Divorce: Torah v Prophet, Mark v Matthew and how the early church misunderstood the matter

The matter of divorce was important to proto-Christians, and the treatment of the subject gives an understanding of how badly they misunderstood Judean texts as they were redacted back into the “Jesus” narratives.  Proto-Chrisians called TaNaKh (the “Old Testament”) “the Law.”  Properly speaking, “the Law” is only the Torah (the “Ta” part of TaNaKh). 

We see that the Torah (“the Law”) permits divorce, while the Malachi, in the books of the Prophets (Navi’im, the “Na” part of TaNaKh) does not.  The early church, believing that all of TaNaKh constituted "the Law," chose the position of the Navi'im because they understood "navi" to mean "prophet," and because they gave weight to the prophets over Moses as consistent with their stance that the "prophets" had ordained that they, not the Judeans, were the rightful owners of the text (a stance achieved via Philo). 

Deut 24:1

When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorce, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house

Malachi 2:16

The man who hates and divorces his wife," says the Lord, the God of Israel, "does violence to the one he should protect," says the Lord Almighty. So be on your guard, and do not be unfaithful.

      In the “Jesus” narratives, we find only two books refer to divorce:  Mark and Matthew.  The larger part of the issue they handle in the same manner.  The difference between the two traditions is only evident at the end.

Mark 10:1-10

And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them.

And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter.  And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Matthew 19:1-12

Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, he went away from Galilee and entered the region of Judea beyond the Jordan.  And large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”

The Markan text claims that if a couple divorce and remarry they commit adultery.  From the Judean perspective, this makes sense only regarding the ex-wife, because the ownership of any progeny produced by the woman would be suspect.  The claim that the remarriage of the man would constitute adultery against the ex-wife indicates that this is a Greco-Roman take on the matter, because if the man remarried he was doing no more than constructing a new contract for the ownership of progeny.  

The Matthean text incorporates the issue of adultery into the question of divorce (because the ownership of the progeny would be suspect).  The text then addresses the necessity of marriage, a matter we find in 1 Cor 7 (a text in which we find the phrase ‘slave of Christ,” which echoes Philo), and comments on eununchs—men who physically incapable of producing progeny.  This suggests that this pericope was more aware of Judean praxis (and less redacted by Greco-Romans) than the Markan text.

From this it is apparent that marriage is not a contract of love or of sexuality, but a means of documenting ownership of progeny.  The issue of divorce is not one 

Paul does not discuss divorce.  Nor does Philo.