Wasn't adultery a capital offence?

Someone emailed:
Could you comment on which sorts of immorality the school of Shammai believed were covered by Deut. 24:1, but not by Deut. 22:22? Dead people don't get divorced, so did they have a different category of indecency that wasn't adultery?

Reply: You are right to point out the potential contradiction between Deut.24.1 (which talks about divorce for "a matter of indecency") and Deut.22.22 (which says an adulterer must die). If there was a death sentence for adultery, how could anyone get divorced for adultery?

There are various potential solutions for this contradiction. Perhaps the law of Old Testament was already changing during OT times - after all, Nathan did not call for Bathsheba's death. Or perhaps "a matter of indecency" was something less than adultery? The precise meaning of Deut.24.1-4 is something which scholars are still looking into, and I haven't seen any fully convincing explanation of what the original case law was about.

By New Testament times the Jews had lost the authority to carry out a death penalty for adultery or any other matter (see John 18:31), so they said that it was compulsory to divorce a woman for adultery. Although they cited Deut.24.1 as proof of this, they were, as you point out, not using Scripture entirely in its context. And they were certainly wrong to say that divorce was commanded by Moses.

Jesus corrected them on two counts - he said that Moses didn't "command" divorce for adultery (or for any other cause) but he only "allowed" it, and only when there was hardheartedness (ie stubborn and unrepentant breaking of marriage vows).

Secondly Jesus cited the words of Deut.24.1 very accurately by using the general Greek word "porneia" - a term which is used in the NT for adultery, prostitution, fornication, incest and for sexual sin in general. Jesus didn't make the mistake of translating it "adultery" (according to Matthew).

Jesus didn't tell us what exactly his interpretation of Deut.24.1 was, except to say that he disagreed with the Pharisees who found two types of divorce: the 'any cause' divorce and 'divorce for adultery'. Jesus said that Deut.24.1 referred to only one type of divorce, for 'a matter of indecency' (porneia), so that anyone who got divorced for 'any cause' had an invalid divorce.

So you are right to point out the potential contradiction between these two verses. As you can see, Jesus' interpretation did not fall into the same mistakes as the Pharisees.

www.DivorceRemarriage.com

In the OT an adulterer would have been stoned anyway, thereby ending the marriage

Someone emailed:
From what I have gathered, Jesus is allowing divorce for sexual faithfulness, material support (food & clothing) and emotional support (love) as per OT law which he came to "fulfill not abolish" (beginning of sermon on the Mount) but He is pointing out the OT exception for adultery, in which case a person would have been stoned according to old testament law anyway (ending the marriage), or in more lenient times they would have been an adulterer anyway so the divorce certificate would not have made any difference.

If this understanding is correct, then Jesus is allowing the husband to remarry without a formal divorce certificate similar to when Paul says a spouse can re-marry if their unbelieving spouse abandons them

Reply: You are right that the OT prescribes the death penalty for adultery, but Dt.24.1 also says that you should give a divorce certificate to a wife who has committed a "matter of indecency" (lit "a thing of nakedness"). This potential contradiction can be solved by saying that the death penalty is only applied if there is enough evidence, or if she is taken 'in the act', but probably it is due to different punishments being applied at different times in the history of the OT.

Some Jews in the 1st C appear to have decided that adultery should still be punished by death if there is enough evidence, as in Jn.8 - though it was death by mob violence, not by official execution, because the Romans did not allow the Jews to apply a death penalty. But most Pharisees were against the death penalty and preferred other punishments, so they were happy to apply Dt.24.1 and give a divorce certificate to an adulteress.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that an adulteress doesn't need a divorce certificate - for any 1st C Jew, the Law of Moses was absolutely clear that she did require one.

See more on the non-application of the death penalty in Divorce & Remarriage in the Bible

www.DivorceRemarriage.com