Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 10:12
And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
Verse 12. And if a woman shall put away her husband] From this it appears that in some cases, the wife assumed the very same right of divorcing her husband that the husband had of divorcing his wife; and yet this is not recorded any where in the Jewish laws, as far as I can find, that the women had such a right. Indeed, were the law which gives the permission all on one side, it would be unjust and oppressive; but where it is equally balanced, the right being the same on each side, it must serve as a mutual check, and prevent those evils it is intended to cure. Among the Jews there are several instances of the women having taken other men, even during the life of their own husbands. Nor do we find any law by which they were punished. Divorce never should be permitted but on this ground-“The parties are miserable together, and they are both perfectly willing to be separated.” Then, if every thing else be proper, let them go different ways, that they may not ruin both themselves and their hapless offspring.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And if a woman shall put away her husband,…. Not that there was the same law, or the same sufferance by the law of Moses, for a woman to put away her husband, as for the husband to put away the wife; nor was it practised among the Jews, unless it came to be in use about this time, in their declining state, having taken it from the Gentiles; of whom they say s, that
“they divorce one another: says R. Jochanan, , “his wife divorces him”, and gives him the dowry.”
So Salome, the sister of Herod the Great, sent a bill of divorce to her husband Costobarus; and in this she was followed by Herodias, the daughter of Aristobulus, as Josephus t relates; and which his own wife also did. And by such examples the practice might prevail among the Jews: and we have a story told u us of a holy man, and a holy yeoman, who were married, and had no children, , “and they divorced one another”; and the one went and married a wicked woman, and she made him wicked; and the other went and married a wicked man, and she made him righteous but I do not find that this practice was approved, or established by any rule, or canon. They allow w indeed a woman to write her husband’s divorce of her, with proper witnesses; and they also oblige one, that was espoused in her minority, and refuses her husband, when adult, to write a bill of refusal; the form of that, and the rules about it, take as follow x:
“they do not allow one to marry a minor; he that marries a minor that is fatherless, and she is not pleased with her husband, lo! she may refuse, and go away, and she has no need of a divorce from him, because the espousals of a minor are not perfect espousals, as we have explained: and so a minor, whom her father marries, and she becomes a widow, or is divorced whilst she is a minor, lo! she is as one fatherless, in, her father’s life time; and if she marries whilst she is a minor, she may refuse–how does she refuse? she says before two witnesses, I do not like such an one my husband; or I do not like the espousals with which my father, or my brother, espoused me; and such like words.–The two, before whom the minor refuses, write for her; on such a day, such an one, the daughter of such an one, refused, before us, such an one her husband; and they seal, and give it to her: and this is the body, or substance of a bill of refusal–in such a week, on such a day of the month, in such a year, such an one, the daughter of such an one, refused before us, and said, that my mother, or my brother, forced me, and married me, or espoused me, and I, a minor, to such an one, the son of such an one; and now I reveal my mind before you, that I do not like him, and I will not abide with him: and we have searched such an one; and this is manifest to us, that she is yet a minor, and we have written, and sealed, and have given this to her, for her justification, and a clear proof;”
“Such an one, the son of such an one, witness. Such an one, the son of such an one, witness.”
And such a writing was called, , “a bill of refusal”, and sometimes , “letters of refusal” y, but a bill of divorcement given by a married woman to her husband, I have not met with. Justin Martyr speaks z of a Christian woman that,
, “gave a bill of divorce” to her husband: such things, therefore, have been done, and might be done in Christ’s time, to which he refers; and concerning which he says, that if a woman do so,
and be married to another, she committeth adultery; with the man she marries, and against, and to the injury of her former husband, unjustly left by her.
s Bereshit Rabba, sect. 18. fol. 15. 3. t Antiqu. l. 15. c. 11. & 18. 7. u Bercshit Rabba, sect. 17. fol. 14. 4. w Misn. Edict. c, 2. sect. 3. x Maimon. Hilch. Gerushim, c. 11. sect. 1, 8, 9, 11. y Misn. Bava Metzta, c. 1. sect. 8. z Apolog. 1. p 42. Yid. Euscb. Eccl. Hist. l. 4. c. 17.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
If she herself shall put away her husband and marry another ( ). Condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of determination). Greek and Roman law allowed the divorce of the husband by the wife though not provided for in Jewish law. But the thing was sometimes done as in the case of Herodias and her husband before she married Herod Antipas. So also Salome, Herod’s sister, divorced her husband. Both Bruce and Gould think that Mark added this item to the words of Jesus for the benefit of the Gentile environment of this Roman Gospel. But surely Jesus knew that the thing was done in the Roman world and hence prohibited marrying such a “grass widow.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And if a woman shall put away her husband,” (kai ean aute apolusasa ton andra autes) ”And if she, having dismissed, divorced or put away from her, her husband,” which Jewish women could not do, but Gentile women could, and Mark gave this teaching of Jesus as a guide for Gentiles.
