QUESTION: How are we to defend marriage in the public
square as being between ONE man and ONE wife when Old Testament is littered
with polygamy? “I'm barren so I’ll give
you my servant”?? When talking to a non
Christian, this whole idea seems so discrediting. I think these women are crazy
to let their husbands sleep with anyone else but my goodness, how come these
men don't just say no?!?!
RESPONSE: Great question and let me address your second
question first because it relates to the Biblical ideal. And that’s
important because if we can’t establish a cohesive biblical ideal, then it does
seem weird to argue for a set of sexual morals in society when our holy book
doesn't even seem to have a consistent message itself. The fact is,
despite instances of polygamy, the Bible DOES have a consistent sexual ideal
and design. In fact, the occurrences of polygamy in Scripture help us
respond to the challenge of homosexuality in the present as you’ll see.
God’s
sexual model is revealed on the first pages in the creation narrative (Gen 1-2)
and the same model is affirmed throughout the Bible, most importantly by Christ
himself who actually deepened our understanding of the importance of it (Matt 19:1-9).
Finally Paul indicates that faithful, loving, heterosexual monogamy was the
only marriage model the Church affirmed (1 Tim 3:12).
Yes,
intermixed with this simple model are descriptions of sexual models and customs
that conflict with it, but those have to be understood in relation to the
overall teaching of Scripture and their specific intent. The first
description of someone perverting God’s marriage model is Lamech (Gen 4) who is
the first polygamist. His actions are not put forward as a new ideal or a
new permissible option for marriage… he’s an illustration of what the Fall into
sin has done in perverting God’s good design.
So
now remember when I taught on the difference between PRESCRIPTION and
DESCRIPTION in Scripture? God never PRESCRIBES any marriage model except
one: one man, one woman, for life. He often DESCRIBES many other
models in his Word. Polygamy being one. “Levirate marriage” being
another – that was when a brother in law was required to marry his sister-in-law
if his brother died without leaving any sons. These are examples of
marriage practices that God doesn't specifically initiate, but in some cases
“tolerates” or “manages” until the new creation period brought in by Christ –
who comes to RESTORE God’s creation desires and designs. Polygamy is a
fundamental desecration of this larger design.
When
the law comes and talks about polygamy, keep in mind that it is merely a
temporary steward of God’s People to temper the devastating effects of sin –
not God’s ideal order. So, for example, Levirate marriage was a specific
form of polygamy that God tolerates in his law after the Fall to help widows be
cared for who wouldn't be otherwise without sons. In the new creation
period, however, this provision goes away as widows are to be cared for by the
Church rather than find plural marriage partners (1 Tim 5:16).
Therefore,
polygamy being practiced by Old Testament characters or being talked about in
the law of Moses is not an endorsement or presentation of “just another
lifestyle choice” or evidence of conflicting marriage models. Contrary to what this internet meme is meant to convey:
Remember, polygamy
PREDATES Mosaic Law. Thus biblical polygamy
laws, rather than mandate the practice, are there to manage the extra hardships
that come with this preexisting condition, the insecurity, and jealousy and
infighting known in all polygamous cultures.
Hence, the law about
polygamy in Deut 21:15-17 – it is a law requiring that non-favored wives NOT be
treated inequitably. The transcendent
moral principle is about fairness, not condoning multiple wives – and the
implicit acknowledgement is that polygamy creates no end of ugly family
dynamics. Abraham’s story illustrates
all the problems which this law is meant to address – in fact, part of his
story is to teach us the steep price he paid for violating God’s marriage
ideal!
Having
said that, we should notice there are underlying “noble” intentions or cultural
mandates surrounding polygamy - which may be why God doesn't come out and specifically challenge it with Abraham or other O.T. figures. It was
common practice in those days to build your household through a slave-wife if
your actual wife was barren. While that seems crazy to us, keep in mind
just how critical it was to have children in the ancient world! Children
were EVERYTHING. They were your retirement fund, they were your
police/security guards, your work force, your fire department, your food
security, your medical insurance, all wrapped up in one. So now let’s say
your wife isn't having kids. How would you like to live your life without
any of those securities? I’m not saying it was right according to God’s
creation design, but the need for polygamy was felt in the ancient world
deeply, because of the rampant loss of male lives at childbirth and in war and
work (it was a dangerous world to be a man!) and the importance of children on
your security.
Now,
in the same way, our culture feels a need for homosexual marriage because of
the value we place on sexual freedom. Homosexual marriage would seem as
crazy to them as polygamous marriage seems to you. Changing cultural
conditions make certain forms of marriage more palatable at certain
times. Well, God’s Word speaks with a timeless authority above temporary
conditions like a shortage of males or barren females (them) or an overemphasis
on the value of sexual freedom and personal autonomy (us). God’s design
is not swayed by the transitory winds of want – it’s founded in God’s own
unchanging character and our ACTUAL needs as his creations.
So
we are not that different from them. I’m glad you brought up polygamy in
relation to the national debate about marriage, because it illustrates how ALL
variants to God’s marriage model have some “noble” rationale. A shortage
of males makes it seem only natural and permissible to multiply wives, for
seemingly good reasons: survival, even compassion – for unmarried women
would most likely turn to prostitution to live.
Well,
in our society, because we put such a high value on sexual autonomy, when we
find some people who are genuinely sexually attracted to members of the same
sex, it seems only natural and permissible to endorse homosexual unions – in
fact tolerance would seem to DEMAND it.
However, though some OTHER good
is upheld in these diverse marriage models (compassion/survival in polygamy or
freedom/tolerance in gay marriage) the Bible still says “it is not right
to do evil that some good may result.” (Romans 3:8). Violating God’s revealed,
and narrow sexual design is never right even if it achieves some partial good.
Given God’s clear creation sex model, if it was not right to marry
many women no matter the cultural condition of the ancient world, how can it be
right to marry someone of the same gender in today’s world?
So the sexual design in the Bible, from first page to last page, is clear - difficult, narrow, challenging - but clear.
So the sexual design in the Bible, from first page to last page, is clear - difficult, narrow, challenging - but clear.
No comments:
Post a Comment