CFM: May 8–14
Videos and Podcasts
Video/ Podcast | Lesson Extension | Additional Materials |
Scripture Central | | |
Follow Him | ||
Line Upon Line | ||
Teaching with Power | | |
Don't Miss This | | |
CFM New Testament | ||
Unshaken | | |
The Interpreter Foundation | ||
Teaching Helps with John Hilton | Matthew 19–20; Mark 10; Luke 18 (not yet posted) | |
Talk of Him | | |
Ponderfun | ||
Talking Scripture |
Resources and Insights about this Week's Lesson
The materials covered in this week's lesson address some sensitive social topics that are frequently misunderstood, primarily due to translational issues. I'd like to clarify a few of these interpretations and offer a few additional insights.
Marriage, Divorce, and Putting Away
In Greek, the word for divorce is ἀποστάσιον, apostasion or apostisia (depending on the conjugation). This word comes from ἀπό (from) and ἵστημι (I stand, established, set in place). This word may have a distant relationship to the English word apostasy, which was adopted via Latin. However, the Greek word for apostasy (ἄπιστος) uses the πίστις pistis root with the negating prefix a-, a- + pistis, which means "without faith." These words are phonetically similar and share many related concepts but are structured differently and represent different things. The word ἀποστάσιον indicates a legally binding exit or withdrawal from one's marriage. In Jewish tradition, this was done through a formal divorce document called a כְּרִיתוּת (keritot) or "Get." This had to be done in writing, and proper witnesses had to be present to certify the divorce. This frequently involved some type of compensation, and if a dowry was paid, that would usually have to be returned to the wife's family unless there was evidence of infidelity. Once a get was issued, women were free to move on and remarry.
In contrast, "put away," ἀπολύω, is very different. This was not regarded as a legally binding divorce in Jewish Law, not to the same standard that ἀποστάσιον is. This word is more accurately interpreted as a "release," "separation," or "dismissal." In the modern day, this is compared to a "civil divorce." Even today, while many Reform Jews disregard the tradition of the get, technically, a civil divorce is not recognized by the Jewish religious court as a legal divorce in the eyes of God until that document has been ratified. And technically, a woman is still not supposed to get remarried unless she has a "get."
Anciently, the word ἀπολύω was frequently used to indicate a separation between an enslaved person or servant from their masters, and sometimes it was used to indicate a divorce among gentiles or the dismissal of a concubine. To the Jews, gentile marriages and gentile slave marriages were not subjected to the same laws and privileges as traditional Jewish marriages. At that time, women were frequently regarded as property; they were seen as a commodity that, in many cases, was disposable. Among the Roman community, some sources say that it was very common for the average Roman citizen to go through 6-8 wives during their lifetime. The Greek base for the phrase "putting away" is ἀπολύω, from ἀπό (from) and λύω (loose), which means "I release, send away, set free, dismiss." There are various forms of this word used throughout the passages we are studying, which alter in spelling as suffixes are attached to the ending of the root word to indicate the form of its conjugation (ἀπολύσῃ, ἀπολελυμένην).
'Απολύω has many connotations relating to both relationships and pragmatic usage, including sending or dispatching someone to another location, a release from service or duty, a temporary or permanent separation, abandonment, relocation, liberation (for enslaved people), a breakup, kicking or casting someone out, rejection, etc. Some circumstances were considered shameful, and others were welcomed. Like today, life was messy in the ancient world, and a wide range of circumstances would lead couples to these situations. For example, when Joseph found out that Mary was pregnant, he did not want to humiliate her, and initially, he planned to "put her away" privately. Because they were only betrothed, Joseph did not need to go through the process of a legal divorce, an ἀποστάσιον. Still, because they were betrothed, Joseph did have legal responsibilities for Mary's welfare, and so an ἀπολελυμένην was in order. Even if done privately, the social stigma of putting Mary away would have had significant ramifications for both Mary and Jesus. Joseph was a good man, and one can assume that he intended to ensure that Mary and the child were cared for. However, circumstances like that were not always the case.
