Two Ways of Dealing With an Insubordinate Wife
Two Ways of Dealing With an Insubordinate Wife
Chris Schaefer ©2010
Before we examine the two ways of handling an insubordinate wife, we must first ask a question:
Matt 5:31-32 (NKJV)
32 "But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery
Matt 19:9-10 (NKJV)
9 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.
Luke 16:18 (KJV2000)
|
|||
The above verses have been used by the church and Messianic congregations as a means of forbidding divorce for any reason other than physical adultery. The result is a two pronged pitchfork. One prong makes it seem that with the exception of physical adultery, no divorce is allowed whatsoever: this has resulted in countless men being rendered impotent against rebellious wives, because after all, she can act like the devil, she can even lead the children astray, but if she doesn’t commit physical adultery he’s stuck with her, right? How many men can endure that sentence till the day they die? Of course many cannot bear up under such an edict, and so the other prong is they pretend the verses don’t exist and just simply divorce and remarry. The divorce and remarriage statistics in the church verify that this has indeed been the case.
Is the Torah eternal? Did Yahusha come to make up His Own Torah in conflict with that of His Father’s? If the Words which Yahusha spoke were from/inspired by His Father, how could He possibly contradict His Father’s words?
Let’s check the Father’s words on divorce.
Debarim/Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (AFNHSS)
"When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he has found some [dvar] uncleanness [ervah] in her,; then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. And if the latter husband hates her as well and writes her a bill of divorcement, and gives it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; Her former husband, who sent her away may not take her again to be his wife again, after that she is rutually impure."
It is significant that the word ervah is used. It can mean nakedness and could imply sexual impurity, but then again, what man would not want his wife naked at times. Isn’t nakedness in the marriage bed a good thing? Well ervah can also mean uncovered.
Let’s see how the apostle Pallu understood the symbolism of covering for a wife:
Qorintyah Aleph/First Corinthians 11:5-15 (RSTNE
5 But every woman that makes prayers, or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head: for that is the same as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman does not have a head covering, let her also be shorn: but if it is a shame for a woman to be shorn, or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to veil* his head, because he is the image and glory of YHWH: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not from the woman; but the woman from the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have a symbol of AUTHORITY on her head because of the unclean fallen demons.**
If a woman refuses her husband’s authority over her, she is insubordinate, therefore she is positionally uncovered a.k.a ervah!
So if we look back at the Devarim/Deuteronomy 24:1-4 passage, If a woman is insubordinate, wouldn’t an expected result be that she would eventually not find favor in husband #1’s eyes? And if husband #2 ends up hating her, wouldn’t insubordination be a plausible cause for his hatred? So clearly that is the the context of Debvarim/Deuteronomy 24:1-4 since Devarim/Deuteronomy 22:13-21 and Bemidbar/Numbers chapter 5 take care of physical adultery.
Now let’s take this a step further.
1Schmuel/1 Samuel 15:23a. (RSTNE)
For rebellion [mer ee 4805] is as the sin of witchcraft [keh sem’ 7081], and INSUBORDINATION [paw tsar’ 6484] is as iniquity [aw ven’ 205] and IDOLATRY [teraphim 8655].
All throughout the Tanakh, sexual immorality is likened to idolatry, and visa versa.
If idolatry can be compared to sexual immorality, then sexual immoraltiy can be an idiom for idolatry. Idolatry is obviously declared an euphemism for INSUBORDINATION in 1 Schmuel 15:23. The context of 1 Schmuel/1 Samuel 15:23 Is King Shaul’s chronic rebellion and insubordination against YHWH.
Shaul’s rebellion was compared to witchcraft, or more specifically divination. Divination is the rejection of YHWH’s authority in favor of demonic authority. The king was supposed to be subordinate to YHWH, but Shaul repeatedly refused. Finally YHWH rejected Shaul as king. Likewise, if a woman rejects her husband’s authority by being rebellious and INSUBORDINATE, then by default she is under demonic authority! If YHWH wouldn't continue to put up with Shaul’s rebellion, why would YHWH expect a husband to perpetually put up with a chronically rebellious/insubordinate wife?
Mattityahu 5:31-32 (RSTNE)
It has been said, ‘Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a Get of divorce.” Therefore I say to you, that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication [gk:porneia/ heb:zenuth*], causes her to commit adultery, and whoever shall marry her that is undivorced [Aramaic: sh’bikta] commits adultery.
Mattityahu 19:9 (RSTNE)
And I say to you, Whoever shall divorce his wife, except it be for fornication [gk:porneia/ heb:zenuth*], and shall marry another [gk: alleen], commits adultery; and whoever marries her who has >not yet been divorced [Aramaic: sh’bikta] does commit adultery.
18 Whosoever illigetimately divorces his wife, and
marries another, commits adultery: and
whoever marries her that is undivorced [Aramaic: sh’bikta]
from her husband commits adultery.
sh’bikta means: not yet divorced, or incompletely/improperly divorced.
