Sun Kwak, “Tell It Slant”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOpgt-JBcL4

TEXT: Mark 10:1-12

[1] And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them.

[2] And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” [3] He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” [4] They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” [5] And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. [6] But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ [7] ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, [8] and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. [9] What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

[10] And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. [11] And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, [12] and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

SERMON: “Tell It Slant”

So, I don’t know if you ever look back at old pictures or relive some old memories. And you just cringe. Am I the only one? Questionable fashion choices, outdated diction. There’s something that C. S. Lewis calls chronological snobbery— where we always assume that what’s right at the moment has always been right. But one of the silly regrets I have — and I have many, for the record. But this one, I don’t think will ever age well in any era or stage of life I’m in. And it’s about how Judy and I did our wedding vows. Now, for the record, we are happily married. But as some of you might know about me and may have heard me say, through this personality assessment tool called the Enneagram, I’m an Enneagram Type 4. And Judy has a 4 wing. And the 4 is called the individualist. So, one of the things that this means is that we don’t like doing things the way everyone else does them. We want to be unique and special and one of a kind. And so, for our wedding, we thought it would be special to write our own vows. And so, in essence, we wrote each other letters. I guess the words in Scripture weren’t fancy enough for us at the time. And what I regret, in some sense, is that what we essentially did is not make vows but make oaths. We were promising each other — I won’t leave you, forsake you, debilitate you. And that’s all well and good, but the problem is that these aren’t vows. And I know it’s a nuance, and it might seem like a silly nuance. But the difference between an oath and a vow is that an oath is made from person to person, while a vow is made to God. And the reason why the vows are now one of my favorite parts when officiating weddings is that these are words that we speak to God, trusting not in our human ability to keep promises. But in reciting words of God’s covenant faithfulness. I’m reminded of words from an elderly lady who was in attendance at a wedding. And as one recalls, this was when the young couple was pronouncing vows and the I do’s in the ceremony. And this lady leans over and says — They’ll need those for tomorrow. And tomorrow not meaning the next 24 hours — hopefully not. But tomorrow as in one day. One day when the puppy love fades. One day when the looks of bliss and affection dissipate. One day when feelings of annoyance seem to overshadow compatibility. One day when broken trust challenges the commitment to their vows. They’ll need those for tomorrow. To remember God’s covenant faithfulness even in the midst of their human frailty and lapses. And it’s something that I want to uncover with us today, as we look into how Jesus doesn’t shy away from but dives into the messiness of divorce and all the things tangled up with it. Showing to us his covenant faithfulness. They’ll need those for tomorrow. Because of the one who, according to Hebrews 12:24 is the same yesterday, today, tomorrow, and forevermore.

The context of our passage is that Jesus is on what’s known as his retirement journey. These are the last six months of his ministry. I remember when Kobe Bryant was doing his retirement tour in his last year of playing in the NBA. And arenas that once booed him applauded his introduction, because they knew this was his last season. Jesus didn’t get that kind of reception. He’s now in Perea, and this is the far east, on the other side of the Jordan River. It’s from here where he’ll turn westward and journey his way to Jerusalem. And when Luke records in his Gospel that he set his face toward Jerusalem, this was a commitment to making his death march. This was near the last stages of his ministry, his end game where he will ultimately meet his death on the cross. And it’s into this far region that these Pharisees are following Jesus. Not to applaud him, not welcome him, not to appreciate the work that he had done. But they are so committed to trapping Jesus that they’re now following his every move. And how suffocating does this sound? I mean, I need space from the people I love and the people I like — it’s the way I recharge. But here, Jesus is constantly around and harassed by people who hate him and want to bring any form of accusation against him.