During this time, women had very few rights. They could not have a job, receive an inheritance, and were not regarded as reliable witnesses in a court of law. Additionally, men could divorce a woman or "put her away" for many reasons, some of which were ridiculous. Documented excuses recorded in the Mishna include "hearing one's wife's voice in the next room" and "boredom." Some of the podcasts address these issues in more detail; Lynne Wilson does a good job explaining some of these circumstances in her CFM New Testament podcast. This was cruel and tragic for many reasons; a woman's survival and the survival of her children depended upon men, whether a husband, brother, son, uncle, or someone else. A woman would have few options if she did not have a man to provide for her. Typically, she would have to resort to desperate means; she would have to become someone's mistress, beg, become a prostitute, and in many cases, she would die.
The Samaritan woman's story at the well indicates this very serious problem. This woman had a previous husband who refused to give her a divorce, so she had to live with a man who was not her husband. Sometimes men would refuse to give their wives a divorce because they wanted to maintain control. Other times there were other reasons, taxes, not wanting to repay dowries or other expenses, and some men didn't want to bother with the hassle of going through the legal process. Others would accuse the woman of infidelity so they wouldn't have to pay back dowries and restitution, and because women could not legally defend themselves, those allegations would frequently stick. These circumstances didn't hurt the men; in many cases, it was easier and more financially advantageous for them to send their wives away. Sadly, some events were even more tragic; if a man went missing for any reason, during wartime or on an extended trip, and his death could not be proven, their wives were considered abandoned and could not legally remarry. These women were called Agunot, or "chained wives." Every woman at this time lived in a constant state of anxiety and fear that they could find themselves in these circumstances, and this was the issue that Christ was addressing in his discussion with the Pharisees.
In Matt 5:31-32 (INT), Christ initially addressed the topic of divorce in his Sermon on the Mount. In the verses we are studying this week, the Pharisees are following up on some of the issues they had with Christ's initial sermon to try to discredit him. Unfortunately, many English translations of these passages, including the KJV, have significant problems. Let us first look at Matthew 5.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away (ἀπολύσῃ) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (ἀποστάσιον):
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away (ἀπολύσῃ) his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (ἀπολελυμένην - perfect passive article, the feminine form of the verb ἀπολύσῃ "put away") committeth adultery.
The end of verse 32 should read, "whosoever shall marry her that is "put away/separated" (i.e., not legally divorced) committeth adultery. The word ἀπολελυμένην is a conjugation of ἀπολύσῃ "put away, separated," not ἀποστάσιον, "divorced." Again, these are two very different words, with very different connotations. The mistranslation of this single word from "separated" to "divorced" makes a huge difference in the meaning.
The way this statement was written in Greek is very similar to the definition of adultery that is generally understood today. If one is married, and they have sexual relations with someone else, that is adultery, even if they are "separated." In Greek, this was Christ's clear, straightforward, and simple definition. However, the English translation significantly muddied the waters, resulting in much confusion, especially when most people are unfamiliar with the cultural context. This is a primary example of scribes unintentionally or possibly intentionally altering and perverting the plain and precious truths of the text (1 Nephi 13:25-29).
In these verses, Christ is not condemning women as being somehow tainted if they are divorced. In fact, he is doing the opposite and fiercely advocating for these women by clarifying the divine sanctity of marriage and setting women as equal partners to their husbands in the eyes of the Lord. (Matt 19:4-6). This was a radically feminist position for that time and vastly different from the property/slave connotation that the Priests inferred with their question. In his answer, Jesus condemns men, leaders, and those people/ laws/ traditions that are holding these women hostage, those who are abusing their positions of authority and power, thereby putting these women and children in tragic and dangerous situations. Christ has tremendous compassion for these women; his own mother was a widow, and he had personally suffered significant persecution because of social stigmas that condemned his family regarding the circumstances of his birth. This was a serious issue for Christ, and he went out of his way on several occasions to help women and families in these precarious circumstances. This is the concern that Christ addressed in his debate with the Pharisees.
