers nice juicy steaks.

You make this work possible.

You can donate by going to the chip-in counter at http://www.nazarenespace.com; or donations can be sent by paypal to donations@wnae.org

Donations can also be made out to “Nazarene Judaism” and sent to:

Nazarene Judaism
PO Box 471
Hurst, TX 76053

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by James Trimm on July 22, 2012 at 12:07pm

James Trimm said:

I think the issue here is simply the wife who refuses to be submissive to her husband's headship.

We are not talking about arguing over the TV remote here, nor are we talking about divorcing over burnt dinner or finding a prettier girl.

We are talking about the wife who will not accept the Headship pf her husband just as the House of Israel did not accept the headship of YHWH.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Trimm on July 22, 2012 at 12:11pm

DAVAR Z'NOT is to be understood as "going astray" and may refer to the
wife who will not be subject to her husband's headship, as we read
"For, behold, they that go far from You shall perish; You do destroy
all them THAT GO ASTRAY from you. (Ps. 73:27)" and "For just as you do
not let the water go and abound, thus do not let the wicked wife go
and sin. And if she will not follow your direction, cut her off from
your flesh, and divorce her from your house." (Sira 25:25-26). And as
Paul writes:" Wives be subject to your husbands as to our Adon,
Because the husband is the head of the wife, Even as the Messiah is
head of the Assembly; and he is the life-giver of the body. But even
as the Assembly is subject to the Messiah, So also wives [should be
subject] to their husbands in everything." (Eph. 5:22-27 see also Gen.
3:16; Eph. 5:22-27; 1Cor. 11:3; 14:34-35; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:2-5;
1Kefa 3:1-7).

Divorce is always a last resort. Even when there is a matter of
Z'NOT, though a man has the right to divorce, the preferred way is to
forgive and work out the problems. Divorce should be reserved for
situations from which repentance is not forthcoming or where the Z'NOT
is not likely to stop.

Yirmeyahu said:

That is certainly one side of the coin but the other is also extremely important to keep in mind. What is written in the talmud? R. Akiva argued, 'He may divorce her even if he found another woman more beautiful than she. (Git 9:10).

Messiah's words were most likely directed at the those who apopted the leniency of the Hillelite position in order to satisfy their carnal desires after the the wife of their youth had lost her figure.

It is true, however, that at times it is perhaps advisable to break company with a marriage mate. I think if that is the case, it is only necessary to make sense of the situation to remember that we are not justified by the law, and if we happen to break a law by getting a divorce, then our salvation is not in jeopardy, because it is impossible for us to keep the law perfectly. An aberration of the law is not the end of the world, so long as you humble yourself and admit you have failed the law, and set your mind not to do it again.

It is very important to keep in mind Lev 26:40-42 for such cases.

My opinion is that it is indeed a missing of the mark to get a divorce. If necessity dictates one should divorce, then one should repent before YHWH and ask forgiveness and it will likely be given him/her.

If on the other hand you twist the words of Messiah to mean that divorce is completely legal for any cause like the Talmud and the Hilellites say, in practice you never feel any need to repent for missing the mark, and your spiritual health is weakened because in YHWH's eyes you have sinned and not repented. And that because you insist on interpreting Scriptures according the program of the Hillelites.

James Trimm said:

In the Scriptures a man seems to be made accountable to keep his house in order. Yet you are telling me his wife can do anything under the sun just as long as she does not commit adultery and he can do nothing and must remain her husband and be held accountable for not keeping his house in order at the same time... How would that be just?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 命 on July 22, 2012 at 3:29pm

Well cultural context is kinda important, don't you think?
Many marriages were arranged, pressured or whatnot, and people didn't choose their partners with the freedom as they do today, so divorce was more understandable. That's probably why certain of the Rabbis had a liberal attitude toward it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 3rxqash0xupnt on July 22, 2012 at 4:16pm

ZNOT is from the root word Zanah H2181 זָנָה

1) to commit fornication, be a harlot, play the harlot

a) (Qal)

1) to be a harlot, act as a harlot, commit fornication

2) to commit adultery

3) to be a cult prostitute

4) to be unfaithful (to God) (fig.)

