What are the "laws of divorce"? Most people cite Deuteronomy 24:1-4, yet a careful reading of it reveals a few issues with this: 1) It does not define what the conditions are; "uncleaness" is never defined [ervah H6172 aschemon G908] 2) The passage is very much an if/then, where the // if // is "a man divorces his wife AND she marries another" // then // she cannot return. 3) The only command in the passage is "may not take her again" [v4]. The reason this passage is claimed to be the permission for divorce is it is the only passage in Torah that mentions divorce in any instructional way. The passage that is the "laws of divorce" is Talmud's section called Gittim (a certificate of divorce is called a "git", and the '-im' makes it plural, thus it means "divorces"). It goes for over 90 chapters on the conditions, definitions, instruction, etc. Talmud is the written *oral* traditions of man that are claimed to have been given by Moses, and they were finally written down about 500 AD, or just before the Masoretic text (from where most English translations translate the Tanakh "Old Testament"), and about the time Mohammad lived and wrote the Quran. These oral traditions are the very things Yahusha spoke against [Matthew 15:3-9, Mark 7:8-13 -> Isaiah 29:13]. This is why Matthew 19 (and the parallel passages) goes the way it does; the leaders asked if it was permissible to put away a wife for any reason (Hillel) or for specific causes (Shammai); the two schools (houses) of thought did not agree, and divorce was one of the primary things they disagreed on. (The other matters being 1) admission to Torah study, 2) white lies, 3) Hanukkah, 4) new year for trees, 5) where to say grace if you forgot before eating, 6) laying on of hands on a sacrifice on a festival day; as you can see, divorce was overall the most generally crucial matter.) Thus, the leaders were asking Yahusha *which* school of thought was correct. You should notice He didn't say either was, but pointed to Genesis 2:24. The leaders then claim Moses "commanded" them to give a certificate of divorce and put a wife away (they were referencing Deuteronomy 24:1-4), but Yahusha said (paraphrased) "it was due to refusal to obey Torah that Moses allowed you to divorce".
Which passage he referenced is clear when we use the two clues here: 1) Deuteronomy 22 is what happens when someone is has sex outside of the marriage, or is unmarried, while Leviticus 18 is about what is forbidden. Recall that married sex with a non spouse results in death, while unmarried sex results in marriage. Thus, Leviticus 18 is about unlawful marriages. 2) "for these things I drove out the prior nations" [Leviticus 18:24-30]. Thus, the relevant passage is Leviticus 18:7-8/20:11. To be clear, Shaul is not saying that *only* a man marrying his father's wife is sexual immorality, but it certainly is one of the many things. Leviticus 18/20 gives the full list. These are things for which Yahuah will *not* join two in marriage [Matthew 19:6, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11] as it is an unlawful marriage with an unlawful vow [Numbers 30]. Thus, the man in 1 Corinthians 5 did precisely the exception; he divorced his father's wife so that he was no longer in sexual immorality, and assuming neither she nor he had any living prior lawful spouses, they were free to remarry without committing adultery. Another story may come to mind; Herod and Herodias [Matthew 14:3-4, Mark 6:17-18, Luke 3:19]. Yet, if Herodias had done the right thing and divorced, then she would have fallen under Deuteronomy 24:1-4 and not been able to remarry until Philip died, without being in adultery. Yet, she refused to do this, Herod refused to do this (at least until later), and both remained in sexual immorality *and adultery* (as both had been lawfully married prior). This also explains why David, who had many wives (polygamy, or more precisely polygyny) is said to only be guilty of murder [1 Kings 15:5] and why he needed Abishag to keep him warm [1 Kings 1] when Bathsheba lived and seemed healthy enough; David repented and divorced his unlawful wives *or* they were no longer living. The same is true of Abraham (with Hagar) and Jacob.
The front of the book is the foundation in which the back of the book pulls from Just have to know where to go to get the answers. Otherwise we are in danger of traditions of men and relying on our own understanding rather than his♡
I don't agree men with him that the command for men not to shave is no longer a requirement, also the sabbath year of rest for the land is not only for in Israel...
Although I agree with the sabbath year. The Torah says men should not mar their beards, its not talking about shaving. It's actually about scaring the skin so the hair would no longer grow.
Obeying the spirit of the law, of the 10 Commandments is much more difficult than obeying the letter of the law.