This is further clarified in Matt 19:3-10 (INT) and Mar 10:2-12 (INT). The Priests tried to trick Christ by asking why Moses authorized "written divorcement" and "putting away." These were two very different questions. Christ had already addressed the first question, "Whosoever shall put away (ἀπολύσῃ) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (ἀποστάσιον)." In his extended conversation with the Pharisees, which is addressed in Matthew 19 and Mark 10, Christ is primarily addressing the topic of ἀπολύω "putting away" (גָּרַשׁ in Hebrew). He had already responded to the ἀποστάσιον "divorce" question, and this word is not used in his response to the Pharisees (כְּרִיתוּת in Hebrew).
Christ stated that because of the hardness of the hearts of the children of Israel, Moses "suffered" or allowed these various types of separations to occur. These laws of divorce and
'putting away" were constructed by men, not God. Christ clearly stated that this was never the Lord's intention to end marriage like this, as weapons and chains of oppression. He never intended women, children, and families to be hurt in these tragic ways. Instead, God established marriage as an eternal blessing, a sacred institution, and a covenant bond that no person should pull asunder. Additionally, Christ articulated the importance of unity and fidelity within marriage, not domination, ownership, or abuse. For those types of situations, Christ counseled that ἀποστάσιον was appropriate and that those matters needed to be handled legally before the two parties moved on to other relationships. Furthermore, any violations and abuses suffered as a result of "putting away" ἀπολύω one's spouse was unacceptable.
Sadly, misunderstandings surrounding this doctrine have led to considerable confusion and further abuses because of the incorrect stigmas and misinformation generated. People who get legally divorced, widowed, and later remarry are not violating the law. There are provisions within the law to protect them, and there are circumstances that justify the necessity of pursuing those courses of action if necessary, as was stated by the Savior.
Another example of a "tweaked" interpretation occurs in Matthew 19:10-12. Christ has just discussed the sanctity of marriage and the sacred and holy union between a man and a woman during his discussion with the priests. Upon hearing this debate, the apostles also have questions. In these verses, there is a very different interpretation and tone between the Greek and English translations.
In Greek, the apostles ask Christ, given the challenges described, is it profitable to get married at all? This is a fair and valid question that many people ask. Christ explains that not everyone will be able to receive the law of marriage, and many won't have the opportunity; Jesus uses the eunuchs as examples. However, he advises that those who can receive the order of marriage should.
In the Latin and English translations, these verses are slightly altered, which changes the delivery. These translations read, "All men cannot receive the "saying," save they to whom it is given." Some have interpreted this subtle adjustment to imply that a "higher calling" is somehow being inferred through the practice of celibacy. In the Greek version, that implication is not there. The word "men" is not even mentioned; in fact, the word πάντες (pandes) is used, which specifies "all or everyone." The word translated as "saying" is λόγον (logon), a conjugation of Logos, which can be interpreted as "saying." However, it can also be interpreted as word, doctrine, law, teaching, decree, and order, referring to the holy order of matrimony. Thus, one can interpret this passage as "All cannot receive the holy order of matrimony, save those to whom it is given." This is quite beautiful because the word "given" δίδωμι denotes a gift, a commitment, the giving of oneself according to their own accord. This word indicates mutual consent, permission, free will, and choice.
Considering the push for celibacy within the priesthood by the Essenes and later traditions, it appears that this section may have been adjusted in the later translations to justify those practices, yet again demonstrating plain and precious truths being altered to conform to the social standards of the time.
Camel & the Eye of the Needle
This phrase is commonly referred to, but few understand the profound significance of the symbolism, and many more are confused by it; I know I was.
