Matthew 1:19

An Exegetical Analysis of λάθρᾳ in Matthew 1:19: Syntactical Ambiguity and Translational Implications

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of λάθρᾳ in Matthew 1:19: Syntactical Ambiguity and Translational Implications is based on a b-greek discussion from April 6th, 2012. The initial discourse commenced with an analysis of the prosody of Matthew 1:19, focusing on the syntactical relationship of the adverb λάθρᾳ with the surrounding verbs. One participant proposed that the position of the unemphatic pronoun αὐτήν—naturally occurring in the second position within its intonation unit—suggests that λάθρᾳ does not directly modify ἀπολῦσαι. This interpretation posits that ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν forms a distinct intonation unit separate from ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ. Consequently, alternative phrasings, such as λάθρᾳ αὐτὴν ἀπολῦσαι or ἀπολῦσαι αὐτῆν λάθρᾳ, were considered more prosodically appropriate if λάθρᾳ were intended to modify ἀπολῦσαι.

The central exegetical issue under examination is the precise syntactical scope of the adverb λάθρᾳ (“secretly” or “privately”) in Matthew 1:19. The ambiguity lies in whether it modifies the preceding finite verb ἐβουλήθη (“he intended/resolved”) or the subsequent infinitive ἀπολῦσαι (“to divorce/release”). The chosen construal profoundly impacts the interpretation of Joseph’s character, his actions, and the narrative’s portrayal of his response to Mary’s pregnancy. A significant implication of this ambiguity is how Joseph sought to reconcile his righteousness with the cultural imperative of public shaming, thereby influencing the understanding of the divine intervention that follows.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)
Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, δίακαιος ὢν καὶ μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι, ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The text of Matthew 1:19 in Nestle 1904 is identical to that found in SBLGNT (2010).

Textual Criticism (NA28), Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

The text of Matthew 1:19 is remarkably stable across the major manuscript traditions. Critical editions such as the Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) present the same reading as Nestle 1904, with no significant textual variants affecting the interpretation of λάθρᾳ or its immediate syntactical context. The unanimity among early and later manuscripts provides high confidence in the established Greek text for this verse.

Lexical notes for key terms in Matthew 1:19:

• Ἰωσὴφ (Iōsēph): “Joseph.” A proper noun, identifying Mary’s betrothed husband.
• δίκαιος (dikaios): “righteous, just.” (BDAG 239 s.v. 1). This adjective is pivotal, describing Joseph’s moral character and providing the motivation for his dilemma concerning Mary’s unexpected pregnancy.
• θέλων (thelōn): A present active participle from θέλω, meaning “wanting, wishing, intending.” (BDAG 449 s.v. 1). It indicates Joseph’s volition in the situation.
• δειγματίσαι (deigmatisai): An aorist infinitive, meaning “to expose to public disgrace, to make an example of.” (BDAG 214 s.v. 1). This verb highlights the potential public shame Mary faced.
• ἐβουλήθη (eboulēthē): An aorist passive indicative form of the deponent verb βούλομαι, meaning “he willed, resolved, intended.” (BDAG 183 s.v. 1). This verb expresses Joseph’s internal decision or intention.
• λάθρᾳ (lathra): An adverb, meaning “secretly, privately, without the knowledge of others.” (BDAG 583 s.v.). This is the critical term whose syntactical connection is debated. Its semantic range emphasizes concealment.
• ἀπολῦσαι (apolysai): An aorist infinitive, meaning “to divorce, send away, release.” (BDAG 117 s.v. 3bα). In this context, it refers to the legal act of ending the betrothal/marriage.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The interpretation of Matthew 1:19 hinges critically on the syntactical construal of the adverb λάθρᾳ. Two primary interpretations emerge, each with distinct grammatical and rhetorical implications:

1. λάθρᾳ modifying ἐβουλήθη (“he *privately* intended to divorce her”):

• Grammatical Analysis: In this construal, λάθρᾳ directly modifies the main verb ἐβουλήθη, describing the *nature of Joseph’s intention* or resolution as being internal and concealed. The argument from prosody in the b-greek discussion, based on the placement of the unemphatic pronoun αὐτήν, suggests this as a plausible reading. The pronoun’s position (second in its intonation unit, following λάθρᾳ) separates λάθρᾳ from ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν, thereby making it more likely that λάθρᾳ modifies the preceding verb.
• Rhetorical Analysis: This emphasizes Joseph’s internal struggle and his desire to *conceal his thoughts* or decision-making process. His righteousness extends not only to his public actions but also to his private deliberations, ensuring that even his intention to divorce Mary was not done in a way that would prematurely or unnecessarily bring shame upon her. However, a counter-argument raised by another participant in the discussion highlights a potential weakness: a private *decision* (an internal state) does not inherently lessen the public shame of the *subsequent act* of divorce. If the divorce itself were public, then the privacy of his initial intention would not achieve the stated goal of “not wanting to expose her to public disgrace.”

2. λάθρᾳ modifying ἀπολῦσαι (“he intended *to divorce her secretly*”):

• Grammatical Analysis: Here, λάθρᾳ modifies the aorist infinitive ἀπολῦσαι, describing the *manner of the action* of divorcing. This means Joseph intended to carry out the divorce in a discreet or private manner. This is the more commonly accepted interpretation among major commentators, primarily due to its strong contextual coherence with the preceding clause.
• Rhetorical Analysis: This construal directly addresses the dilemma posed by Joseph’s righteousness and his unwillingness “to expose her to public disgrace” (μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι). By divorcing her “secretly” (e.g., through a less formal process requiring only two witnesses, as opposed to a public legal accusation which would involve greater exposure), Joseph could minimize the public scandal and shame for Mary. This interpretation portrays Joseph as actively seeking a means to mitigate the social consequences for Mary, aligning his actions with his righteous character and compassionate intent. While the prosodic argument might seem to push against this, the semantic and contextual force is often considered stronger in overall interpretation. As one participant noted, the contextual reason (avoiding shame) strongly suggests λάθρᾳ must relate to the *act* of divorcing, not just the intention.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

While linguistic prosodic analysis offers a compelling argument for associating λάθρᾳ with ἐβουλήθη, the broader narrative context and theological implications strongly favor connecting λάθρᾳ with ἀπολῦσαι. Joseph’s character as a righteous man (δίκαιος ὢν) and his explicit desire “not to expose her to public disgrace” (μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι) find their most direct and logical fulfillment if his intention was to execute the divorce itself in a discrete manner. A private intention alone would not achieve the objective of sparing Mary public shame, whereas a private act of divorce would. Therefore, the most coherent interpretation aligns Joseph’s resolve with the compassionate execution of the divorce.

Below are three translation suggestions for Matthew 1:19, reflecting the nuances of this exegetical discussion:

1. “And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, *intended privately* to divorce her.”
   This translation emphasizes the privacy of Joseph’s internal intention or decision, aligning with linguistic arguments that λάθρᾳ modifies ἐβουλήθη. It highlights his internal moral struggle and discreet deliberation.
2. “And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, intended *to divorce her secretly*.”
   This rendition connects λάθρᾳ with the act of divorce, reflecting Joseph’s desire to perform the action in a way that minimizes public shame for Mary. This is the prevailing scholarly view due to its strong contextual and theological fit within the narrative.
3. “And Joseph her husband, being righteous and unwilling to disgrace her, resolved *to dismiss her quietly*.”
   This translation offers a slightly softer phrasing for both “divorce” and “secretly,” aiming for a natural English flow while preserving the sense of Joseph’s benevolent intent to avoid public scandal by undertaking a private separation.