This section explores some further aspects that are relevant for an understanding of marriage from an Old Testament perspective. Attention now turns to questions such as when marriage begins, how marriage was arranged, and what characteristics are expected from the marriage partners.
Contrary to critical voices,1 the Bible provides frequent, unambiguous, and congruent accounts to answer the question of when marriage begins.
In biblical times there was a public process to mark the beginning of marriage. The first step was the engagement or betrothal. In biblical times this was normally connected to a dowry (mōhar), the “payment of a price”2 or a commensurate service (cf. Gen 29:18–27; 31:12; Exod 22:16, 17; Josh 15:16; 1 Sam 17:25; 18:20–27)3 by the future husband to the father of the woman. The money, goods, or services paid to the guardian of the bride can be seen “as the wealth which the bride brought to her new home.”4 It has been pointed out that “in the earliest times the engagement took place when the husband paid the bride’s father, in the presence of witnesses, the purchase price (mōhar).”5
The engaged couple was legally married, but not permitted to practice sexual intercourse during this time because marriage had not officially commenced yet. Sexual intercourse during the engagement was considered immoral and equivalent to fornication (cf. Deut 22:23, 24).
At the end of the engagement period, another public ceremony would take place to start the actual marriage. The bridegroom, accompanied by his friends, would go to the house of his bride to bring her with her friends in festive procession to his own house.6 This prompted a marriage feast that normally lasted for several days (cf. Gen 29:22; Judg 14:10; cf. Matt 22:1–10; John 2:1–11).
Some of the practical steps leading up to the official commencement of the wedding, such as paying the dowry (mohar), reflect customs of the ancient Near East that are still in place in many cultures today. However, some general aspects transcend the cultural boundaries and particularities connected with marriage. All the above mentioned practices reveal that marriage was never a private enterprise, but included a formal beginning that had a legal and public character. Without such official and public steps marriage was not accepted as valid and a person was not considered to be married.
In the official beginning of marriage, the father of the bride played an important role in a religious and legal sense. It was the father who arranged the marriage of his daughter, led her as “best man” to her husband, officiated the marriage covenant and, as priest of the household, pronounced the divine blessing on the marriage (cf. Gen 24:60; cf. also Tobit 11:17). “What gave the Jewish marriage a quasi-religious character was the paternal or patriarchal blessing that accompanied it.”7 Thus, the same essential elements of the first marriage in Eden are present in later biblical history.
While the Old Testament does not describe this sequence of engagement and marriage in great detail, one finds reference to it in many places. Thus Jacob commences his marriage only after paying the price for his bride to whom he was engaged for seven years (Gen 29:16–21). Similarly, David had a legal right to marry his betrothed wife Michal, because he had paid the price for the bride (cf. 2 Sam 3:14). Also, the Mosaic law reflects this dual step of engagement and then marriage in the legislation that exempts an engaged young man from going to war (Deut 20:7; cf. 28:30).
Apparently, the family status and legal status of a young woman had to be made visible—perhaps through her clothing. It was most likely for this reason that Abraham’s servant immediately recognized Rebekah as an unmarried woman (Gen 24). Having lost her virginity, David’s daughter Tamar indicated her changed status by tearing apart her “long-sleeved garment; for in this manner the virgin daughters of the king dressed themselves in robes” (2 Sam 13:18). This visible status of virginity is also presupposed in passages like Job 31:1 and Deuteronomy 22:23, 24, 28, 29.
While the Bible offers no detailed legislation on the formalities or rites to bring about a marriage, the Old Testament makes sufficiently clear that marriage is a public covenant before God, which includes witnesses to provide legal safety.
This study now turns to the question of who arranged marriage and what characteristics are expected from the marriage partners, according to the Old Testament.
The ancient Israelites apparently followed the practice of parentally arranged marriage, as deduced from scattered references to such a procedure in the Old Testament.8 While such practice seems strange to Western society—where such a procedure may be perceived as an infringement on personal freedom and individual rights—we have to reckon that much of the world still operates in this fashion.9 Hamilton mentions a double rationale for parental selection of marriage partners. First, “such an arrangement focuses attention upon the entire family unit, and not just on the couple alone. Second, it permits an understanding of love which has as much to do with the commitment of the will (‘I love you because you are my wife’) as it does with emotions, glands, and hormones (‘you are my wife because I love you’).”10 One should not forget, however, that no Old Testament law mandates such a practice. No legislation imposes on the father the responsibility to select a bride for his son.