Over the last several weeks, we have been learning about the alphabet, its history, and its symbolism. For example, we read that the scribes marveled because Christ knew about "letters," and Christ informed them that the letters were symbolic of the doctrines of the Father. Christ's interaction with the wealthy nobleman appears to be another example where Christ took the opportunity to teach his disciples about the symbolic nature of the alphabet.
The third letter of the alphabet is the letter Gimel. In Hebrew, one interpretation of this root, גמל (Gimel-Mem-Lamed), means camel, and the Aramaic form of the letter depicts that image, ג. In Greek, this root was borrowed from Hebrew, and there was a consonant shift between the g and k sounds to get κάμηλος (kamelos); this is where the English word camel was derived, only this time the k and c consonants shifted. However, even though these are different languages, written in different scripts, one can see the root in all three instances, gml, kml, and cml.
Understanding the letter Gimel can help one better understand the meaning associated with Christ's allegory. Another Hebrew word using the גמל root is gamal, a verb meaning to bestow, reward, wage, and compensation. If one has ever played the Dreidel game at Hanukkah, one might recognize the "gime, gime, gimel" symbol because if one's dreidel lands on this lucky letter, one gets to take the accrued coins and chocolates that have built up in the "pot."
According to Jewish tradition, there is a story about the letter gimel in which a rich man runs after a poor man to give him charity.
The story goes that once, in the city of Jerusalem, there was a poor man who was unable to provide for his family. One day, he went to the local synagogue and prayed to God for help. After his prayers, he left the synagogue feeling hopeless and dejected.
As he was walking down the street, a rich man, known for his generosity and charitable deeds, saw the poor man and noticed that he looked sad and in need. So the rich man approached the poor man and asked him what was wrong. The poor man explained his situation and how he was struggling to make ends meet.
The rich man listened attentively and felt compassion for the poor man. He then took out his wallet and searched for money to give the poor man. However, he only had two coins, one worth one shekel and the other worth two shekels.
The rich man decided to give the poor man the larger coin, which was worth two shekels. He handed the coin to the poor man and said, "Here, take this and use it wisely."
The poor man thanked the rich man and went on his way. As he was walking, he noticed that the coin had a letter gimel engraved on it. He didn't understand why the rich man had given him this particular coin, but he didn't give it much thought.
Later that day, the poor man went to the market to buy food for his family. He went to the first stall and asked the vendor how much a loaf of bread cost. The vendor replied that it cost two shekels. The poor man realized that he had exactly enough money to buy the bread, thanks to the generous gift from the rich man.
As he was leaving the market, the poor man noticed the same rich man who had given him the coin earlier running towards him. The rich man was out of breath and looked like he had been running for a while.
When he finally caught up with the poor man, he explained that he had mistakenly given him the wrong coin. He had meant to give him the smaller coin worth one shekel, but instead, he had given him the larger coin worth two shekels.
The poor man looked at the rich man and then remembered the coin with the letter Gimel engraved on it. He then smiled and said, "Do not worry, my friend. I believe this coin was intended to be in my possession, as it had the letter gimel on it."
The letter gimel is the third letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and it symbolizes giving and kindness. The poor man believed that the coin was a sign from God that he would provide for him and his family.
The poor man's words and faith touched the rich man. Then, finally, he realized that the poor man was right and that the coin was meant to be his. He then gave the poor man an additional donation and asked for forgiveness for the confusion.
The poor and rich man parted ways, both feeling grateful for the lesson they had learned about the power of giving and faith. And so, the story of the letter gimel and the rich man running after the poor man to give him charity became a symbol of generosity and kindness in Jewish tradition. If one looks at the letter gimel, one might even see an image of a man running after another to give them charity ג.
In the story of the wealthy nobleman, one can see strong Gimel principles. Jesus Christ, the Gimel Gadol (the "Great Gimel"), the bestower of all benefits, called this wealthy nobleman to become a gimel himself. However, the rich man trusted and valued his money and the things of this world more than he trusted and loved the Lord.
