by Edward Ridenour
–
Now that I have hopefully described clearly and distinctively the crux of the concepts of Biblical marriage, let’s dig deeper into the word of God and see if by applying these concepts to other Scripture related to the marriage of a man and woman, we will be able to verify these concepts and help us understand better when they are presented to us. After all, if any concept or theory doesn’t seem to fit throughout, then it needs to be reexamined or discarded.
–
Let’s examine carefully the Old Testament text that gives a clear distinction of the difference between a female who is married by covenant (no sexual intimacy) and a female who is married because of her sexual intimacy. The the text is: “If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die…If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto a husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring both of them out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die…” (Deuteronomy 22:22-24).
–
Did you notice the difference between the married woman and the one that is betrothed. The married woman is not depicted as a virgin like the one who is espoused through betrothal, yet each had a husband. Scripture reveals that God identifies marriage distinctly through whether sexual intimacy has occurred between a man and the woman, and none other. Otherwise, she is an espoused virgin wife by betrothal only. Until a betrothal is consummated (sexual intimacy) there is no one-flesh marriage by God. If the betrothed female were sexually intimate with another man the consummation can’t go forward, the same as if it occurs when already married, the marriage cannot continue, because the husband, whether betrothed or married, will be defiled along with the female. In the O.T. a woman violating her betrothal or her marriage pointedly died.
–
Let’s now look at Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, where in chapter seven he instructs both male and female in Biblical marriage by commandment and personal authority, concerning these concepts and responsibilities of Biblical marriage. Obviously, the Corinthians living in a culture that was extremely humanistic and ungodly, like ours, wanted to know, as Christians, the ways of God concerning for them in marriage. It is important to note that when reading 1 Corinthians chapter seven, Paul is instructing them primarily on how they should govern themselves sexually during “the present distress” 1 Corinthians 7:34 yet applies in all instances.
–
Paul begins chapter seven verse one by stating, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” He is not saying that a man touching a woman in a sexually intimate way is necessarily bad, but his reasoning, as he continues for clarification of this statement, is this, “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband (7:2). He is warning that if a man cannot refrain himself from his need for intimacy with a woman, he is not to do this with more than one woman, because if he is sexually intimate with more than one, he will be guilty of fornicating himself in committing adultery.
–
The same is basically alluded to for the woman as well. She should refrain from being touched by more than one man. Otherwise, she will be guilty of adulterous fornication also. Therefore, “every man should have his own [one] wife and every woman her own [one] husband,” which is what being sexually intimate with the opposite sex produces. In other words, no circumstances, which one is going through justifies committing sexual fornication. It must be with only one, if it is engaged in.
–
This why he said in verses 7-9 “For I would that all men were even as I myself [able to refrain]. But every man has his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry [be sexually intimate with only one]. For it is better to marry [a legitimate sexual joining] than to burn [be in an illegitimate fornicated joining and suffer hells fire]. See my article “Better To Marry Than To Burn.” Hell is full of sexual fornicators. Fornication is idolatry “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry; For which things sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience (Colossians 3:5-7).
–
In reference to the aspect of touching and Paul’s instruction, you will notice in a number of places in Scripture it speaks of “marrying” and giving in marriage.” What this is referring to is the males were always doing the marrying (touching), and the females were always being given in marriage (being touched). Men always took wives, and women were always given or offered as wives. Females do not take males, because they are incapable of doing so. They can only lure or tempt to be taken. In doing so, they give themselves. A good example of this is found in Luke 17:27, “they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the Ark…” Another good illustration is in Psalms 78:63, “The fire consumed their young men; and their maidens were not given in marriage” (For more evidence see also Genesis 34:9 and Deuteronomy 7:3). In 1Corinthians 7:36-38, it is the espoused husband that decides whether his espoused virgin will give, or offer to him, herself for a sexually intimate marital relationship under their present distress.
–
Again, this is important. Paul is saying that if you are going to touch or allow yourself to be touched, then let every man touch only one woman and every women allow herself to be touched by only one man and continue in that marriage as the husband and wife that they are. Otherwise, if the man continues to touch others or the woman continues to be touched by others, each will be guilty of fornication. Through this instruction, Paul prescribes the remedy for “avoiding fornication” (adultery).
