Impact of Non-Scriptural Views on Marriage and Family Throughout History
The concept of marriage and family has been shaped by various non-scriptural views throughout history, often diverging from biblical teachings. The biblical account of marriage is rooted in the created order, as seen in Genesis 2:24, where it is described as a fundamental covenant relationship between a man and a woman [4]. This understanding is reinforced in Ephesians 5:31-32, where the relationship between Christ and the Church is used as a metaphor for marriage [1].
However, historical and cultural influences have led to deviations from this biblical ideal. For instance, the early Christian Church faced challenges from mixed marriages between believers and non-believers, as noted in the commentary on Genesis 6, where marriages between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" led to widespread corruption [2]. The commentary on Daniel 11:37 highlights how certain Christian traditions have discouraged or prohibited marriage under the guise of greater chastity, thereby discrediting God's ordinance [6].
The biblical metaphor of marriage as a symbol for God's covenant relationship with His people is a recurring theme. In Ezekiel 23:4, marriage represents the covenant between God and Israel, with adultery symbolizing Israel's spiritual unfaithfulness [3, 5]. This imagery is also seen in Hosea 1-3 and Isaiah 54:1-8. The New Testament reinforces this idea in Ephesians 5:22-33, where the relationship between Christ and the Church is likened to marriage [1, 3].
Throughout history, the understanding of marriage and family has been influenced by various theological and cultural factors. The commentary on Jeremiah 3:14 notes that God is described as being "married" to Israel, emphasizing the depth of their covenant relationship [7]. In contrast, certain traditions have prioritized celibacy and discouraged marriage, as seen in the commentary on Daniel 11:37 [6].
The diverse interpretations and emphases across different Christian traditions reflect the complex and multifaceted nature of the biblical teachings on marriage and family. While some traditions have maintained a strong emphasis on the biblical ideal of marriage, others have been influenced by non-scriptural views, resulting in a range of understandings and practices throughout history. The biblical account remains a foundational reference point for understanding marriage and family, even as historical and cultural contexts continue to shape their expression [1, 4].
Sources
- Ephesians (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Ephesians 5:31: For--The propagation of the Church from Christ, as that of Eve from Adam, is the foundation of the spiritual marriage. The natural marriage, wherein "a man leaves father and mother (the oldest manuscripts omit 'his') and is joined unto his wife," is not the principal thing meant here, but the spiritual marriage represented by it, and on which it rests, whereby Christ left the Father's bosom to woo to Himself the Church out of a lost world: Eph 5:32 proves this: His earthly mother as such, also, He holds in secondary account as compared with His spir”
- Genesis (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Genesis 6 (introduction): WICKEDNESS OF THE WORLD. (Gen. 6:1-22) the sons of God saw the daughters of men--By the former is meant the family of Seth, who were professedly religious; by the latter, the descendants of apostate Cain. Mixed marriages between parties of opposite principles and practice were necessarily sources of extensive corruption. The women, religious themselves, would as wives and mothers exert an influence fatal to the existence of religion in their household, and consequently the people of that later age sank to the lowest depravity.”
- Ezek (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Ezek 23:4: 23:4 Marriage is commonly used in the Bible as a symbol for the covenant relationship between God and his people (e.g., Isa 54:1-8; Eph 5:22-33). Adultery symbolizes Israel’s spiritual unfaithfulness (e.g., Hos 1–3). God makes his covenants in spite of, not because of, his people’s character (Rom 5:6-11).”
- Genesis (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Genesis 2:24: 2:24 Marriage between a man and a woman is not just a human social construct but is rooted in the created order. • a man leaves . . . and is joined: Marriage entails a shift of loyalty from parents to spouse. • the two are united into one: Marriage and its commitments make it the most fundamental covenant relationship observed among humans. Marriage is a powerful image of Israel’s covenant with God (Hos 2:14-23) and of Christ’s relationship to the church (Eph 5:22-32). Marriage is designed as an inseparable, exclusive relationship between a man and a woman. The f”
- Ezekiel (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Ezekiel 23:4: 23:4 Marriage is commonly used in the Bible as a symbol for the covenant relationship between God and his people (e.g., Isa 54:1-8; Eph 5:22-33). Adultery symbolizes Israel’s spiritual unfaithfulness (e.g., Hos 1–3). God makes his covenants in spite of, not because of, his people’s character (Rom 5:6-11).”
- Daniel (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on Daniel 11:37: Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers - That God who sent the evangelists and apostles to preach the pure doctrine. These true fathers of the Christian Church, and their God, this Church has not regarded, but put councils, and traditions, and apocryphal writings in their place. Nor the desire of women - Both the Greek and Latin Church, in their antichristian enactments, have discouraged, and in several cases proscribed, marriage, under the pretense of greater chastity, to the discredit of God's ordinance, and Christianity itself. Nor regard any god - For t”
- Jeremiah (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Jeremiah 3:14: I am married--literally, "I am Lord," that is, husband to you (so Jer 31:32; compare Hos 2:19-20; Isa 54:5). GESENIUS, following the Septuagint version of Jer 31:32, and Paul's quotation of it (Heb 8:9), translates, "I have rejected you"; so the corresponding Arabic, and the idea of lordship, may pass into that of looking down upon, and so rejecting. But the Septuagint in this passage translates, "I will be Lord over you." And the "for" has much more force in English Version than in that of GESENIUS. The Hebrew hardly admits the rendering though [HEN”