2) ”And be married to another,” (kai games allen) “And she marries another,” another husband, or man, 1Co 7:10-11; 1Co 7:13.
3) “She committeth adultery.” (moichatai) “She commits adultery,” in the action she pursues, Luk 16:18. It is a moral and ethical breach against the holy order and will of God, Gen 1:27; Gen 2:24; Mal 2:14-15.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(12) And if a woman shall put away.This also is peculiar to St. Mark, and it is noticeable, as being the only passage in our Lords teaching which distinctly states the case referred to, and passes sentence on the wife who divorces her husband and marries again, as well as on the husband who divorces his wife, and the wife who is so divorced. All three cases are dealt with on the same grounds: (1) that the marriage relationship ought to be indissoluble, and that one cause only justifies or permits its dissolution; and (2) that any further permission of divorce is but a concession to the hardness of mens hearts for the avoidance of greater evils.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
103. JESUS HAVING LEFT GALILEE, IN PEREA, DISCUSSES THE LAW OF MARRIAGE.
(See notes on Mat 19:1-12.)
12. If a woman By the Mosaic law the woman seems to have had no legal right to divorce her husband. Yet several instances appear in Jewish history, of a woman’s abandoning her husband and marrying another during the first husband’s life; nor does there seem to have been any law to punish such wickedness. Jesus virtually puts both sexes on a level in the Christian dispensation. Neither has a right to divorce for other cause than unchasteness, and neither, so divorced, has a right to marry again.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mar 10:12. And if a woman shall put away her husband, Though it is certain that the Jewish law did not put it in a woman’s power to divorce her husband; yet it is plain from Josephus, that it was done, not only by several ladies of distinguished rank, but even that his own wife did it, having probably learned of the Roman women, who, in this age, are known to have practised it in the most scandalous manner. See Juv. Sat. 6. ver. 222, &c. Compare 1Sa 25:44. 1Co 7:13 and Lardner’s Credibility, part 1: vol. 2 p. 890.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
Ver. 12. And if a woman have put away ] No such thing was permitted by Moses, but usurped by the women of those licentious times. Among Turks the woman may sue a divorce; but only then when her husband would abuse her against nature. (Blount’s Voyage.)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
12. ] This verse corresponds to in Mat 19:9 but it is expressed as if the woman were the active party, and put away her husband, which was allowed by Greek and Roman law (see 1Co 7:13 ), but not by Jewish (see Deu 24:1 ; Jos. Antt. xv.7.10). This alteration in the verbal expression may have originated in the source whence Mark’s report was drawn. On , Grotius remarks, ‘Mulier, cum domina sui non sit, si, marito relicto, ad aliud matrimonium se conferat, omnino adulterium committit, non interpretatione aliqua, aut per consequentiam, sed directe : ideo non debuit hic addi, .’
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
if a woman, &c. Condition being problematical, because not according to Jewish law; it was Greek and Roman law. See App-118.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
12.] This verse corresponds to in Mat 19:9-but it is expressed as if the woman were the active party, and put away her husband, which was allowed by Greek and Roman law (see 1Co 7:13), but not by Jewish (see Deu 24:1; Jos. Antt. xv.7.10). This alteration in the verbal expression may have originated in the source whence Marks report was drawn. On , Grotius remarks, Mulier, cum domina sui non sit, si, marito relicto, ad aliud matrimonium se conferat, omnino adulterium committit, non interpretatione aliqua, aut per consequentiam, sed directe: ideo non debuit hic addi, .
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Reciprocal: Exo 20:14 – General Mat 19:9 – Whosoever Luk 16:18 – General Joh 4:18 – is not 1Co 7:4 – General 1Co 7:10 – Let
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2
The same rule applies to a wife that does to a husband.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 10:12. And if she herself put away, etc. Marks account is peculiar in representing the woman as seeking the divorce. This was unusual among the Jews (exceptional cases: Michal, 1Sa 25:44; Herodias, Mat 14:4), though it occurred among the Greeks and Romans. Probably in this confidential interview, the delicate subject was discussed in all its bearings (Matthew preserves particulars omitted here), and Mark preserves a specification more applicable to Gentile readers.