–
Paul also gives important instruction on the appropriate conduct and actions regarding a Christian being married to an unbeliever; “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. If a brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband, else were your children unclean, but now are they holy. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowst thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife” (1Corinthians 7:12-16)?
–
First, it must be understood, this marital relationship between a Christian believer and unbeliever was not the result of a Christian marrying an unbeliever. For a Christian man or woman to marry (sexual intimacy) an unbeliever is to violate what Paul admonished, stating, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers…” (2Corinthians 6:14). Not only is this true in other aspects of our life, but especially so when it comes to being bound as one in marriage to each other and the Lord.
–
The point of understanding of what Paul is alluding to in the text is if two unbelievers are married and one of them is converted (born again) and is now a child of God. He very clearly insinuates that the newly converted believer is to continue in that relationship if the unbelieving spouse is not disturbed enough to depart due to the believing spouse’s regeneration and new belief. The reason is because the marriage between them is not made void in this circumstance.
–
Also, the Christian’s sanctification and holiness is diffused onto the unbelieving spouse and their children. I do not believe this to mean that they are now saved as the believing spouse, but that they are in a state of privilege to become beneficiaries of the blessing, power, and presence of God, because of the believing spouse/parent. It would be similar to the judgments of God (Noah and his family escaping the flood; Lot and his family’s deliverance out of Sodom and Gomorrah; Rahab and her house escaping the destruction of Jericho; Abraham and his household; those whose parent or spouse placed the blood of the lamb over the doorpost in Egypt before the death angel passed over).
–
The reason for not believing them to be eternally saved is because of what Paul says in verse 16. He describes the believing spouse to possibly be a catalyst to the conversion and salvation of their unbelieving spouse.
–
Paul recommends to both men and women who are yet virgins (unmarried), legitimately divorced, or widowed that under the present circumstances they were encountering, it would be advisable for them to forgo marriage temporarily, hence “it’s good for a man not to touch a woman.” Again, his advice was for them to be even as he (celibate).
–
We see this also as being Paul’s concern and reasoning when he stated, “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless. such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you” (1Corinthians 7:25-28).
–
We don’t know what the present distress involved, but it alludes to a necessity because of a calamity of some sort. If the present distress consisted of persecution, being single and unmarried would make them more tolerable to bear it, than if they had a spouse and possibly children to be concerned with.
–
Remember, unmarried women were still generally under a man in some capacity. If a virgin, she would still be in her father’s house. If divorced, then she would usually be back under the protection of her father, or with a male relative. This would apply to a widow as well, if any alive (Genesis 38:11).
–
Howbeit, in no way is Paul promoting a single life altogether, especially to women. If there were any hint of this, he would be contradicting what he prescribed in 1Timothy 5:14, when he advocated, “I will therefore that the younger widows marry, bear children, guide the house…” For women to have opportunity to marry however, men needed to be of the marrying mind also. To advocate singleness would hinder Paul’s stated will for the younger marriage age women.
–
Nevertheless, he stressed that if they were to marry anyway, in spite of the circumstances, they would not have violated any law or commandment of God. He wasn’t against them marrying, he just wanted to spare them hardships they could possibly encounter, because of the circumstances presented to them as Christians at the time.
–
The Apostle proceeds to describe, specifically with men, in verses 32, 33 the disposition that prevails regarding one who is married, as opposed to one who is not married. He states how a genuine love and care for a wife will influence the man in his motives, actions, and nurturing feelings. They will be worldly in nature. Not that this is so wrong, but that it will be a natural inclination taking away a complete dedication to the Lord. In the next verse, he addresses a woman that is married or not married, like the man, whose desire will be inclined to her husband.
–
Notice what he says in verse 34, “There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. the unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the of the world, how she may please her husband.”
–
The wife, in this context, is a woman who is married through her sexual intimacy with a man. Whereas the virgin would refer exclusively to a single woman who is free from sexual intimacy with a man. We know this, because Paul identifies the virgin as “unmarried.” She is one who can dedicate her spirit and body, without distraction, to the Lord and not be obligated to any man. Again, observe how he uses the word virgin to identify her as unmarried! Hmm! Virgin – unmarried! Hmm! Yet, he identifies the non-virgin as one who is married – a wife. See how, in this verse, Paul uses their sexual experience exclusively to identify their fleshly marital status. No covenants, vows, certificates, or documents involved.