The word is primarily used to refer to literal inappropriate sexual activities and secondarily to spiritual infidelity. Why not just interpret the word according to its most primary usage? In the context of two humans being married it makes more sense to interpret ZANAH as lack of fidelity. The first occurrance of this verb is clearly associated with illicit sexual activity (Gen 34:1).

So, imo, a good ultra-literal translation for DAVAR ZONOT is probably "a matter of illicit sexual activity". That is in full accordance with the most sane interpretation of Deut 24:1 as well. Exceedingly simple and no twisting is required.

James Trimm said:

DAVAR Z'NOT is to be understood as "going astray" and may refer to the
wife who will not be subject to her husband's headship, as we read
"For, behold, they that go far from You shall perish; You do destroy
all them THAT GO ASTRAY from you. (Ps. 73:27)" and "For just as you do
not let the water go and abound, thus do not let the wicked wife go
and sin. And if she will not follow your direction, cut her off from
your flesh, and divorce her from your house." (Sira 25:25-26). And as
Paul writes:" Wives be subject to your husbands as to our Adon,
Because the husband is the head of the wife, Even as the Messiah is
head of the Assembly; and he is the life-giver of the body. But even
as the Assembly is subject to the Messiah, So also wives [should be
subject] to their husbands in everything." (Eph. 5:22-27 see also Gen.
3:16; Eph. 5:22-27; 1Cor. 11:3; 14:34-35; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:2-5;
1Kefa 3:1-7).

Divorce is always a last resort. Even when there is a matter of
Z'NOT, though a man has the right to divorce, the preferred way is to
forgive and work out the problems. Divorce should be reserved for
situations from which repentance is not forthcoming or where the Z'NOT
is not likely to stop.

Yirmeyahu said:

That is certainly one side of the coin but the other is also extremely important to keep in mind. What is written in the talmud? R. Akiva argued, 'He may divorce her even if he found another woman more beautiful than she. (Git 9:10).

Messiah's words were most likely directed at the those who apopted the leniency of the Hillelite position in order to satisfy their carnal desires after the the wife of their youth had lost her figure.

It is true, however, that at times it is perhaps advisable to break company with a marriage mate. I think if that is the case, it is only necessary to make sense of the situation to remember that we are not justified by the law, and if we happen to break a law by getting a divorce, then our salvation is not in jeopardy, because it is impossible for us to keep the law perfectly. An aberration of the law is not the end of the world, so long as you humble yourself and admit you have failed the law, and set your mind not to do it again.

It is very important to keep in mind Lev 26:40-42 for such cases.

My opinion is that it is indeed a missing of the mark to get a divorce. If necessity dictates one should divorce, then one should repent before YHWH and ask forgiveness and it will likely be given him/her.

If on the other hand you twist the words of Messiah to mean that divorce is completely legal for any cause like the Talmud and the Hilellites say, in practice you never feel any need to repent for missing the mark, and your spiritual health is weakened because in YHWH's eyes you have sinned and not repented. And that because you insist on interpreting Scriptures according the program of the Hillelites.

James Trimm said:

In the Scriptures a man seems to be made accountable to keep his house in order. Yet you are telling me his wife can do anything under the sun just as long as she does not commit adultery and he can do nothing and must remain her husband and be held accountable for not keeping his house in order at the same time... How would that be just?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by michaelnoble(messengerofYah) on July 30, 2012 at 6:28pm

Rom.7:1-3 Or do you not know,brothers-for I speak to those knowing the Torah-that the Torah rules over a man as long as he lives? For the married woman has been bound by Torah to the living husband, but if the husband dies,she is released from the Torah concerning her husband. So then,while her husband lives,she shall be called an adulteress if she becomes another man's.But if her husband dies,she is free from that part of the Torah,so that she is not an adulteress,having become another man's.It is written.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Trimm on July 30, 2012 at 6:56pm

1 Or do you not know, my brothers, (for I speak to learned ones of the Torah), that the
Torah has authority over a man as long as he is alive,
2 As a woman who is bound by the Torah to her husband, as long as he is alive. But if
her husband dies, she is freed by the Torah from her husband.
3 And if, while her husband is alive, she has intercourse with another man, she becomes
an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is freed by the Torah, and she is not an
adulteress if she marries another.

(Rom. 7:1-3 HRV)