There are laws that outline “procedures for dealing with a rebellious son (Deut 21:18–21), a recently married son (Deut 24:5), and a deceased son with no son of his own (Deut 25:5–10), but not one for an unmarried son.”11 In addition, “the Old Testament Wisdom Literature has much to say about healthy marital relationships. But it never classifies as wise one who chooses a wife for his son with prudence. Indeed, Proverbs 19:14 affirms that a good wife is from the Lord, not from the husband’s father.”12 Thus, parental authority should not disregard the feelings of the marriage partners. “There were love marriages in Israel.”13 It was possible for the young man to make his preferences known (Gen 34:4; Judg 14:2) or even make his own decision without consulting his parents, at times even going against their wishes (Gen 26:34, 35). While women would seldom take initiative, we do read of Saul’s daughter Michal falling in love with David (1 Sam 18:20). Even in the case of the parentally arranged marriage of Rebekah, she had the choice to either accept or decline that invitation (Gen 24:58).14 Mutual consent seems to have been an integral part of marriage.
Based on God’s creation pattern (first leaving and cleaving, then becoming one flesh) the Old Testament repeatedly emphasizes the ideal of virginity before marriage. As indicated in the Garden of Eden, this is a constitutional factor in God’s design for marriage and is not a culturally conditioned pattern. Abstinence from sexual intercourse before marriage is the biblical mandate from the beginning. This is affirmed later, for instance, in the story of Rebekah where the beauty and virginity of Rebekah is extolled in detail: “The girl was very beautiful, a virgin, and no man had had relations with her” (Gen 24:16b). Before marriage began through an official and public act, no sexual intercourse was allowed (cf. Gen 29:21; Deut 22:28). This also applied to a widow who wanted to remarry (cf. Ruth 4:10–12, in front of witnesses in the court). Thus, the Old Testament repeatedly reaffirms the value of chastity before marriage (cf. Gen 19:8; Deut 22:13–30).
Nowhere in the Old Testament does sexual intercourse constitute marriage. Actually, there are clear indications that after sexual intercourse against the will of a woman, the man had to pay a dowry; however, the father could refuse to give the daughter to him, and the two were not married (Exod 22:16, 17). This passage also shows that sex before marriage does not receive God’s blessing. Rather, sexual intercourse is taken so seriously that one had to pay a fine if it took place before marriage.
As important as virginity before marriage is faithfulness in marriage. The condemnation of adultery in the Decalogue (Exod 20:14; Deut 5:18) and many other places (e.g. Lev 20:10; Prov 6:32; Ezek 16:38; Hos 1:2) demonstrates that God opposes unfaithfulness and intends marriage to last for the whole life. The permanent covenant of marriage should not be separated or divorced.
The Old Testament condemns spiritually-mixed marriages—that is, marriages between partners of different faiths (cf. Gen 6:2). The reason given in Deuteronomy 7:3, 4 for not marrying unbelievers is that they will turn the believer away from God to serve other gods (cf. Exod 34:15, 16). To marry an unbelieving partner is described as sin (Neh 13:25, 26; Mal 2:11, 12; Ezra 10:2, 3, 10).15 Sexual intimacy in marriage is powerfully related to spiritual life, and mixed marriage would make the Israelites vulnerable to spiritual compromise and corruption. The prohibition was later clarified through Ezra: “So now do not give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters to your sons” (Ezra 9:12).16 Only the same faith commitment will ensure a proper transmission of faith to the children.17
As noted above, the covenant idea is intimately bound up with marriage. A covenant is a solemn and binding promise and an agreement of farreaching importance between individuals, groups, or nations. It is a means by which obligations are established and sanctioned. As such, a covenant encompasses legal, social, religious, and other aspects18 and biblically also encompasses the idea of a reliable and binding settlement, that is characterized by an oath and a commitment on the one hand and love and friendship on the other.19 The covenantal character of marriage, as indicated by the language used in Genesis 2:24, is taken up by later writers in the Old Testament, where the covenant of marriage is carried out in the presence of God and witnesses (cf. Mal 2:14–17; Ezek 16:8; Prov 2:17). In other words, marriage in the Bible has clearly legal connotations. Thus it has been pointed out that marriage in the Old Testament—and in the Ancient Near East—“was contractual, involving payments, agreed stipulations, and penalties.”20