–
What it reveals is when God takes inventory of who among His people are married or not married, he does not take into consideration whether any rituals have been performed or if they have a civil decree to be married or to be divorced. In other words, marriage (the binding of two people to where they become one-flesh), in the eyes of our God, has nothing to do with a state-issued piece of paper, any church, justice of the peace, nor any minister, etc. It has everything to do, though, with the human aspect of sexuality of the male and female.
–
Moving on to verses 36-38, Paul gives instruction to the man who is betrothed/espoused to a virgin wife. He says, “But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry. Nevertheless, he that standeth steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well. So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.”
–
Okay, look closely at these verses! In verse 36, the Apostle addresses any Christian man who is betrothed/espoused to a virgin wife under the present distress of circumstances. He declares that if a man begins to act toward his espoused wife in any way that is sexual in nature, and because of his need becomes sexually intimate (marries) with her, it would not be in violation toward Paul’s prior recommendation concerning the present circumstances.
–
It is important to state here, that when a man was espoused to a woman, he could take her at any time, although they generally did not live together until they had sexual contact (married), usually occurring in the bedchamber at the beginning of the wedding feast. Paul is indicating here that however their arrangement was, they had not yet married (sexually intimate), and until then, when she was with him, he had the power and option of keeping her a virgin, so she could still “careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit (1Corinthians 7:34), and “may attend upon the Lord without distraction (7:35).
–
To give an example of this living apart while espoused, in Matthew 1:24, Joseph was raised from his sleep by the angel of the Lord, who came to him in a dream, and urged him to go and take his espoused wife Mary unto him. In other words, because they were not living together and were waiting for their betrothal consummation/wedding, he was instructed to immediately fetch her and bring her into his house without any typical seven-day marriage feast or ceremony. For any of the public having knowledge of Mary, being a virgin, who was now pregnant and not consummated to Joseph would have been construed as her having been sexually intimate with another man, as Joseph had assumed. It was, therefore, vital for Joseph to get her with him, so it would be perceived that it was his child instead of and unlawful affair. The Lord knew people would not believe Mary as Joseph did, because of his encounter with the angel in his dream.
–
As we know the story to be, all who knew Jesus knew Him as the son of Joseph. He was never looked upon as the illegitimate child of a mother of ill repute. Under the Mosaic law, and the consequences of a woman having an affair with another man, these kinds of mothers generally didn’t exist. They were dead. Joseph also would have been seen as an adulterer, if he took her, which meant stoning also. What appears to be evident in this is there was a public perception that they had consummated their marriage through sexual intimacy, foregoing any celebration, which they could do. No one knew the truth, however, except God and those to whom it was revealed. Praise the Lord!
–
Just like the story of Onan found in Genesis 38:7-10. Onan was the second son of Judah and was told by Judah to go in unto Judah’s deceased firstborn son’s wife and “marry her and raise up seed to thy brother.” The Bible said that he went in unto her, but because he knew the child would not be his, he “spilled” his seed on the ground “lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the Lord; wherefore, He slew him also.” No human knew what Onan had done, other than Tamar. However, the Lord knew, as He does with all of us in our sexually intimate encounters, and that is what’s important.
–
The idea of sexual intimacy as being the factor that marries two people is also shown when the Apostle Paul said, that if the man with his virgin “need so require, let him do what he will [sexually]…let them marry” (1Corinthians 7:36). Otherwise, if he didn’t marry her, she would still be a virgin. A document or agreement has never taken away one’s sexual virginity.
–
For the espoused husband to “keep his virgin” as a virgin meant great willpower on the part of the man to avoid marriage by not be sexually intimate with her, because he always had access to her. This is what Paul meant when saying, “Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well” (1Corinthians 7:37). It was up to the man to take her or abstain from her sexually. The aspect of her being kept, as a virgin, indicates an espoused union, whereas married if he were to take her sexually.
