What cultural norms of marriage does John 4:18 challenge? Text Under Discussion “‘For you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. You have spoken truthfully.’ ” (John 4:18) First-Century Marital Landscape The Samaritan woman stood at the intersection of three overlapping cultures: 1. Samaritan Torah-based tradition, which, like Judaism, acknowledged Deuteronomy 24:1-4 and thus permitted divorce with a written certificate. 2. Wider Jewish legal debates. The School of Hillel allowed divorce for virtually any cause; Shammai restricted it to sexual immorality. Both assumed male initiative; women rarely had legal recourse. 3. Greco-Roman civil law, under which either spouse could dissolve a marriage with a simple declaration (cf. Gaius, Institutes 1.52), and serial remarriage was common. Concubinage (contubernium) provided socially tolerated cohabitation without legal marriage. Norm #1 – Serial Divorce and Remarriage Viewed as Acceptable Jesus’ disclosure—“five husbands”—exposes a culture where repeated divorce was routine. By affirming that history as sinful rather than merely unfortunate, He challenges a permissive mindset that treated the marriage covenant as disposable. Later, He will declare in Judea, “Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Mark 10:9), reaffirming the Edenic model of lifelong, exclusive union (Genesis 2:24). Norm #2 – Cohabitation Without Covenant “The man you now have is not your husband.” Roman concubinage and Samaritan custom tolerated informal unions, especially for widows seeking economic security. Jesus rejects that accommodation. Covenant, not convenience, defines marriage (Malachi 2:14). Any sexual relationship outside a publicly recognized, God-ordained covenant remains immoral, regardless of societal leniency. Norm #3 – Male-Centric Control of Marital Status In both Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts, men dictated marriage and divorce. By addressing the woman directly, Jesus confers moral agency on her. He neither excuses her situation as a victim of patriarchy nor diminishes her responsibility. This confronts the cultural assumption that only men’s decisions “count” in defining marital legitimacy. Norm #4 – Ethno-Religious and Gender Barriers in Marital Discourse A Jewish rabbi speaking theology with a Samaritan woman alone (John 4:9, 27) shattered conventions of segregation. While not strictly a “marriage norm,” this boundary-breaking conversation reframes purity concerns: true purity hinges on worship “in spirit and truth” (John 4:24), not ethnic pedigree or social avoidance. Biblical Ideal Reasserted By linking her marital history to her spiritual thirst, Jesus re-anchors marriage in the creation ordinance—monogamous, lifelong, covenantal, and God-glorifying. The Samaritan woman’s encounter anticipates Ephesians 5:31-32, where earthly marriage pictures Christ’s covenant with the Church. Archaeological and Textual Corroboration • Jacob’s Well (John 4:6) is still identifiable near modern Nablus, lending geographic credibility. • First-century divorce decrees on papyri (e.g., P.Oxy. 2673) confirm how brief and frequent dissolutions could be, paralleling “five husbands.” • The early manuscript tradition (𝔓66, 𝔓75, Codex Sinaiticus) carries John 4 unchanged, underscoring textual reliability. Summary John 4:18 confronts and overturns: 1. The cultural casualness of divorce and remarriage. 2. The acceptability of non-covenantal cohabitation. 3. Male-dominated definitions of marital legitimacy. 4. Ethnic and gender taboos that obstruct redemptive dialogue. In doing so, the verse calls every culture—ancient and modern—back to God’s original, life-giving design for marriage. |
    |