As Yahusha’s manner always was, He corrected the religious leaders' twistings of the Scripture. They wanted an OK of their idea of it being alright to divorce a wife for whatever reason. However Yahusha showed that the only valid reasons for divorcing a wife were for adultery and insubordination (chronic) which are BOTH codified as fornication (porneia and zenuth).
*From Eliyah’s online article Divorce and Remarriage (note: I don't exhaustively endorse all aspects of Eliya's article but I think he makes many excellent points, and so am in agreement with much of what he says.)
In the case of a chronically rebellious/insubordinate wife, it is the HARDNESS OF HER HEART that is breaking up the marriage. Not the man. So when by her actions, a chronically rebellious and insubordinate wife REJECTS her righteous husband's authority, she is the one breaking up what YHWH has joined together-- whether or not she claims to be a believer-- that does not matter! Her actions speak louder, and so It is on her head!
So if the insubordinate wife is committing chronic rebellion against her husband, which is an action compared to idolatry, which is compared to fornication/adultery, then that is indeed a valid reason for issuing her a get (certificate of divorce). It is a merciful thing to grant her a get because it allows her to remarry without her adding on the additional sin of physical adultery to her itinerary . And it prevents the next bloke from unknowingly committing adultery with her due to an invalid get.
In the Mattityahu 19:9 passage the key word is another. The key question is: “another what?” Since Yahusha had just confirmed that the valid the reasons for divorcing a wife are sexual immorality AND/OR chronic insubordination, then the “another” would be referring to a woman who was divorced for reasons other than insubordination(chronic)/sexual immorality. This interpretation is confirmed in the remainder of the verse when Yahusha clarifies that marriage to an improperly divorced woman results in adultery. Yahusha was not forbidding the issuing of a get, but he was forbidding the issuance of a get for gratuitous reasons.
Q: what is the pinnacle for of an insubordinate wife?
A: When she repeatedly encourages the children to disobey their dad and routinely mocks him in front of them. Why is that so egregious? Because a properly functioning patriarchal family structure is a reflection of the very image of Elohim as seen in Beresheeth/Genesis 1:27! If the wife is rebellious against her head (her husband) then that is teaching (through the typology of the dysfunctional family) that it is OK to be in rebellion against the Heavenly Father and it is also teaching that there is division between Mama Chochmah and Father YHWH! To teach that is a direct contradiction to the Shema because YHWH is ECHAD. Is Yahusha going to insist that a husband indefinitely tolerate such treachery, just as long as his wife doesn’t commit physical adultery? NO!!!!!! To insist that He supposedly did demand such folly would be to contradict the WHOLE of Scripture.
Teaching children to disobey and disrespect YHWH via the family structure-- is that a misleading of children? YES IT IS!
Teaching children that dischord and division of the Living Elohim is the norm via the family structure-- is that a misleading of children? YES IT IS!
Mattityahu 18:6 (RSTNE)
“But whoever shall mislead one of these little ones who believe in Me, it were better for him/[her] that a millstone were hung around his/[her] neck and that he/[she] be drowned in the depth of the sea!
Romiyah/Romans 11:11-15
11 I say then, have they [Yahudim] stumbled that they should fall
forever? Let it not be: but rather through their [unbelieving Yahudah's] fall
salvation has gone out to the nations, for to provoke them [Yahudah]
to jealousy.
12 Now if their [unbelieving Yahudah's] temporal fall brought riches to this age,
and the diminishing of their believing numbers
brought riches to the nations; how much more the fullness
of their return from blindness?
9
13 For I speak to you nations, because I am the emissary
to the nations, I magnify my work by explaining this.
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation those
who are of my flesh, and might save some of them.
10
15 For if their temporal setting aside be the reconciling of
this world, what shall the receiving of them [Yahudah] back be,
but life from the dead?
11
9 Efrayim gets it while Judah is blinded. But in the end
times both houses start seeing clearly.
10 From Judah.
11 If Judah’s blindness brought life to Efrayim, how
much more will Judah's regeneration bring greater life
in the kingdom?
When Paulo is speaking of "those who are of his own flesh, he is clearly speaking of the tribes of Benyamin combined with Yahudah. So it is clear that Yehoshua's provoking of jealousy in the older sister of Yahudah (sister-wife as seen in Yechezqel/Ezekiel 23and Yirmehayu/Jerimiah 3) is actually working out both Yahudah’s and Ephrayim’s collective salvations!
Yochanan/John 10:16-
16 “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring in, and they shall hear My voice;
and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.”
3
3 A plain reference to the other fold, or flock of Yisrael,
Efrayim-Yisrael, that Yehoshua says He must bring in by
command of the Father. Note that even before He died
and rose, He had two existing Yisraelite flocks, not
one. Through His mission as the Good Shepherd, both
folds will become one.