–
Paul also indicated in verse 36, it was appropriate for the espoused husband to wait until his virgin “pass the flower of her age” before he married her. This is giving reference to the girl coming to the point of maturity where she has begun to menstruate. The blood of her menstruation, which she issues, is referred to flowers. Her womb is now able to bear fruit and “replenish the earth.” Moses, in giving the laws to the children of Israel in Leviticus, called the issued blood as her “flowers” and gives direction concerning this issue. There were steps to be taken involving different circumstances (Leviticus 15:24,33).
–
Again, does this instruction concerning the man’s behavior of will toward his virgin and her maturing into womanhood, indicated by menstruation, have anything to do with marriage through a ceremony or receiving a civil document? Not at all! But it does have everything to do with their physical and sexual encounter, which binds them and joins them where two become one-flesh.
–
Now, the final thing the Apostle Paul expressed to the inquiring Corinthians regarding Biblical marriage is the forever “till death do us part” bond that is created when a man engages in sexual intimacy with a woman (1Corinthians 7:39). He speaks concerning a woman bound to the man, which also includes the man to the wife. This bond is the result of what sexual intimacy causes – “they are no more twain, but one flesh” and “what God has joined together man cannot put asunder.” This bond was originally only intended to be broken upon death of one of the spouses and no other reasons!
–
The Apostle Paul also refers to this marital bond in Romans 7:2&3 where he points out this marital bond is a law of God and if one’s husband is still alive and “she be married to another man, she shall be called and adulteress.”
–
Question. Do you mean a divorce decree doesn’t eliminate that bond? Correct! It does not. Only if she was to put him away for committing fornication against her or he was an unbeliever and he departed from the marriage, is the obligation severed. Fleshly sexual intimate marriage bonds are never severed. However, in this instance, Paul is referring to no such violations, either way. Without one of those two violations, occurring, one is bound to their spouse until death separates them. If one is married (sexual intimacy) to another, while their spouse is alive, adultery is being committed. Remember, you cannot commit adultery against a covenant, vow or a civil document. Adultery is a sinful sexual encounter with the opposite sex against your “legitimate” sexual joining (your legitimate marriage).
–
In the book of Mark there is an important instance and illustration recorded by the Holy Spirit, which I would like to reference, which, again, reveals the truth of this concept of Biblical marriage. In Mark 6:17&18 wee see the boldness of John the Baptist declaring to King Herod about his unlawful adulterous relationship by being married (sexually intimate) to his brother Philip’s wife. Notice how, and with what, John qualifies his condemnation of this marital violation. He forcefully states, “It is unlawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.” Well, let me ask you a question. In verse 17 it says that Herod married her! Surely, we can believe that Herodias had applied for and received a divorce from Philip and then, acquired a new marriage document with Herod before she married him! Right? If so, why then would John declare it to be unlawful for Herod to take her as his wife? By what law was John referring to?
–
By understanding God’s way of marriage, we can know what John knew. Notice, John still referenced Herodias as being Philip’s wife. The law he indicated is the same law Paul exhorted in 1Corintians 7:39 and Romans 7:2,3, which I just talked about. She was still bound (married) to her husband Philip. I really don’t think John was taking this severe of a risk to condemn a king over a civil document or a law of the kingdom of man. Do you? John was one to declare those laws regarding the Kingdom of God.
–
This. of course, made Herod and Herodias very angry to be called out in their sin, but as the text points out, “Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy…” (Mark 6:20). It was said that Herod knew this by hearing and observing John’s life and works. Herodias did not share this fear and respect for John.
–
Another revealing instance of the truth of Biblical marriage, being sexually oriented and between a man and a woman, is found in Matthew 22:23-30. It is here where Jesus was confronted by certain of the Sadducees, who did not believe in a resurrection after death. They tempted him to give an answer concerning a Mosaic law of marriage and its effect after the death of the participants.
–
In order to understand the crux of the question being asked by the Sadducees, it’s imperative to first have some background to the law they were referencing. Within the Sadducee’s example, most likely fabricated, they were alluding to the Law of Moses where the next of kin was to marry (sexual intimacy – they understood what true marriage was) the widow of him that died childless, like the story of Onan. This is found in Deuteronomy 25:5. It was a political law designed for the preservation of distinct tribal families and inheritances among the children of Israel.