One important characteristic of the marriage covenant is associated with the biblical word ḥesed—mostly translated as “kindness,” “favor,” “faithfulness,” “loyalty,” etc.—which convey the general sense of covenant commitment.21 Thus, ḥesed is power that guarantees a covenant and makes it strong and durable, uniting the covenant partners in strength, faithfulness, fidelity,22 but also in benevolence and “loyal-love, which is the real essence of the marriage relationship.”23 Malachi calls the bride “the wife of thy covenant” (Mal 2:14). Proverbs 2:17 calls marriage a covenant “made before God” (NIV), and Ezekiel 16:8 describes the covenant at Sinai with marriage imagery (“I spread my skirt over you and covered your nakedness”) namely, as the marriage contract between God and Israel. Thus, there is a religious dimension associated with the marriage covenant in biblical times. Interestingly, the word bĕrît (covenant) often stands for a religious pact and may well allude to a written contract.24
The covenant image expresses the idea of marriage as a highly personal decision, involving a permanent commitment to the marriage companion of one’s youth (Prov 2:17), and a public declaration and contract that signals lifelong permanence and faithfulness. When God entered into a covenant with Israel at Sinai, the covenant was accompanied by the Ten Covenant words—the Ten Commandments or the words of the covenant, as they were called (Exod 34:28; Deut 29:1)—providing a covenant contract so to speak, that gave permanence and public status to the covenant. Otherwise the covenant could have soon been forgotten.
While marriage is called a covenant in the Bible several times we do not find a specific reference to any marriage contract in the canonical texts. Hugenberger suggests that the actual words of the marriage covenant may be something like the expressions “You are my husband” and “You are my wife.” This is based on the opposite words indicating a divorce in Hosea 2:2 and several parallels in ancient Near Eastern sources.25
However, outside the Hebrew canon, there is a reference in the story of Tobit26 (Tobit 7:13), where a written marriage contract is set up. Furthermore, we know of the existence of marriage contracts in Jewish marriages from the Elephantine papyri, dating from the fifth century BC .27 To write marriage contracts was a custom that was firmly established among the Jews in the Greco-Roman era.28 This custom also existed in very early times in the Ancient Near East.29 In Israel it was known that one could write “certificates of divorce” (Deut 24:1–3; Jer 3:8) and therefore it would be surprising if contracts of marriage did not exist at the same time. De Vaux therefore concludes that “perhaps it is merely by accident that they are never mentioned in the Bible.”30
__________
1 Cf. Wolfgang Trillhaas, Sexualethik (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), 101, writes, “One should nevertheless have to remember that there is no biblical or Christian unambiguous standard for the beginning of a marriage” (translated).
2 David Jacobson, “Marriage, In Bible Times,” in The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, ed. Isaac Landman (New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969), 7:369, points out that “there is little evidence, however, that the wife was actually bought like chattel from the family … the bride usually brought to her new home goods of such value that one is led to the conclusion that the original payment of goods or services was for the purpose of providing the bride with wealth.” Thus it served as a kind of social security to the woman.
3 It has been pointed out that “few theories of primitive society have had such a vogue as that of marriage by capture, yet few theories have been built on such slender foundations. … Actually there is no direct evidence in the Bible to show a condition of marriage by capture, and indeed, it is questionable whether such an institution was ever found in any society” (Jacobson, 369).
4 Jacobson, 369. Similarly W. Günther, “Ehe,” in Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, new edition, eds. Lothar Coenen und Klaus Haacker (Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus Verlag, 1997), 1:290, also writes, “The mohar did not make the woman into a commodity, but indicates the rank of the family from which she came” (translated).
5 Marcus Cohn, “Marriage, In Rabbinical Law,” in The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, ed. Isaak Landman (New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969), 7:372.
6 James M. Freeman and Harold J. Chadwick, Manners & Customs of the Bible (North Brunswick, NJ: Bridge-Logos, 1998), 468.
7 John Henry Blunt, ed., Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology (London: Longmans, Green, 1903), 443.
8 Hamilton, “Marriage,” 562–563. The first instance of a parentally arranged marriage can be found in Genesis 21:21 where Hagar selects a wife for her son Ishmael. The marriage of Rebekah is a classical case of parentally arranged marriages (Gen 24). Hamor asked for Dinah as a wife for his son Shechem (Gen 34:4–6), Caleb decided on his daughter’s marriage (Josh 15:16), as did Saul (1 Sam 18:17, 19, 21, 27; 25:44).
