What is the Purpose of Marriage?

Marriage is an institution, and a tradition, which is observed, as far as I am aware, in every civilised society in the world. An anthropologist might correct me on this, but it is certainly true of all of the societies with which I have any familiarity. There are, of course, many different forms and variations across cultures and religions, but at the heart of every marriage there are certain universal principles:

• Two people are being joined together in a unique relationship which has no equivalent within human society.

• There are vows, promises, or undertakings of some kind which the couple make to each other.

• The union is recognised by family, society, and the law of the land as being the nucleus of a new family unit.

• There is an expectation that the couple will at some stage either produce or adopt children, who will be legally recognised as being their children, and for whom they will be recognised as the legal parents.

• There is also an expectation that the couple will be faithful to each other, in whatever way that is understood within their culture.

It is interesting to note that there is nowhere in the Bible that any details are given of how a marriage ceremony should be conducted or what vows should be made. I would suggest that this is because it is the inward PRINCIPLES of the marriage relationship that God is concerned about, and not the outward style of the wedding. So long as the couple are committed to each other in their hearts and happy to declare that commitment publicly and to abide by their promises, the ceremony may be as formal or as informal as is acceptable within the society to which they belong.

What, then, are these inward principles that are of primary importance to God?

We have already seen that they are established for us in Genesis chapter 2. Let’s remind ourselves of what is written there:

(It’s worth noting that the word translated here as ‘wife’ is the general Hebrew word for ‘woman’, as used in verses 22 and 23. Hebrew, like many languages, such as German, does not have a specific word corresponding to the English ‘wife’ for a woman who is married.)

As has been noted in the previous section on sex, one of God’s two purposes for human sexuality is the facilitation of this unique ‘one-flesh’ relationship which Adam celebrated so enthusiastically when his chosen helper was presented to him. It is this relationship which is at the heart of marriage, and whereas the primary function of sexuality is reproduction, as we see throughout the worlds of flora and fauna, a marriage which, for whatever reason, fails to produce offspring is still a precious and wonderful thing in the eyes of God, because its central pillar is mutual love, respect, and affection, which is a highly-prized treasure in the eyes of our loving Father.

For the people who take their moral guidance from the Bible – that is to say, both Jews and Christians – marriage is much more than a social or legal contract, and certainly much more than a traditional institution. For them it is a solemn COVENANT.

What is the difference between a CONTRACT and a COVENANT?

There are, of course, similarities between the two, but I would suggest that the primary difference is that a CONTRACT usually has what the Americans might call an ‘off-ramp’ – a way out, a means of nullifying or negating the agreement should one or other party renege on their responsibilities – whereas a COVENANT is an agreement which is binding FOR LIFE.

God says that the man and the woman become ‘one flesh’ in marriage. When Jesus was commenting upon this, in answer to a question regarding divorce, He made this statement:

It is clear from this that, as far as Jesus was concerned, marriage is for life and divorce should never be contemplated. However, He does allow for a single exception to this rule:

What is the reason for this exception? What is meant by ‘sexual immorality’, and why should this be a permissible ground for separating a man and a woman who have become ‘one flesh’ in the sight of God?

First of all, we must recognise that Jesus did not say that ADULTERY is a ground for divorce.

The word that He uses here is the Greek word ‘porneia’ (pronounced ‘por-NI-ah’ – number 4202 in Strong’s Greek concordance), translated in the King James Version as ‘fornication’. It is derived from the verb ‘porneuo’ (pronounced ‘porn-YOO-o’ – number 4203 in Strong’s), which in turn comes from ‘porne’ (‘POR-nay’ – 4204 in Strong’s) meaning a harlot, a whore, a prostitute.

This group of words is the origin of our English word ‘pornography’.

So, Jesus is saying that if a man discovers that his wife has been engaged in sexual activity with another man before they were married, he is justified in divorcing her. Why so?

The simple answer is that she has already become ‘one flesh’ with that other man.

There is an example of this in Jesus’s own family:

(Unlike our ‘engagement’, which is simply an expression of intent which can be revoked without any fuss, a Jewish ‘betrothal’ was a formal public commitment to marriage, which could be revoked only by formal divorce proceedings.)

In this case, after Joseph and Mary have been betrothed, Joseph discovers that Mary (presumably by her own admission) is pregnant. Under normal circumstances, the only way that this could have happened was for her to have entered into a one-flesh relationship with another man.

Although Joseph did not divorce Mary after all, but married her and raised Jesus as his own child, having learned that it was God Himself and not any human being who was the real father (Matthew 1:20-21), it would seem that it was common knowledge that the boy was born sooner than would have been expected after the marriage ceremony. When Jesus is challenging some Jews about their righteousness before God, they turn the guns back upon Him in a very personal way:

The implication of their retort would appear to be: “We were not born of fornication – as you were!”

(The irony here is, of course, that whereas these Jews claimed to have God as their Father and accused Jesus of having questionable parentage, Jesus knew that God truly was His Father.)

There are differing views among Christians around permissible grounds for divorce, but the important point I want to make here is that there is much more to marriage than a legal contract. Ideally, the legal contract would reflect and support the spiritual reality, as is the case with Christian marriages, and as was the case with British and Irish marriage laws until recent years.

We have a situation in Britain now where one wonders why anyone bothers to get married at all.

In England and Wales, a divorce is as simple as one of the spouses going online, filling out a form, and waiting for about a fortnight for the divorce to be authorised, without even needing to notify the other spouse that this is being done. So, a wife could be informed by her husband over breakfast that they are no longer married; or a husband could come home from work to be told that the marriage is over.