–
They cited that a man had married a wife to which they bore no children. The man died and therefore by law the brother of the deceased married her and he died without children with her also. This happened seven times. Each time one of the seven brothers married (sexual intimacy) her and they each died without children with her, until eventually she died also. Their question to Jesus was, since she had married (sexual intimacy) and become one with each of the seven brothers, whose wife would she be in the resurrection?
–
Listen to the reproof the Lord gave them. He said, “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:30). Notice how Christ uses the word “marry” and “given in marriage” to identify male and female and their sexual intimacy or lack thereof after death. What had occurred between the woman and the brothers, in the flesh, was of no consequence in the life after death. There is no celestial marriage. Two individuals are not bound together after death. This is why the death of a spouse sets one free from their marital bond on earth.
–
Forget any document. He was clearly insinuating that in heaven there is neither sexes, which therefore sexual intimacy (marriage) is non-existent. Remember how I said before that when the terms “marry” and “given in marriage” are used in Scripture, it is speaking of a man and woman, respectively. See how Christ differentiates between the earthly physical body and the heavenly spiritual state. Once in the spiritual state, no sexuality exists. Therefore, no marriage!
–
Since we will all be like angels – spiritual, there will be no more joining and no more law of marriage. This law, which makes us one through our sexual intimacy while on earth, will have no application beyond the resurrection. Biblical marriage is not through a document!
–
While I’m on the subject of spiritual beings (angels) I’d like to take the opportunity to clarify something in Scripture, which I believe is extremely misrepresented by many ministers who preach from a certain text. The text I am referring to is found in Genesis 6. It says, “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the son of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also, after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men and they bear children to them the same became mighty men, which were of old, men of renown” (Genesis 6:1-2,4).
–
Many believe this to be saying that fallen angels (“sons of God“) came to earth and while they were here looked upon young human females born to human men and found them attractive, and therefore, they had sexual intercourse with them and bore children. These children became giants, because of this unnatural sexual relationship, and were superior in intellect and strength, somewhat superhuman. Well, this is not the case. Let me explain.
–
First, we know from a couple paragraphs ago, Jesus declared that angels, who we shall become like, are not distinguished as being male and female, like humans. They are spiritual beings and not capable of procreation in the flesh. Also, the “sons of God” were not fallen angels. Trust me, the Holy Spirit would never refer to fallen angels as God’s sons. What Scripture is declaring is these were the righteous men of God that lived in that day (see also Romans 8:19 and 1John 3:1,2). What has to be realized is that these verses do not just refer to the events over a short period of time, but rather, they describe what transpired throughout the first two thousand years, leading up to the flood.
–
In a very condensed way, it describes the falling away of the church represented by the “sons of God.” The righteous men desired for and lusted after the “daughters of men,” who were the daughters of the unrighteous, representing and embodying the world. Scripture describing these men “taking wives of all that they chose,” indicates increased lustful activity by them, engaging in adulterous fornication – whoredom. Remember, when a man is sexually intimate with a female he marries her, which is how a female becomes a wife to a man or many men (1 Corinthians 6:18).
–
Their children became giants, “in there day.” There could have been some who were giants in stature, and I wouldn’t dispute that some may have existed, but I am more inclined to believe it meant giants in their abilities, achievements, knowledge, skills, and capabilities. I believe we have these kinds of giants in our world today when you see all that is being accomplished. It’s mind-boggling. For when they had grown older, they became “men of renown.” Having opportunity to live five to seven hundred years, they had plenty of time to hone their skills.
–
What this Scripture reveals is the entanglement of the church with the world and how the church, because of not coming out, staying out, and being separate, became corrupt and ungodly as the the world. The church was corrupted, because of the worlds culture, subtle influences, and deceits, which the sons of God embraced by joining themselves with the daughters of ungodly men. As time went on, the church progressively became more and more sinful and corrupt, leaving off calling on and having fellowship with God, and having its eyes on the world, to the point where God had had enough, and there was only one righteous member of the church left on earth – Noah. The same is happening today! “But as in the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the Ark. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (Matthew 24:37-39). There were very few righteous left.