And here, we have these Pharisees who are said to test him. And this is a word with evil intent. This same word was used of Satan back in the wilderness back in chapter 1, when he was tempting Jesus. And while he conquered that moment, it’s not over, as this testing continues. And so, he’s under this constant pressure and duress, not just against human powers but especially against evil powers and forces. And at this particular moment, what these Phariseesdecide to put on the table is the topic of divorce. And it’s not because they’re particularly concerned for the welfare of those in relational tension. But it’s a trap, because this doctrine was a tricky and divisive one. For one, this area of Perea was under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas. And if you look back at a moment of flashback for Mark, we see this recalled in chapter 6, where John the Baptist was beheaded for accusing Herod Antipas of adultery and marital infidelity. So, it’s not necessarily safe waters to be talking about a topic like divorce in this public setting and to possibly bring about anything related to adultery or accusations toward adultery. But of course, they do, leaving Jesus with this slippery scenario.

And I don’t know how you react when you’re put in these sticky situations. But if you remember in the season of COVID, nothing you did was the right decision. Mask, no mask, six feet, outside, online, in person. There seemed to be nothing you could do that was right. And it’s a bit like this with the situation that the Pharisees have put Jesus in. Once again, it’s not just a divorce question. But there’s some devious intent here. Because these Pharisees knew what kinds of ramifications a misstep or misspoken word could have with, not just Herod Antipas, but with the mass population of the Jews. Because this was a topic that divided the Jews into two camps. And it’s a division that had widened further and further over time. It’s not too dissimilar to if someone today were to ask if you were a Democrat or a Republican in our American context. I remember seeing this picture some time ago, where two neighboring families take a picture together, and they’re holding signs — They’re Republicans (arrow sign to the left). And then another sign — They’re Democrats (arrow sign to the right). And then the kids holding a sign — And we love each other. And it was heartwarming, but it kind of tells you an underlying message — They’re not actually supposed to like each other. And that’s a little like what is being stated here. These two sides, because of this topic, often didn’t get along with one another. And the two sides were how the divorce law in Deuteronomy 24, which is alluded to in our passage — how this Old Testament law was interpreted.

Here, this certificate of divorce in verse 4 relates to the words found in Deuteronomy 24:1, where we find this reference to this certificate of divorce. This was contingent upon the husband finding some indecency, as the ESV translates it. And the camps become divided according to how one understood this indecency. And more woodenly, it’s a word that’s translated as nakedness or nakedness of the matter — the Hebrew word davar. And here’s where the division would occur. That for the side of those who followed the teachings of Rabbi Shamai, it was about a woman being found naked with another outside of her marriage. Literally, being caught in an adulterous act. But for those who followed the teachings of Rabbi Hillel, it was not just about adultery but about any indecency, which made the man the ultimate judge of what was considered to be indecent. It was not only vague but incredibly subjective. An indecencycould be the way food was made, the way the house was kept, the way the wife dressed in public. Which is where you could see the power dynamics slanted in an unjust and cruel way. There were a myriad of things, under this understanding, that the man could accuse his wife of, in order to issue this certificate of divorce. And you could assume that Jesus has thoughts about this, in particular with the teachings of Rabbi Hillel, because this brought about considerable injustice toward women, which Jesus wasn’t ignoring. But Jesus knows the intent of these Pharisees, and so, he doesn’t engage with them on their tactics on creating division. Because instead of saying that he sides with either rabbi, he shows that there’s a greater authority that he submits to. That he’s not subject to manmade interpretations of the law — after all, it was the very law that he created.

Jeannine Brown, who’s a professor of New Testament at Bethel, shares on this matter from a unique perspective — as both a biblical scholar whose aim is to be responsible to what the text says while the human experience of seeing all of this from a woman’s perspective in our modern world. And one of her areas of expertise was with the history of divorce and how it was understood according to biblical context. And hers was a perspective where she was observing all of these slants toward the injustice directed toward women with how men in power had abused this law. And how this progressed over time. That men had within their legal recourse the right to initiate divorce. But it wasn’t within a woman’s rights to divorce her husband. And this, of course, can’t have sat well with her all those years studying these laws. And this injustice and abuse, again, wasn’t just what was on paper but with how this had developed layers and layers of injustice and assumptions about the power dynamics in a marriage relationship and regarding men and women in society, as a whole. Towards the end of the interview, she’s asked point blank how she as a woman who sees these injustices throughout history against woman in biblical history — how she’s stayed committed to being a biblical scholarand has stayed committed to her faith in the God of the Scriptures. And she paused for a moment but then responded — Because I have forgiveness in Christ, and that can never not be a part of the equation. And here’s why this isn’t just a blanket statement.