What are the "laws of divorce"? Most people cite Deuteronomy 24:1-4, yet a careful reading of it reveals a few issues with this:
1) It does not define what the conditions are; "uncleaness" is never defined [ervah H6172 aschemon G908]
2) The passage is very much an if/then, where the // if // is "a man divorces his wife AND she marries another" // then // she cannot return.
3) The only command in the passage is "may not take her again" [v4].
The reason this passage is claimed to be the permission for divorce is it is the only passage in Torah that mentions divorce in any instructional way.
The passage that is the "laws of divorce" is Talmud's section called Gittim (a certificate of divorce is called a "git", and the '-im' makes it plural, thus it means "divorces"). It goes for over 90 chapters on the conditions, definitions, instruction, etc. Talmud is the written *oral* traditions of man that are claimed to have been given by Moses, and they were finally written down about 500 AD, or just before the Masoretic text (from where most English translations translate the Tanakh "Old Testament"), and about the time Mohammad lived and wrote the Quran.
These oral traditions are the very things Yahusha spoke against [Matthew 15:3-9, Mark 7:8-13 -> Isaiah 29:13].
This is why Matthew 19 (and the parallel passages) goes the way it does; the leaders asked if it was permissible to put away a wife for any reason (Hillel) or for specific causes (Shammai); the two schools (houses) of thought did not agree, and divorce was one of the primary things they disagreed on. (The other matters being 1) admission to Torah study, 2) white lies, 3) Hanukkah, 4) new year for trees, 5) where to say grace if you forgot before eating, 6) laying on of hands on a sacrifice on a festival day; as you can see, divorce was overall the most generally crucial matter.)
Thus, the leaders were asking Yahusha *which* school of thought was correct. You should notice He didn't say either was, but pointed to Genesis 2:24. The leaders then claim Moses "commanded" them to give a certificate of divorce and put a wife away (they were referencing Deuteronomy 24:1-4), but Yahusha said (paraphrased) "it was due to refusal to obey Torah that Moses allowed you to divorce".
Which passage he referenced is clear when we use the two clues here:
1) Deuteronomy 22 is what happens when someone is has sex outside of the marriage, or is unmarried, while Leviticus 18 is about what is forbidden. Recall that married sex with a non spouse results in death, while unmarried sex results in marriage. Thus, Leviticus 18 is about unlawful marriages.
2) "for these things I drove out the prior nations" [Leviticus 18:24-30].
Thus, the relevant passage is Leviticus 18:7-8/20:11.
To be clear, Shaul is not saying that *only* a man marrying his father's wife is sexual immorality, but it certainly is one of the many things. Leviticus 18/20 gives the full list. These are things for which Yahuah will *not* join two in marriage [Matthew 19:6, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11] as it is an unlawful marriage with an unlawful vow [Numbers 30].
Thus, the man in 1 Corinthians 5 did precisely the exception; he divorced his father's wife so that he was no longer in sexual immorality, and assuming neither she nor he had any living prior lawful spouses, they were free to remarry without committing adultery.
Another story may come to mind; Herod and Herodias [Matthew 14:3-4, Mark 6:17-18, Luke 3:19]. Yet, if Herodias had done the right thing and divorced, then she would have fallen under Deuteronomy 24:1-4 and not been able to remarry until Philip died, without being in adultery. Yet, she refused to do this, Herod refused to do this (at least until later), and both remained in sexual immorality *and adultery* (as both had been lawfully married prior).
This also explains why David, who had many wives (polygamy, or more precisely polygyny) is said to only be guilty of murder [1 Kings 15:5] and why he needed Abishag to keep him warm [1 Kings 1] when Bathsheba lived and seemed healthy enough; David repented and divorced his unlawful wives *or* they were no longer living. The same is true of Abraham (with Hagar) and Jacob.
The front of the book is the foundation in which the back of the book pulls from
Just have to know where to go to get the answers. Otherwise we are in danger of traditions of men and relying on our own understanding rather than his♡
I don't agree men with him that the command for men not to shave is no longer a requirement, also the sabbath year of rest for the land is not only for in Israel...
Although I agree with the sabbath year. The Torah says men should not mar their beards, its not talking about shaving. It's actually about scaring the skin so the hair would no longer grow.