–
If anything should wake us up to examine our lives, this should. The ways of the church today are corrupted by the ways and protocols of worldly men. With its increasing connection to the world, the church is falling away in the same fashion as they did in the time before the flood. My friends, with the church embracing the marital applications of our culture, it is a big part of its corruption failure. Is it any wonder we have such marital problems existing in the church today? In how many other things do we implement our acculturation into our and our family’s lifestyles, which profoundly affect our relationship with Christ in violation of His Word? We had better understand that His Word must unequivocally come first, before any cultural prescriptions or dictates. Know the truth of God’s Word and abide in it, because it makes you free and sinless. This is God’s word on marriage.
–
Let’s examine some more Scripture that gives a clear and vivid description of the fact that true Biblical marriage is the coming together of a male and female in a sexually intimate way. First, let me look again at Genesis chapter 38. Remember it was here where Judah had given his firstborn son Er a woman, Tamar, as a wife. Because of Er’s wickedness and evil in the sight of God, God slew him before they had conceived any children. According to the custom of that time, to preserve family seed, Onan, Judah’s second son was told, and was obligated to take Tamar to wife for himself and bear seed for his brother.
–
However, if you recall, he decided to not carry through with it and at the time of copulation he spilled his semen on the ground. Notice how the Scripture describes what this action was! It was marriage (sexual intimacy). He was told to “go into thy brother’s wife and marry her…“(Genesis 38:8). It is very evident that it was the sexual act that determined their bond of marriage and not a covenant or document or any ritual.
–
So, why did God kill Onan for this? Was it just because he refused to place his semen in Tamar, spewing it on the ground? Well, not altogether. I believe there was more involved in his evil action not recorded. The first evil God recognized in him was, as long as there were no seed attributed to his brother Er, then there would be a greater inheritance coming to him. He was greedy. The second evil, though not recorded, was making her his wife, by being sexually intimate with her, yet never intending of being that way with her again, because he didn’t want children for the reason stated above. Since she was now bound (married) to him, and unable to have another husband, he deprived her by not being a husband to her and having children. One could say, yes but, he could have as many wives as he wanted and could take another. Yes, but however, it wouldn’t have mattered which woman he took sexually, because any son born would be raising up seed for Er. It didn’t have to be Tamar. So, does that mean Onan was going to be celibate for the rest of his life? Not necessarily, which brings me to speculate the third evil in Onan not recorded. That being, he was a homosexual and didn’t desire a woman. I believe these are the evils God recognized in Onan. He was selfish and ruthless in every way.
–
We know the story of Abraham and Sarah, how God had promised a child to them, but because it wasn’t happening in the time frame, which they thought it should, Sarah encouraged Abraham to take Hagar, her handmaid, a virgin woman of his tribe, to “be his wife” and bear a child through her. So, Abraham succumbed to his wife’s wishes and took Hagar sexually and she conceived, birthing him a son.
–
Now, what I want to focus on is a comment Sarah made to Abraham after she realized the mistake she had made in pushing for this event to occur. In Genesis 16:5, Sarah described the sacredness and binding aspect that is connected with the event when a man and woman engage sexually. She said to Abraham, “My wrong be upon thee, I have given my maid into thy bosom.” This is pretty powerful. They didn’t just have sex, but Hagar became a part of Abraham. This is exactly what marriage is; two people becoming one. Hagar was now in Abraham’s bosom physically, as one in flesh.
–
In another instance, after God had opened the womb of Sarah and she bore unto Abraham a son named Isaac, Sarah had died and Abraham was old. Abraham, then, focused on Isaac’s marital condition of not having a wife and being forty years of age. Abraham, therefore, instructed his eldest loyal servant to go to the land of his kindred to find a wife for Isaac, because he did not want Isaac taking a wife among the daughters of the Canaanites, where they dwelt. The servant had been successful in finding a wife for Isaac among Abraham’s kindred. Her name was Rebekah. The Holy Spirit, in Genesis 24:16, declared a very intriguing comment about Rebekah. He stated that she was a “virgin,” but also included “neither had any man known her.” One would think that declaring her virgin would be enough, but there was something more that God wanted us to know about Rebekah. That is, not only had she never been sexually intimate with any male, but, also, no man had ever seen her nakedness or touched her inappropriately. She was the epitome of sexual purity and the Holy Spirit, who knows all, imparted to us this fact. Who else would have known this truth of purity? The Lord sees and knows everything concerning us.