Because what Jesus responds with to the Pharisees is what we read in verses 6-9: “But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” These are the sacred words of summary of what happened at the very beginning of creation, before sin had come and stained the world and made us all covenant breakers. And we read in Malachi 4 of how God hates divorce. Those are strong words, as the one who created and first instituted marriage. And so, if he saw covenant infidelity and people breaking vows, doing the very thing he hates, why not just remove himself from the situation? Because while we are vow breakers, that’s not the end of the story. There’s a stronger word than our words to God, and it’s his words to us. Because what we read with the creational ordinance of marriage here repeated in verses 6-9 and in particular the bridegroom leaving his father and holding fast to his bride. This is ultimately what Jesus did. It’s he who left his Father’s home — his rights and his privileges in heaven. It’s he who would hold fast to his bride, even when we with wavering eyes and wandering hearts leave him in our sinning and idolatry. And it’s this union that God puts together, saying — Whatever God has joined together, let not man separate. That while we sin, while we rebel, while we make regrettable choices, while we commit idolatrous sins, while we hurt our God. Even with this and everything we say and do, what God has put together, we cannot separate. What’s done is done. That because of Jesus’ life-giving commitment to cling to us, to hold fast to us, he was held fast and was clung to the cross. In order that God’s saving grip would never loosen on our wavering hearts. And he would battle it directly, stepping out of his perfect relationship with his Father in heaven in order to run toward his idolatrous and adulterous bride. For here, he steps into this covenant infidelity and radically does the unthinkable — not only to come to idolatrous and adulterous people. But to step back into covenant relationship with we who had broken our covenant vows, knowing that to do so would cost him — it would cost him his life, considering our offenses. Because these are words for tomorrow. We’ll always need those for tomorrow. And tomorrow not meaning the next 24 hours. But tomorrow as in one day. One day when the puppy love fades. One day when the bliss and affection dissipate. One day when feelings of annoyance seem to overshadow convenience. One day when broken trust challenges our commitment to our vows. We’ll need those for tomorrow. To remember not ours but God’s covenant faithfulness even in the midst of our human frailty and lapses.

And here’s how I want to begin closing, and this will be short. Because what Jeannine Brown says is not, once again, a blanket statement. Because I have forgiveness in Christ, and that can never not be a part of the equation. Because there is something binding there, something stronger and more overwhelming. Because while the Pharisees are turning to man’s words, what Jesus shows is that there is a greater and more authoritative word. So, a two part application, and I don’t usually do application directly, so really take this as a bonus. For those of us who are married, let’s be anchored not in the fuzzy feelings inside or when we look at our spouse. But let’s be anchored in Christ’s covenant faithfulness to us. We can’t expect our spouses to be Jesus — they belong to God and aren’t meant to take his place. For us in broken marriages or ones that are hanging on by a thread, Jesus cares about your marriage. And he left heaven’s throne in order to show you what kind of love ought to be reciprocated toward and from one another in our marriage. Look to Jesus, the one who left his Father to cling to us. And lastly, for those whose marriages have been wrecked by infidelity— by yours or your counterpart’s. For those who have been divorced and have this tainted picture when it comes to marriage. For those who have grown up around divorce and even abuse in the home. None of that is unseen by Jesus. And your ex-husband, your ex-wife does NOT get the final word on Jesus’ ultimate commitment to you. And your marital track record doesn’t get the final word on whether Jesus commits himself to you. It’s contingent upon Jesusand Jesus alone. And while you might feel undeserving and unworthy, maybe you can teach us what that feels like, because it’s the way we all ought to feel. For Jesus didn’t dive into a convenient relationship with us — it cost him his life. Let’s remember that, let’s marinate in that, and let’s build our relationships through that.