{
  "id": "a_ylyjmlli",
  "oid": 165412,
  "revision": 1,
  "revision_oid": 165413,
  "work": "orthodoxy",
  "edition": "pg16769-r1",
  "title": "The beginning as a court of appeal against custom",
  "anchors": [
    {
      "unit": "CH07.P016",
      "oid": 172,
      "role": null,
      "edition": "pg16769-r1",
      "paragraph": "CH07.P016",
      "exact": "Man may have had concubines as long as cows have had horns: still they are not a part of him if they are sinful.",
      "start": 952,
      "end": 1064,
      "prefix": "riginal good anything but good. ",
      "suffix": " Men may have been under oppress",
      "url": "/orthodoxy/pg16769-r1/CH07.P016#char=952,1064"
    }
  ],
  "body_markdown": "The argumentative pattern closely resembles Jesus' answer about divorce in Matthew 19:3–9. His interlocutors appeal to Mosaic permission; Jesus appeals behind that permission to creation, joining the creation of male and female to the two becoming one flesh. The King James Version renders his distinction: ‘but from the beginning it was not so’ (19:8). Antiquity and even legal permission therefore do not settle what human union ought to be. Chesterton extends that pattern from divorce to concubinage and oppression: a practice can be historically pervasive without belonging to humanity's original good. This is a textual parallel, not proof that Matthew was his immediate source. [Matthew 19:3–9, KJV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A3-9&version=KJV).\n\nThe claim that the ideal precedes the world's foundations also uses biblical diction. Ephesians 1:4 places election to holiness ‘before the foundation of the world’; John 17:24 uses the same phrase of the Father's love for Christ. Neither verse describes Eden as existing before creation. Chesterton combines the biblical language of a purpose before creation with the narrative of an original human condition; his sentence is a theological synthesis rather than a quotation of one verse. The inspected Bible is Project Gutenberg's electronic KJV witness; the English translation was first published in 1611. [Ephesians 1:4; John 17:24](https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10).",
  "sources": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A3-9&version=KJV",
      "title": "Matthew 19:3–9, King James Version",
      "locator": "19:4–8; KJV first published 1611",
      "exact": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10",
      "title": "The King James Version of the Bible",
      "locator": "Ephesians 1:4; John 17:24; electronic text updated October 29, 2024",
      "exact": null
    }
  ],
  "citations": [],
  "external_references": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A3-9&version=KJV",
      "title": "Matthew 19:3–9, KJV"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10",
      "title": "Ephesians 1:4; John 17:24"
    }
  ],
  "limits": [
    "The parallel does not establish Chesterton's direct dependence on Matthew 19."
  ],
  "metadata": {
    "run": "chapter-07-restart-2026-11-07",
    "paragraph_investigator": "P016",
    "task": [
      {
        "approach": "Biblical references",
        "question": "What biblical argument allows an original good to judge ancient sexual custom?"
      },
      {
        "approach": "Theological contextualization",
        "question": "Does the doctrine that slavery is foreign to created nature necessarily entail Chesterton's revolution?"
      }
    ],
    "model": "gpt-6.1-sol"
  },
  "content_sha256": "sha256:506080174ce53207c58990b0f5276d38f32780cb9c5c43958af4775de9e017e2",
  "created_at": "2026-11-07T18:08:03Z",
  "is_current": true,
  "url": "/a/a_ylyjmlli",
  "revision_path": "/a/a_ylyjmlli/r/1",
  "cited_by": []
}