Radix Fidem Blog

Keep in mind that, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is contrasting the difference between the corrupt legalism of the Pharisees and Scribes with the divine revelation of the Covenant through Moses. In this series, He is discussing the most ancient laws and customs standing since the Covenant of Noah. The purpose is to step closer to the heart of the Father and point out how Moses was actually rather easy. Not only do the Scribes and Pharisees make things harder than they have to be, but they are missing the whole point of having a law code in the first place.

From ancient times, adultery was considered a threat to the tribe and peace with God. Jesus says that’s too easy, but it needs context. First, Hebrew culture forbade women showing anything more than her face, and perhaps some portion of her arms, in public. Clothing was not supposed to be form-fitting, either. Furthermore, Hebrew men were raised to have an instinctive reaction to look away in embarrassment when a woman showed too much flesh. Even Pharisees typically covered their eyes when they saw too much. Unlike in our pornographic Western culture, few Hebrew men would have gazed upon an overexposed woman. That kind of exhibitionism was repulsive.

Secondly, this is actually the proper instinct for a heart-led man, even one raised in the West. It is a godly instinct to look away from that kind of temptation, and a mark of spiritual maturity. Jesus isn’t talking about the temptation or the obscene thoughts, but the moral authority to control oneself. Thus, He asserts that anyone who obeys the Father from the heart will have a hard time staring at a woman that way. If you can’t look away, you’ve already disappointed God in your heart.

In this context, He goes on to make some very extreme suggestions for handling sinful fleshly impulses. If you cannot restrain your flesh, cripple it. This is no different from the admonition of Proverbs (23:1-3) to put a knife to your throat to restrain a strong appetite in the presence of someone who would be expected to tempt you. It’s basic Hebrew hyperbole. At all costs, avoid situations that provide temptation. Spend more time in prayer and training the weak flesh, even to the point of being anti-social, if that’s what it takes to keep you morally on track. The whole image of cutting off flesh was a symbol for social exclusion. There’s no shame in being a hermit if that’s what it takes.

A related moral problem in Judean society was the Talmudic expansion of divorce law. The Pharisees taught that a man could divorce his wife for any reason, or no reason at all. This is not really what Moses had to say about it. The Law of Moses presumes divorce, and God placed restrictions on what happens afterward. The Pharisees made a big deal out of the phrase that describes what constitutes a lawful divorce. Indeed, we have evidence that they carried on a sort of horse-trading of additional wives.

Most Pharisees and Scribes were upper middle class or higher. They were materialistic and elitist. Their first marriage was sometimes arranged for political reasons, even if only localized politics. They could afford additional wives and used them merely as sex toys, passing them along when they got bored, or found another pretty young thing they wanted. Even the monogamous (likely the majority) would practice serial monogamy this way. It created a class of concubines, as it were, traded among their peers. As with everything else, the traditions of the elders (oral Talmud) was rigged in their favor, and this became the law of the land by virtue of judicial precedent. It encouraged a moral looseness about marriage in Hebrew society, and defiled shalom.

Jesus raised the standard back higher than Moses. In the Kingdom of Heaven, a man had best choose wisely whom he marries, because the only excuse he has for divorce is that she wasn’t an actual virgin after all, and lied about it. And despite that a certificate of divorce is supposed to clear her for remarriage, she is actually committing adultery in remarriage.

This has nothing to do with the male pride demanding a virgin. This whole thing rests on the issue of sexual immorality defiling the land and the people living on it. Women and men are both wired so that their first sexual experience is not simply a matter of losing virginity; it creates a bond that registers in the fabric of Creation itself. Medical fact: the initial sex act burns a neural pathway that can never be removed. It alters hormonal chemistry. Granted, it is more obvious with women than men, but it’s present in both. This is part of what it means when we say a marriage covenant is sworn before God; it touches His divine moral character. It changes us for the rest of our lives.

In another place, Jesus teaches that it’s one man, one woman, for life. The whole idea is that you treat marriage and sex with due respect. Any sexual experience with someone else after that first is defiling in God’s eyes, except in very limited circumstances, and it simply won’t be the same for you. It demands a great deal of discipline to make it work in subsequent marriages, and you’ll always be missing some sacred and powerful element that God alone can give you in your marriage.

It was bad enough in Jesus’ day to warrant sharp condemnation. What do you suppose He thinks of our situation today in America?