Biblical Marriage and Cultural Dynamics
How
does the institution of marriage get defined?
Better yet, why do we define the institution of marriage the way we
do? For generations Western society has
defined marriage as a covenant or contract between two people who happen to be
male and female. This definition is said
to have biblical roots, but does the Bible have one consistent vision of
marriage?
We
know that polygamy was practiced in ancient Israel. Abraham had at least two wives, David had
several, and Solomon had many wives and concubines. But the time we get to the New Testament age
(first century CE), it does appear that in Jewish circles monogamy was standard
practice. It does seem that things
change over time, but even if there is no “biblical pattern” for marriage, is
there nothing that we can learn about marriage in all its complexity from our
reading of the Scriptures that are treasured by Jew and Christian?
It
is my intent to write a study guide that seeks to discern insights from
Scripture relating to marriage. While
this is not a book on gay marriage or marriage equality, my belief is that
these texts can apply equally to heterosexual and same-sex marriages. Passages like Genesis 2, in which God looks
at his creation, and discerns that the man he created was lonely, and God
created a companion fit for him. What is
the message of that passage? Then
there’s a passage like 1 Corinthians 7, where it appears that Paul prefers the
single state to the married state, but if one doesn’t have the gift, it is
better to marry than to burn (with lust?).
As
we begin this journey (and I will be trying out ideas for the book on this
blog), I thought the story of the marriages of Jacob might be instructive.
In
this story, Isaac and Rebecca decide that it would be better if Jacob found a
wife among their clan, rather than from within the Canaanite community (Genesis28:1-5). As the story goes, Jacob meets
Rachel, the daughter of Laban, the brother of Rebecca. Apparently it’s okay to marry first cousins
in “biblical times.” He falls in love
and seeks her hand in marriage. Laban
agrees to the transaction (yes this was a transaction), though Jacob is going
to have to work for seven years before he can marry his beloved. Now, that seems rather long, doesn’t it? Would you wait seven years to get married?
Jacob
works the seven years, and then on the wedding day, Laban sends in his daughter
to Jacob’s tent. The “happy couple”
consummates the marriage. Then the next
morning, to his surprise, Jacob wakes up and finds that the woman with whom he
has shared a bed isn’t his beloved Rachel, but is instead her older sister –
Leah. Jacob is furious. He’s been tricked – which is a reversal of
fortune since it’s usually Jacob who is the trickster – and he won’t stand for
being taken advantage of.
What
is interesting about this story is Laban’s response to Jacob. Laban simply says to his nephew and now
son-in-law: This is not done in our
country – giving the younger before the first-born. Now Jacob will receive Rachel as his wife,
but Rachel will be his second wife. He
might love her more than he loves Leah, which is the cause of tension going
forward, but the point that Laban makes is that community standards will
prevail. These might not be Jacob’s
standards, but they are Laban’s, and he’s going to enforce them.
What
is the implication of this story for us?
Obviously, we will likely find abhorrent the idea that one must purchase
a spouse, even if that means working for seven years. We might want to side with Leah, who gets
married, but remains unloved. She has
lovely eyes, but Rachel has the good figure.
Could it be that the way we understand marriage evolves over time. Definitions differ from one community to
another. In many cultures, polygamy is
still acceptable. In Africa the practice
of polygamy has been a major concern for churches. If they demand that converts become
monogamous, then there will be women who are abandoned. Is this just?
Is it necessary? At least in the
near term?
In
Laban’s mind – in his community – you won’t find younger daughters getting
married before the older one. It’s simply not done.
In
the United States, which is where I live, it wasn’t that long ago that many
states had on their books laws that prohibited inter-racial marriage. This simply wasn’t allowed. Those laws have long been repealed and for
the most part society has welcomed inter-racial marriage. Today the issue is gay marriage or marriage
equality. The response of some in our
society is a bit like that of Laban – we just do that kind of thing in our
community. But, while Jacob acquiesced
to Laban’s rules, apparently this wasn’t the rule in his own community. At least he wasn’t aware of the tradition of
Laban’s country.
There
is much in this story about deception – Jacob was a deceiver, got deceived, and
will deceive again. There is also the
cultural dynamics present. Even though
it does appear that Jacob and Rachel loved each other, Laban wasn’t as
concerned about their affection for each other as he was in making sure the
oldest daughter didn’t get pushed aside.
I’m not sure that Laban was as concerned about Leah’s feelings, as he
was about making sure he got his money’s worth.
If it appeared that Leah wasn’t marriage material, he would lose his
investment. In the end Jacob agrees to
work off the debt to receive Rachel’s hand, but there appears to be no love for
Leah in his heart.
What
is interesting is that as the story continues, God sees Leah’s plight and
blesses her with children, even as Rachel finds it difficult to have
children. Blessings come in different
ways in the biblical story.
The
question that this story poses for us is how we should read these stories and
the way in which they speak to marriage customs. How do we separate out what was cultural and
what is relevant going forward into the present?
Comments