There have even been cases where judges have ruled that a co-habiting couple should be treated the same under the law as a married couple.

What about polygamy, then? Is this acceptable in the sight of God? Surely there are multiple examples of polygamous marriages in the Bible.

Indeed there are. Just to take two examples:

• King David – a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) – had four wives whose stories we know: Michal, daughter of king Saul; Abigail, widow of Nabal of Carmel; Ahinoam of Jezreel; Bathsheba, widow of Uriah the Hittite. But there were others, some of whose names are given but others who remain anonymous, which we know from 2 Samual 5:13 and 1 Chronicles 3:1-9.

• King Solomon, David’s tenth son, is said to have had seven hundred wives and, as if that were not enough, another three hundred concubines (1 Kings 11:1-3).

There is no record in the New Testament of anyone ever challenging Jesus on the subject of polygamy as they did on the subject of divorce (see Matthew 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12), but let’s look at the answer that He gave to the Jews when they argued that Moses had permitted divorce:

In the beginning, Adam and Eve loved each other and were delighted in their one-flesh relationship. However, as time went on and men’s hearts became hardened, the treatment of women by their men became increasingly cruel and abusive. God therefore permitted men to divorce their wives, not as a concession to the hard-hearted man, but as an opportunity for the unloved wife to be set free.

However, Jesus directs our attention back to ‘in the beginning’. This is the gold standard of man/woman relationships.

We also need to pay attention to what Jesus says in verse 9 of Matthew 19: whoever divorces his wife, unless she has already been involved with another man, and marries another woman, commits adultery.

If this is the case when the first wife is divorced, then what about the case where the first wife is not divorced? Is that any less an adulterous relationship?

The Biblical standard, and the Christian standard, for sexual relationships is very clear and very specific: One man and one woman committed to each other for life, observing chastity without marriage and fidelity within.

However, we must also recognise that fornication, adultery, and divorce are NOT unforgivable sins.

It is unfortunate that in some Christian circles, and in some societies, there is deemed to be no way back from certain moral failures. If this were truly the case, few of us would be able to stand in the presence of God.

The grace of God, through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary, is more than adequate to allow God to forgive, cleanse, sanctify, and justify us of every sexual sin, as well as sins of any other kind (1 Corinthians 6:9-11), the only exception being what Jesus refers to as ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’ (Mark 3:28-29; Luke 12:10), by which is meant to knowingly and maliciously attribute to the evil one the works of the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:22,30).

I recently attended a wedding where the bride had had a previous informal relationship and was the mother of a young child. Both bride and groom were Christians, and the presence and blessing of God were evident at the service.

Grace overcomes our faults and opens new doors of opportunity to us.

An excellent Biblical example of this is the relationship between King David and Bathsheba, which was initially adulterous, but which eventually, after David’s heartfelt repentance, enjoyed the blessing of God, Who chose Solomon, the child of that union, to be David’s royal heir (see 2 Samuel 11:1-12:25; Psalm 51).

The apostle Paul confirms the importance of monogamy in his directions relating to the appointment of elders in the church:

The phrase translated here as ‘faithful to his wife’ is literally ‘a man of one woman’. The same stipulation is repeated in verse 12, relating to deacons, and also in Titus chapter 2 verse 6.

Did Paul mean that in order to be an elder/overseer or a deacon, a man had to be married? I would think that to be unlikely, as he says elsewhere that it is better not to be married if you want to give yourself to the service of God (1 Corinthians 7:32-35).

He certainly does mean that if a man is married, then he should be married to one woman only, and whether he is married or not, he should not be involved romantically with more than one.

A missionary whom I know started a work in a remote village in Kenya. The village chief became a believer, and also became the leader of the village church. However, being a chief, he had a number of wives.

The missionary showed him from scripture that he must only have one wife if he is to be a leader in the church, so, after prayer, it was decided that he would continue in a marriage relationship with his first wife but refrain from any such intimacy with the other wives, although he did continue to provide for them.

In light of all of this, the question no doubt arises: has God changed His mind? Why would God permit divorce and polygamy in Old Testament times but so strictly forbid them today?

To answer that, let’s consider two statements – one from Jesus and one from Paul:

In the Sermon on the Mount, from which the quotation of Jesus is taken, He makes it crystal clear that those things which were not enforced under the Old Covenant are being enforced under the New Covenant. Until that time, the scribes and the Pharisees had been seen as the paragons of righteousness in Jewish society, but Jesus is saying that their standards are too slack. If you want to gain access to the Kingdom of God, you’re going to have to do a whole lot better than they’ve been doing.

Paul, on the other hand, is speaking to pagan Greeks who have been worshipping idols and behaving according to the moral standards of their religion. His message to them is the same: you need to get right with God, because when judgement day comes, God will accept no excuses.

But how are we to live up this unattainable standard of goodness that’s being demanded of us? Are we to spend day and night searching the scriptures for the rules and regulations that we need to obey and force ourselves to obey them?

If you’ve ever tried that, you’ll know that it doesn’t work – and God does not expect that of you.

What He does expect – and command – is that you repent, that you turn away from your self-centred lifestyle, that you accept His forgiveness for your sin, and that you begin to draw upon His grace, through simple faith, and allow Him to enable you to live the life that He wants you to live:

One of the good works that God has prepared in advance for most of us to do is to enter into a one-flesh marriage relationship with someone of the opposite sex whom we love, having kept ourselves pure up until that time, and remaining faithful to each other for the remainder of our days.

This is not an impossible task. People throughout the world have been doing it for generations. And when God Himself is involved in that marriage, it is the most beautiful relationship that any human being could ever experience.