Cory Thompson
This past year was a slower one for my reading habits. Much of my time and attention was taken up by a major church remodeling project that consumed a significant portion of my schedule. Most of the reading I did was directly related to sermon preparation. Although I read several books, only one was particularly noteworthy and worth recommending.
Remarriage in Early Christianity by A. Andrew Das (Eerdmans 2024) is a meticulous examination of early Christianity’s understanding of divorce and remarriage. With a focus on historical context, exegesis of relevant New Testament texts, and evaluation of the writings of the early church fathers, Das argues for a consistent understanding, from Jesus to the Council of Nicaea, that remarriage after divorce was not permitted. This book provides a scholarly and compelling challenge to the widely held contemporary view in the church that remarriage is permissible after divorce.
Das begins his study by evaluating the cultural view of divorce and remarriage during the time of Jesus. He concludes that Jewish and Greco-Roman societies were generally more accepting of these practices, making the New Testament’s teaching counter-cultural. Das also critiques the commonly held assumption that Jesus’ teachings on divorce in Matthew 19 are tied to the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel. While virtually all New Testament interpreters assume this debate underpins the text, Das finds such a connection unsubstantiated. The references to Shammai and Hillel come from the Mishnah, a rabbinic text written more than 200 years after the New Testament era. Das argues that there is no evidence in either the New Testament or other contemporary literature to suggest Jesus was addressing this specific debate. He believes this represents an anachronistic use of later texts to interpret earlier ones.
The book explores the relevant biblical texts, particularly the Gospels and Paul’s letters. A focal point of Das’s analysis is the “exception clause” in Matthew 19:9. Through a careful lexical study, he argues that the Greek word porneia, often translated as “sexual immorality,” was used because it more inclusively referred to both men’s and women’s adultery, whereas moicheia (adultery) primarily referred to men’s actions.
Das concludes that the “exception clause” in Matthew 19:9 modifies “divorce,” not “marries another.” In other words, divorce is permissible on the grounds of sexual immorality, but remarriage is not. He further supports this interpretation by referencing Matthew 19:12, which he believes indicates that, in the aftermath of divorce, some have become celibate.
Das also examines 1 Corinthians 7:15, a contentious text among interpreters who argue it permits remarriage. Proponents base their argument on the phrase “not under bondage” (NKJV). Similar language appears in Romans 7:3 and 1 Corinthians 7:39, where widows are said to be free to remarry after their husbands’ deaths. Das challenges this view, noting that the context of 1 Corinthians 7:15 concerns divorce, not the death of a spouse. Additionally, the Greek word translated as “not under bondage” in this verse differs from the terms used in Romans 7:3 and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Instead, Das argues that “not under bondage” is better understood as “not enslaved” (douleuo), a term Paul frequently uses to describe obligations under the Mosaic Law.
This language is used because, in 1 Corinthians 7:10, he quotes a command from the Lord: “A wife is not to depart from her husband.” Along with this, Paul explicitly forbids divorce three more times in the surrounding verses. In this context, Das interprets “not enslaved” to mean that a believer whose unbelieving spouse abandons them is not bound by the divorce command. Their conscience is free in this situation, but Paul does not grant permission for remarriage. Das concludes that remarriage is permissible only after the death of a spouse, though he suggests it may be better not to remarry (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:8).
In the final section of the book, the post-apostolic era up to the Council of Nicaea is examined, evaluating whether early Christians were more influenced by Scripture or asceticism in their views on divorce and remarriage. Das concludes that the early church remained consistent in its opposition to remarriage based on biblical teachings.
Remarriage in Early Christianity is a critical book that deserves serious attention. Since its release this past summer, it has received only a few reviews and interactions. I suspect that in the coming year, the topic of divorce and remarriage will become a heated discussion. Das’s scholarship on this topic is a force to be reckoned with. New Testament scholar Thomas Schreiner described the book as “an amazing piece of scholarship.” Schreiner, who believes divorce and remarriage are permissible in certain circumstances, has even suggested that this book is causing him to reconsider his position.
Cory Thompson’s Remarriage In Early Christianity review was worth reading. His comments were balanced. Adding Schreiner’s remarks was hepful.