What Is Biblical Marriage?
When asked if I support the biblical definition of marriage, I often ask which one?. This question usually gets me a surprised look. You may find it quite surprising that the Bible does not have one singular definition of biblical marriage. To examine this subject, let’s start at the very beginning of the Bible.
The Bible records the first humans, Adam and Eve, as having two sons. No other children are recorded in the scriptures. However, most Old Testament scholars will concede that Adam and Eve most likely had other children, particularly female children. Why? Because biology dictates to us that humans come from procreation, from sexual contact. Since this is the case, if you accept the creation story as literal, Adam and Eve’s sons must have procreated with their sisters. Since most people that take the Bible literally also believe that sex outside of marriage is sinful, that means that Adam and Eve’s children must have been married to each other. Does this mean that the Bible supports incest or incestual marriage? If you accept the literal reading of Genesis, there seems to be little other option.
It also doesn’t take very long in reading the scriptures to see that many men in the Ancient Near East at that time had multiple wives. Nowhere in the Bible is this specifically condemned. Even more so, Solomon, the supposed wisest man that ever lived, was reported to have 300 wives and 700 concubines. Does this mean that the Bible also supports polygamy?
It is also important to point out that marriage in the Bible was not always done because of mutual love. Women were considered property in the Old Testament specifically, One did not always marry for love. Indeed, arranged marriages happen even today and that certainly was the norm in biblical times. It isn’t until we get to the New Testament that we see monogamous marriage supported, specifically by the Apostle Paul. Did God change his or her mind in regards to marriage? What are we do with all of this?
First, a literal reading of the Bible will stymie even the most biblically literate person alive. It is apparent that many of the stories in the Bible were not meant to be taken literally. As an example, the story of Adam and Eve is most likely not literal. Rather, it was the Jewish people telling a story in the genre of myth that would explain their origins. The beauty of these so-called “myths” in the Bible is that if we take them at face value, in a literal reading, we can come to some good conclusions, but if we rip off the veneer of literalism, we can mine for truthful treasures among the stories, stories about revealed truth that might not be apparent at face value. In my humble opinion, the story of Adam and Eve in the Bible is much more about the origins of evil in the universe and where our standing is before God revealing that we were created in God’s image and thus, must be, at our core, based in goodness. (The book Original Blessing by Danniele Shroyer has really helped me with this understanding.) Thus, the Bible isn’t speaking about marriage in these passages or even making a comment on gender. It is simply a larger myth wrapped in a story with hidden truthfulness to be mined.
Second, it is apparent that God did not seem that concerned with marriage in the Old Testament or its emphasis on women as property, that is, if we take the Bible readings literally, or even if we don’t take them literally. Even beloved characters like Jacob had multiple wives. It makes much more sense to view these stories as an unfolding of revelation. It could simply be that God didn’t have that much to say about marriage and even allowed men to have multiple wives. However, what do we do with the passage in Exodus 20, commonly called The Ten Commandments? If God isn’t that concerned with marriage and if marriage is seen as a business transaction with women as property, then it would make perfect sense to limit whose property you were willing to violate. If the Bible is not clear in the Old Testament about the concept of marriage, how can it be clear in the concept of adultery, at least in moralistic terms?
Third, when we get to the New Testament, we see rather clearly the emergence of monogamy as the standard. This is probably due more to Roman rule and influence rather than a changing moral attitude. The Apostle Paul speaks about marriage a lot and even condemns adultery and so-called fornication (premarital sex). What are we to do with the Apostle Paul? There are several things to consider here. First, Paul comes in with a patriarchal understanding of the world, that men are superior to women. That is clear in some of his writing where he commands women to be silent in the church. Second, Paul never really defines systematically what adultery is. Is adultery primarily a violation of marital promises? Is it any sexual relationship involving a person who is married? Is the moral issue sexual exclusivity itself, or deception and betrayal? Can a couple mutually redefine the boundaries of its marriage without violating its commitments? Next, Paul seems to base his understanding of an individual's choice to marry based on his expectations that the end of the age was nigh. It is easy to see in Paul’s writings that he expected Christ to return within his lifetime. As we well know, Paul was wrong. If Paul was wrong about this, what else was he wrong about?
Next, we see that Paul’s sexual ethic appears to be overly restrictive. He views sexual pleasure in and of itself not in line with godliness. As an example, in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, he mentions that he prefers people did not marry, but may marry if they cannot exercise self-control. Not only does this point to the fact that Paul expected Christ’s imminent return, but also that Paul did not have the proper scientific understanding that we have today that sex is not only not bad for you, it’s actually good for you. (It should also be noted here that most likely, Paul never married.)
Additionally, in 1 Corinthians 7:4, Paul writes that men and women have control over each other’s bodies. It should be noted here that despite Paul’s writings being very steeped in Old World patriarchy, this declaration is not based on that. Paul does genuinely seem to be concerned with marriage vows. For what it’s worth, I am not arguing that marriage vows are unimportant and can be ethically violated. It’s very important to distinguish here what isn’t addressed and that is consent. In Romans 13:9, Paul repeats the commandment against adultery. But he does not discuss a married couple who mutually agrees that each spouse may have sexual relationships with other consenting adults. In a society like Rome, this was somewhat common. So why did Paul not condemn this?
It is also to be noted here that a person’s hermeneutic will determine how we take the Apostle Paul. Some Christians regard Paul's letters as authoritative Scripture whose teachings must govern Christian conduct. Others emphasize the need to interpret Paul through the historical circumstances of his letters, the central Christian message of love, and the ethical implications of his teachings today. For example, a Christian might argue that Paul's underlying concern was faithfulness, justice, and love rather than the enforcement of every social convention of his time. Does Paul prohibit adultery? Yes, he does, even going so far as quoting the original Ten Commandments in his letter. However, as we have established, adultery in the Ancient Near East is hard to define and it appears that Paul may have read into those passages himself, not understanding the ethical and theological implications of today.
In my personal opinion, biblical marriage is hard to quantify with so many definitions of marriage in the Bible and Paul reads into these passages himself, interpreting them in the light of his own personal feelings about marriage in his time. If one takes the Bible literally, then they must concede that it is unclear as to what marriage is and even more unclear as to what would constitute adultery. It also simply might be that Paul’s ethics of love and justice are much more important than his prohibitions concerning marriage in light of a modern understanding of love and marriage. One could even argue that mutual consent within marriage would allow for sexual activity outside of marriage.
In conclusion, biblical marriage is hard to define beyond what is culturally permissible at the time. In current times, incestuous marriage and polygamy are taboo (the Bible does specifically condemn incest), but monogamy was not always considered the cultural norm and therefore, cannot be considered as the biblical norm.
