11

Matthew 19:1-6 New International Version (NIV)

1 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

When Jesus said “Haven’t you read, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female" I believe he was referring to Genesis 5:2.

Genesis 5:2

2 He (God) created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind” when they were created.

In regards to the unity of one man and one woman, how did the Pharisees as well as others listening to Jesus (Matthew 19:2-3) interoperate what Jesus meant (Matthew 19:4-6) when they would have also known that Abraham and King David had multiple wives and/or concubines?

NOTE: I don't want this to be about how Christians view polygamy today but rather how did those listening think/feel/interperate (through 1st century "eyes") what Jesus was now saying compared to the "views/actions" of their forefathers. Prior to Jesus referencing Genesis 5 and clarifying that the unity of male and female was orignially intended for one man and one woman, did those practicing Judaism and those following Jesus recognize a difference in what was once practiced and what is now being said; or did everyone already know the original intent of male and female, specifically in terms of how Jesus stated it to be in Matthew 19?

Improve this question
19
  • 1
    @Shredder It should be noted that Abraham did not have two wives at once as you may also be pointing out. :–)
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 1:04
  • 4
    The point I see Jesus making is not against polygamy, but against divorce. If the pharisees had asked "Is it lawful for a man to not get divorced, but get married again anyway?" the outcome may have been quite different.
    – Flimzy
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 2:58
  • 1
    @Flimzy I agree that Jesus is making a point against divorce, but within His comments he states "that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female" which may imply one man and one woman in unity ("So they are no longer two, but one flesh" ) combined with Jesus referencing Genesis 5:2 it would seem this was the original intent. So my question still would be how did those listening interpret all of what Jesus said while also understanding how their forefathers viewed unity of man and woman (women)?
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 3:08
  • 5
    Heh - You'd think "no longer two, but one flesh", if taken literally, might well leave open the possibility for that "one flesh" to take on a spouse. At which point they would, one assumes, "no longer be two, but one flesh" again.
    – Muke Tever
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 12:50
  • 3
    @MukeTever: Polygamy by mathematical induction :)
    – hammar
    Commented May 21, 2012 at 5:40

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
9

I think the Pharisees understood quite well that their ancestors were not perfect. The fact that they did X does not make X right. The example of David that you bring up is a case in point: He was guilty of adultery and murder. The Bible is unusual in that it holds someone up as a hero at the same time that it freely recounts his character flaws -- sometimes big ones like this. I don't think the Pharisees supposed that murder was okay because David did it, or would have found this in any way confusing.

(Ever notice that most history books and biographies tend to present their heroes as 100% good? Their character flaws are often whitewashed: he was forced into it by circumstances; this was accepted practice at the time, etc. There are exceptions, of course, but I see this a lot. But the Bible goes to rather the opposite extreme, being quite emphatic about its heroes’ sins.)

That said, the Old Testament does seem to at least tolerate polygamy. There are some clues in the OT that indicate that God intended marriage to be monogamous. For example, Gen 2:24 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Note "wife", singular, not "a man shall be joined to his wives". Etc. But these are subtle enough that one could debate them, and I don't know of anything in the OT that clearly, explicitly mandates monogamy. There are plenty of places where a person's sin is called out, and I don't know of anyplace where polygamy is called out as a sin. I'm interested if anybody else here can point to such a verse.

As Flimzy notes, Jesus was condemning divorce, not polygamy. That doesn't mean polygamy is okay, of course, I'm sure there are lots of sins that the Bible does not record Jesus discussing. But that's not what he was talking about here.

Improve this answer
9
  • I know it is difficult to separate what we call polygamy from what King David involved himself with in regards to women. However, my question is still did the Pharisees as well as the rest of the crowd have any confusion or how would they have been thinking/interpreting (at that time) when they knew God had given David these wives, and Jesus was seemingly saying that one man and one woman as the reason in terms of unity for male and female.
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 14:22
  • Did it become apparent to the Pharisees and crowd that there was a difference in what God gave David (or had given David the right to do) and what as Jesus states was God's original original intent for male and female when he referenced Genesis 2
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 14:23
  • It seems that God gave David multiple wives. 2 Samuel 12:8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things."
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 14:23
  • That being said I don't wan't this to be about how Christians view polygamy today but rather what did those listening think or feel about this (through their eyes) compared to what Jesus was now saying.
    – E1Suave
    Commented May 17, 2012 at 14:24
  • 1
    @E1Suave - "However, my question is still did the Pharisees as well as the rest of the crowd have any confusion..." - I think they definitely had a confusion in their minds at that moment and didn't right away realize the difference between God's original intent and God's forbearance toward His people already in the fallen state. The following verses show both their confusion (verse 7) and the Savior's pointing out to that difference (verse 8: " because of the hardness of your hearts ... but from the beginning it was not so")
    – brilliant
    Commented May 18, 2012 at 14:16
2

"However, my question is still did the Pharisees as well as the rest of the crowd have any confusion..." - I think they definitely had a confusion in their minds at that moment and didn't right away realize the difference between God's original intent and God's forbearance toward His people already in the fallen state. The following verses show both their confusion (verse 7) and the Savior's pointing out to that difference (verse 8: " because of the hardness of your hearts ... but from the beginning it was not so")

Improve this answer
-1

Jesus is speaking of the children involved. One flesh is the offspring of the man and woman and the resulting family it creates. He is admonishing them not to separate the family. He goes on to say that this is not for eunuchs because they do not have children. This pericope ends with the little children coming unto Jesus.

Improve this answer
1
  • Please cite sources for this view and address the concubine angle.
    – Mr. Bultitude
    Commented Mar 7, 2015 at 18:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .