The Jewish Annotated New Testament (87 page)

FREEDOM FROM THE LAW

Greek philosophers such as Dio Chrysostom (first century CE) discussed the relationship of kings to the law of the state (Dio Chrys.,
Or
. 3.10; 14.7–18; 62.2). Kings could choose to follow the law without being subject to it. Similarly, Cynics and Essenes flouted cultural norms or obeyed them in extreme; in either case, they were demonstrating their freedom from the power of the bodily passions (Diogenes Laertius,
Vit. Phil.
6.72–73; Philo,
Hypoth.
11.3). For Jews, obedience to the law, or Torah, became the rallying cry of freedom, the vehicle for maintaining the divine covenant, and a demonstration of faithfulness to God, as reflected in the rabbinic aphorism “only one who engages in Torah study is truly liberated” (
m. Avot
6.2; see also 1 Macc 2.20–27; 2 Macc 6.18–7.42;
T. Moses
9.6). Paul did not understand the freedom vis-à-vis the law obtained in Christ as a license to immorality, as others did (see Rom 2.12–14; 6.15–18; 8.2; Gal 5.1), but portrayed freedom from sin as slavery “to righteousness” (Rom 6.18).

Slaves were neither subject to nor protected by imperial law; thus they were vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Freed persons were subject to certain laws but were denied the full range of protections and privileges, while citizens were bound to and protected by the laws of the state. In Paul’s allegorical schema of the old Mosaic covenant in the pre-Christ age, Gentiles were slaves and Jews were citizens. Christ freed Gentiles from sin so that they would no longer be slaves but free (7.22), transforming the exclusively Jewish Torah covenant into Gentile-inclusive
Christ’s law
(9.21). Some Jews predicted that all the commandments would be rendered obsolete in the end-time (
b. Nidd.
61b).

¹²
“All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything.
¹³
“Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food,”
^*
and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
¹⁴
And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power.
¹⁵
Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never!
¹⁶
Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, “The two shall be one flesh.”
¹⁷
But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.
¹⁸
Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself.
¹⁹
Or do you not know that your body is a temple
^*
of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own?
²⁰
For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body.

7
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is well for a man not to touch a woman.”
²
But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
³
The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
⁴
For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
⁵
Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
⁶
This I say by way of concession, not of command.
⁷
I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind.

⁸
To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am.
⁹
But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

¹⁰
To the married I give this command— not I but the Lord—that the wife should not separate from her husband
¹¹
(but if she does separate, let her remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

¹²
To the rest I say—I and not the Lord— that if any believer
*
has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her.
¹³
And if any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him.
¹⁴
For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
¹⁵
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. It is to peace that God has called you.
^*
16
Wife, for all you know, you might save your husband. Husband, for all you know, you might save your wife.

SEXUAL MORES

Sexual behavior attracted legal attention in antiquity. The Emperor Augustus’s attempt to regulate adultery mandated that an unfaithful wife be divorced, but it did not punish husbands who had sexual relations with unmarried women (
Lex Julia
123). Jewish law of the time defined adultery in terms of the wife’s infidelity but not the husband’s (as long as his sexual partner was unmarried [
Ant
. 3.12.1(274)]), since polygyny (a man marrying several women) was allowed. The husband’s
authority
over the wife’s body was presumed by Roman law, but not the wife’s
authority
over the husband’s body, the position advanced by Paul. Rabbinic law accorded women some authority over her husband’s body, namely, the right to sexual relations (
m
.
Ketub
. 5.6). The late first-century historian Plutarch advocated an ethic similar to Paul’s (
Mor
. 144b), as did the first century Stoic philosopher Musonius Rufus (frag. 9.5, 7).

Divorce was easily available and widely tolerated by Roman citizens. Conversely, Mk 10.2–12 bans divorce under any circumstances, while Mt 5.31–32 (and see Mt 1.9; Lk 16.18) permits divorce only in cases of “porneia,” sexual impropriety (see Deut 24.1). Jewish atitudes toward divorce were not homogeneous, as illustrated by the divergent rulings attributed to the two first-century sages Hillel and Shammai (
m. Git
. 9.10). King Herod’s sister Salome granted her own divorce, while Pharisees apparently forbade women from initiating divorce (
Ant.
4.8.23 [253]; 15.7.10 [259]; see also Philo,
Spec. Laws
3.5 [30–31]).

There is evidence for polygyny among Second Temple period Jews, yet the practice is condemned by the Essenes and Roman law (Josephus,
Ant.
12.4.6 [186–89]; 17.1.2 [14];
J.W.
1.24.2 [477],
m. Yebam.
4.11; CD 4.20–21; 11Q19 57.17–18; third century
Cod. Just.
5.5.2, and
Digest
48.5.12.12).

Celibacy was cultivated by some Essenes (Josephus,
J.W.
2.8.2 [119]) and, according to Philo, the Therapeutae, a Jewish enclave in Egypt (
Cont. Life
68). Jesus praises those who “make themselves eunuchs” for the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19.12), and the book of Revelation identifies the first who are saved in the final judgment as male
virgins
(Rev 14.4). In light of his expectation of the Christ’s imminent return, Paul was more concerned about
changes
in marital status than marital status per se. Nonetheless, Paul’s teachings inspired a second-century movement of Christian celibacy (
Acts of Paul and Thecla
3.5), and virginity was esteemed as a Christian virtue (Tertullian,
Exh. cast.
). The practice did not survive among Jews, perhaps in part because it was so emphasized by the early church. Christians began mandating celibacy for priests in the fourth century (Council of Elvira, canon 33). While the tradition of clerical celibacy continued in the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Church permitted clergy to remain married if they were already married at the time of their ordination (Council of Trullo, canon 13). After the Protestant Reformation, nearly all protestant churches abolished compulsory celibacy for clergy, though some sectarian movements (the Shakers) reintroduced it, and there were revivals of monastic orders in non-Roman Catholic churches (Anglicans).

¹⁷
However that may be, let each of you lead the life that the Lord has assigned, to which God called you. This is my rule in all the churches.
¹⁸
Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision.
¹⁹
Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but obeying the commandments of God is everything.
²⁰
Let each of you remain in the condition in which you were called.

²¹
Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. Even if you can gain your freedom, make use of your present condition now more than ever.
^*
22
For whoever was called in the Lord as a slave is a freed person belonging to the Lord, just as whoever was free when called is a slave of Christ.
²³
You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of human masters.
²⁴
In whatever condition you were called, brothers and sisters,
^*
there remain with God.

²⁵
Now concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.
²⁶
I think that, in view of the impending
^*
crisis, it is well for you to remain as you are.
²⁷
Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
²⁸
But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a virgin marries, she does not sin. Yet those who marry will experience distress in this life,
^*
and I would spare you that.
²⁹
I mean, brothers and sisters,
^*
the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none,
³⁰
and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no possessions,
³¹
and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away.