–
On the servant’s journey back to the place where Abraham and Isaac dwelt, with Rebekah in hand, as they approached, Rebekah saw Isaac out in the field where he had gone to meditate in the evening, and Isaac beheld her coming to him. The Bible states in Genesis 24:65-67 that Rebekah covered herself with a veil, which was customary, and after the servant had explained all the events of finding Rebekah, guess what Isaac did next? “He brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife.” They were married. No justice of the peace, no minister, no documents, and no witnesses, other than the Lord. This is the way it was in the beginning. Jesus said, “they were made male and female, and they twain shall be one flesh.”
–
Over the space of time, Isaac’s wife, Rebekah, eventually bore him two sons, one of them being Jacob. As Jacob grew into a man, his situation was similar to that of his father Isaac. He was a man without a wife and living in among the land of the Canaanites. Rebekah had become distressed over the possibility of Jacob marrying one of the Canaanite daughters of Heth. Isaac, therefore, called Jacob to himself and instructed him to not take a wife of the Canaanites, but to return to the house of Laban, the brother of his mother Rebekah, the same place where Isaac’s servant had retrieved her.
–
Jacob obeyed and did as his father said and when returning near to where Laban lived, he came across one of Laban’s daughters, Rachel, at a well. He informed Rachel of his connection to the family, wherewith he was received by Laban and began to live among them. After a month had passed, Laban and Jacob made a covenant that he would serve Laban for seven years and his wages would be to marry Rachel, whom Jacob loved considerably. After serving the seven years, Jacob confronted Laban that it was time to pay up and give him Rachel to marry. Laban agreed and had a feast prepared for the marriage to be consummated and its celebration.
–
After the feast had been initiated, it was now evening and time for the marriage to take place. In Genesis 29:23 it states that Laban “took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him (Jacob), and he went in unto her.” Again, we see marriage was defined through the man and woman participating in sexual intimacy. Unfortunately, because of the covering used by Leah and probably the darkness within the tent, Jacob could not discern that it was Leah, instead of Rachel, whom he was marrying. He had been deceived. But observe that even though he did not want Leah, and it was an act of deception, Jacob was still bound to Leah as her husband, because of their sexual intimacy. It was understood among them, at that time, of the power of marriage (sexual intimacy) as to why Laban, took advantage of Jacob and deceitfully gave Leah to him instead. Laban, knowing that once Jacob had taken her sexually, Jacob would then be obligated as the head of Leah instead of him.
–
Jacob confronted Laban regarding the deceitful tactic he employed by giving him Leah instead of Rachel. Laban proclaimed that for him to offer (give in marriage) Rachel, the youngest before the oldest, was uncustomary, although no such custom is known to have existed. Therefore, Laban covenanted with Jacob again for Rachel. The agreed upon conditions were for him to work another seven years for Rachel, however, he would not have to wait seven years to take her in marriage. Laban stated that Jacob could marry Rachel once Leah’s seven-day marriage celebration had been completed (no annulment here). Once the celebration week of feasting had finished, Jacob was now given Rachel to have as his wife. The Scripture indicates, then, “Jacob went in unto Rachel” (Genesis 29:30), as he did with Leah. Through sexual intimacy they were married.
–
Unlike the New Testament where multiple wives are not permitted, in the Old Testament, this was something that was acceptable and not sinful, as long as the female taken to be married was a virgin or a widow. It enhanced procreation and tribe building. Also, in this instance, the law of not taking sisters for wives (Leviticus 18:18) had not yet been given. Although, at this time, Jacob did not intend for this to be his goal. The probable reason for men of the Old Testament to subscribe to having multiple wives was to guarantee sons. This was paramount for the preservation of inheritance and carrying on a family seed. This, however, will all change with the coming of Christ, which the New Testament clarifies the reason for it. See my article “Why Old Testament Men Had Multiple Wives.”