Take notice: “other sheep not of this fold” certainly is a reference to another group. Significantly, He emphasized that the other sheep are the ones that WILL hear His voice, meaning they will actually follow His direction and headship. If at times Yahudah (or more accurately, the unbeliving part of Yahudah) was refusing to submit to Yehhoshua's headship, then at least Ephrayim was willing. Also, the note says that the “folds will become one”-- future tense. As of now, they are not yet.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 13:42-47
42 And when the Yahudim had gone out of the
synagogue, the non-Yahudim begged that these words
might be proclaimed to them the next Shabbat.
43 Now when the congregation was dismissed, many of
the Yahudim and religious proselytes followed Paulos and
Bar-Nava: who were speaking to them, and persuaded
them to continue in the favor of YHWH.
44 And the next Shabbat almost the entire city came
together to hear the word of YHWH.
45 But when the Yahudim saw the multitudes,
5
they were
filled with envy, and spoke against those things, which
were spoken by Shaul, contradicting and blaspheming
him.
46 Then Paulos and Bar-Nava grew bold, and said, It was
necessary that the word of YHWH should first have been
spoken to you: but seeing you put it away from you, and
judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, look,
we turn to the nations.
47 For this is what YHWH commanded us, saying, I have
set you to be a light of the nations that you should be for
salvation to the ends of the earth.
5 Efrayim in the nations.
See, if one “wife” is jealous of another-- tough! It’s really for her own good in the
long run!! In the renewed covenant, it is apparently YHWH's and Yehoshua's method saving the most and saving them most thoroughly.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 21:27-30
27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the
Yahudim who were from Asia Minor, when they saw him [Paulos]
in the Beit HaMikdash, stirred up all the people, and laid
hands on him,
28 Crying out, "Men of Yisrael, help: This is the man, that
teaches all men everywhere against the people of Yisrael,
and the Torah, and this set apart place: and furthermore
he brought Greeks
into the Beit HaMikdash, and has
polluted this set apart place."
29 For they had been seen before with him in the city
Trophimos the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paulos
had brought into the Beit HaMikdash.
30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran
together: and they took Paulos, and dragged him out of the
Beit HaMikdash: and immediately shut the doors.
More of the older sister being jealous of the younger. Not a pleasant situation,
but necessary.
Eventually jealousy will come to an end. We need to trust YHWH’s omniscience of
the greater good:
Ephesiyah/Ephesians 5:32-32
31 For this cause shall a man leave his abba and eema,
and shall be joined to his wife, and the two
shall be echad flesh.
5
32 This is a great sod [mystery]: but I speak concerning the
Moshiach and the Yisraelite congregation.
6
5 There’s the pashat, or literal understanding. Two
people becoming one.
6 Mystery? Yes. The pashat/literal understanding is the
two persons becoming one. The secret behind the
literal is that on the metaphorical level, in Yahshua the two individual houses
become one. That is the mystery behind the uniting of
man and woman. Yehoshua and Yisrael become one in
the remez, or hint level of understanding. But in the
sod, or secret level as Yehoshua marries Yisrael, both
houses remarry each other, thereby establishing
peace. That is also known as “the mystery” of the
kingdom.
Each sister being echad with her Husband, will by default be
echad with each other (similar to spokes being united to the hub on a wheel). So
the main point is that the jealousies will end when both are echad with Yehoshua.
How else are two brides to be counted as one collective bride?
So how does this apply on a pragmatic level for us humans? If a wife A refuses to be under her husband's headship, and if the said husband is following the model of how Messiah dealt with the Yahudim (the Yahudim who would not submit to His headship), then instead of divorcing the insubordinate wife (A), the husband takes on rival wife B. When the insubordinate wife A sees how the rival wife B is truly echad with her husband, then she (wife A) ought to come to her senses and likewise submit to her husband's headship. Some might say, "Oh, that is so unfair..." but remember, the chronically insubordinate wife A brought this on herself, so now she needs to accept the the consequences of her own actions and then willingly submit to her husband, and in doing so, likewise love her co-wife (wife B).
Now, before anyone objects and says that this methodology is "so barbaric", consider the following. Yehoshua said he came for the lost sheep of Israel. How many believers are there who are not biological Israelites? Perhaps you are such a person: a believer who is not a biological Israelite. If so, you had better thank Yehoshua that He sent the gospel to the gentiles in addition to the Yahudim and the other tribes of Israel. If He wasn't metaphorically polygynous in this way, there would be no gospel for non-Hebrews! The ONLY reason that gentiles can be redeemed, is because of Yehoshua's metaphorical polygyny.
-
Comment by James Trimm on December 14, 2009 at 10:09am
-
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)
Comment
© 2013 Created by James Trimm.
You need to be a member of Nazarene Space to add comments!
Join Nazarene Space