9 G. M. Mackie and W. Ewing, “Marriage (I),” in A Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908), 2:136, points out that “of the three great events in family life—birth, marriage, and death—that of marriage was rendered important by the amount of consideration devoted to the choice of the son-in-law or daughter-in-law, to the settlement of the customary financial conditions, and to the arrangements connected with the wedding festivities. … In a decision thus affecting the whole circle of relatives, it was considered natural and inevitable that both the selection of the individual and the settlement of all financial matters should be decided by the parents and guardians of those about to be married.”
10 Hamilton, “Marriage,” 563.
11 Ibid., 562. There he also points out: “This is in contrast to the Laws of Eshnunna (ca. 2000 BC) one of which (no. 27) states (ANET, 162): ‘If a man takes a(nother) man’s daughter without asking the permission of her father and her mother and concludes no formal marriage contract with her father and her mother, even though she may live in his house for a year, she is not a housewife.’”
12 Hamilton, “Marriage,” 562.
13 de Vaux, 30.
14 Hamilton, “Marriage: Old Testament and Ancient Near East,” 63, notes that the verb “to love” used to say that Isaac brought Rebekah in to his late mother’s tent and “he loved her” (Gen 24:67) is “susceptible of two different vocalizations: an ‘active’ one (“and he made love to her”), which would emphasize the erotic aspect of their relationship, and a ‘stative’ one (“and he was in love with her”), which expresses a lasting feeling rather than a temporary sensation. The Hebrew manuscripts clearly indicate the stative use.”
15 For specific studies on mixed marriages and interfaith marriages, see the chapters by H. Heinz and Á. Rodríguez in this volume.
16 Daniel R. Heimbach, True Sexual Morality: Recovering Biblical Standards for a Culture in Crisis (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 210.
17 On the issue of inter-confessional marriages from a Seventh-day Adventist perspective, see the excellent biblical exposition and balanced pastoral guidelines in the document “Zur Frage der konfessionsverschiedenen Heirat: Heirat eines Adventisten mit einem Partner einer anderen Konfession—Biblische Richtlinien und Prinzipien” that was adopted March 2003 by the Austrian Union of Seventh-day Adventists as guidelines for their pastors.
18 See Paul Kalluveettil, Declaration and Covenant: A Comprehensive Review of Covenant Formulae from the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East, Analecta Biblica 88 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1982), 5–16; George E. Mendenhall and Gary A. Herion, “Covenant,” Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1179–1202.
19 Cf. M. Weinfeld, “$$b20rith,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, eds. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988), 2:255–258.
21 David Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Content (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 1–19.
22 Paul Kalluveettil, Declaration and Covenant: a Comprehensive Review of Covenant Formulae from the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East, Analecta Biblica 88 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1982), 47–48.
23 Cf. Edmond Jacob, Theology of the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), 103–104.
24 George A. F. Knight, A Christian Theology of the Old Testament (London: SCM Press, 1959), 171; cf. also Jacob, 105.
25 So says correctly de Vaux, 33; yet de Vaux strangely maintains that marriage in Israel and Mesopotamia was “a purely civil contract, not sanctioned by any religious rite.”
26 Hugenberger, 216–237. On biblical and post-biblical marriage vows, see also Instone-Brewer, 213–237 and Daniel E. Block, “Marriage and Family in Ancient Israel,” in Marriage and Family in the Biblical Word, ed. Ken M. Campbell (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2003), 44–47.
27 There is some uncertainty about the date of the book Tobit but most scholars date it in the second century BC, some even earlier (cf. P. L. Redditt, “Tobit,” in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986], 4:867; cf. also Carey A. Moore, “Tobit, Book of,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman [New York: Doubleday, 1992], 6:591).
28 The permanence of the marriage covenant is indicated in the Elephantine contracts by the phrase that is made out by the husband: “She is my wife and I am her husband, from this day for ever” (as quoted in de Vaux, 33). While in the Elephantine contracts the bride herself seems not to have been an active participant in the contract, the bride’s consent was recorded in the first century BC document, Bar Menasseh marriage deed (cf. Edwin Yamauchi, “Marriage,” in The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, eds. Edward M. Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983], 301).
29 Yamauchi, 300–301.
30 For examples from Sumer, Ugarit, Assyria, and Egypt, see Bower and Knapp, 3:262. The Code of Hammurabi declares that a marriage concluded without a formal contract is invalid (cf. de Vaux, 33). See also Instone-Brewer, 1–19.
31 de Vaux, 33.