The Egyptian hieroglyph for the G sound was depicted with a picture of a water pot stand that carried and transported water. This correlates with the symbol of a camel, an animal that proverbially carries its water on its back. The letters ג Gimel and מ Mem symbolically indicate the concept of "carrying water." Mem means water. Thus if one puts Gim and El (God) together, one might interpret Gimel as "Carrying the waters of God". When the rich nobleman asked what he still lacked, Jesus invited this man to follow him and join him on his mission to carry the living waters to all willing to partake. This was a mission call. It also demonstrates the importance of charity. This wealthy nobleman had kept the law since birth, but his efforts were simply vanity without charity. Charity is the highest, noblest, and strongest kind of love, the pure love of Christ, which motivates our actions, thoughts, and desires. When the wealthy noble asked what he lacked, the answer was charity.
As members of the Church of Jesus Christ, we have all entered into the waters of baptism; God has abundantly blessed us, and because we have been given much, we too must give. Every member is a missionary, and we are all called to share the blessings of heaven with those who thirst, in whatever manner or capacity that might be, sharing the gospel, sharing our substance, sharing our time, talents, and resources, or simply sharing our love, a smile, a kind word, or a good deed.
The letter ק Quf (קוּף) means the "eye of a needle." It comprises two parts, a ו Vav and כ Kaph. The Vav וָו represents a nail or rod (think Nephi's Iron Rod). The Kaph represents the palm of one's hand holding on to the Vav, their Vows, their Word, God's Word, and the promises that connect and bind them to Him. Christ tells the apostles that it is easier for a kind, generous, and charitable gimel to enter and stay in a Quf (a covenant relationship with God) than it is for a rich man (a πλούσιος ploúsios), one who is bound down with the burdens of stuff, responsibilities, distractions, and trying to hold on to those material and temporal things that in the end, don't matter. This is not a condemnation of the rich but a call for all to put their priorities in order. Joseph of Arimathea was a ploúsios, and he used his wealth and influence to humbly serve the Savior. Although his service came at a tremendous cost, Joseph is known as one of the kindest and most generous Pharisees on record. His charity and genuine love for the Savior earned him an eternal reward.
When one understands the nature of these symbols, these allegories come to life and are much easier to comprehend and learn from. These images and symbols evoke layers upon layers of lessons that one can meditate on and learn from, primarily as they rely on the Spirit, and search the scriptures to study the words, etymologies, symbols, and histories. These are symbols that, as members of the Church, we are already familiar with. These are not new; they are familiar, and once one starts to make these connections, these seeds begin to sprout, and these words become delicious, exciting, and addictive. I, for one, can't get enough! These words feed my soul, and as I share these insights, I hope you will find fulfillment and peace in the messages they provide as we look to Christ Jehovah, our Savior, the eternal Alpha and Omega, the Word made flesh, the source of all light, hope, knowledge, and wisdom.
Major Topics & Events
Major Events/ Doctrines | Location | Scripture Source | Cross-References | Videos |
The Unjust Judge | Traveling through Galilee | LUMO Luke 18 | ||
The Pharisee and the publican | Traveling through Galilee | | ||
Pharisees ask about divorce | Perea | LUMO Matt 19, LUMO Mark 10 | ||
Suffer little children | Perea | |||
Rich Young Ruler: Camel and Eye of Needle | Perea | | ||
Reward for forsaking all | Perea | | ||
Parable: Laborers in vineyard | Perea | | ||
Prophecy of death and Resurrection | Leaving Perea | | | |
The greatest is to minister | Jericho | | | |
Heals two blind men (Bartimaeus) | Leaving Jericho | | |
Church Videos & Resources
Scripture Central
The Bible Project
BYU’s RSC
Video Tours of the Holy Land
Additional Videos & Insights
Comments