Chiasm in Deuteronomy 22:13-29 on Marriage and Adultery

 

One thing to take from this chiasm is that God considers betrothal to be nearly as sacred as the marriage itself. If a man lies with a woman who is betrothed to another man, he is just as guilty of adultery as if she was already married.

Love Her or Leave Her Alone: Captive War Brides in Torah

When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God gives them into your hand and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you desire to take her to be your wife, and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails. And she shall take off the clothes in which she was captured and shall remain in your house and lament her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her. 

Deuteronomy 21:10-14

The practice of taking captive women as concubines has long been frowned upon in western cultures, and for good reason. As with marrying more than one woman, marrying a prisoner of war is a complicated and difficult proposition. A man of weak character can't pull it off, and a man of poor character can't do it well. On the other hand, difficult doesn't mean sinful or impossible. In fact, in the context of the ancient near east--probably in other contexts as well--marriage was one of the best options available. It is better than killing her with the rest of her people or leaving her to be abused or enslaved by some other nation. At least as a concubine to an Israelite, she would be brought into the religion of Yahweh and enjoy the rights accorded to all wives by Torah.

Allowing a man to take such a woman back to his home also recognizes and helps to stem the harsh reality of rape in war. This law says that a man is not allowed to simply take whatever woman he wants, but knowing that he can still have her after following the proper procedure (and being reminded of that fact every year when reading Ki Tetzei, Deuteronomy 21:19-25:19, in the congregation) can serve to temper his immediate lusts. Chances are very good that after the thirty days of mourning have passed, he will have realized what a crazy idea it is to bring a pagan woman into his house, and he will allow her to leave. If not, then he would be required to begin her education in Torah and her conversion to belief in the True God before he could consummate the marriage. (See Leviticus 19:19, Deuteronomy 7:3, and Deuteronomy 22:9-11.)

If he changes his mind and allows her to leave, she will no longer be a prisoner of war but a free woman with all the rights of a stranger in Israel. Those rights were considerable indeed, especially in light of what she might face in some other land.

Divorce Is Not the Problem

Dr. Stephen Baskerville at MensNewsDaily wrote that "...until we understand that the principal threat to marriage today is not cultural but political, and that it comes not from homosexuals but from heterosexuals, we will never reverse the decline of marriage. The main destroyer of marriage, it should be obvious, is divorce. Michael McManus of Marriage Savers points out that "divorce is a far more grievous blow to marriage than today's challenge by gays." The central problem is the divorce laws."

He's right that divorce is a problem and that the divorce laws are a problem, but he is way off when he says they are the central problem. The divorce laws are terribly perverse, but that is only a symptom of a greater problem that really is cultural. Or maybe I should say spiritual. The central problem with marriage today is feminism, rebellion against God's prescribed order. The absurdities of no fault divorce, mandatory and draconian spousal maintenance and child support payments, default child custody laws, homosexual marriage, et cetera, are the logical end of rejecting the common sense of created order. In that context, divorce is actually an oft-abused remedy that God has built into his Law.

Here's my ideal solution (as of today--I might change my mind later):

1. Take marriage out of the hands of government. Do away with marriage licenses. The civil government has no legitimate role to play in deciding who may marry whom. Neither does the church.
2. Replace marriage licenses and platitudinal "vows" that no one takes seriously with real marriage contracts that must be signed by the bride, groom, and at least one senior relative of each. Two would be better. If there are no relatives available, then a spiritual mentor, such as pastor, rabbi, or priest, would do.
3. Reduce the government's role in marriage and divorce to contract enforcement.
4. Immediately eliminate government financed welfare for able-bodied adults and corporations. Gradually eliminate most other government financed welfare programs as well and eliminate the income tax to compensate. Charity is admirable and spiritually mandatory, but there's no charity at the end of a gun.
5. Institute a biblically based land and property reform. Every family gets its own land, which will be returned every fiftieth year without obligation. No land can ever be permanently sold, but can only be leased for a maximum term of fifty years. The only way that land can be permanently divided or transferred is through inheritance. Eliminate inheritance taxes. (I did say ideal and not necessarily practical, didn't I?)
6. Replace the judicial concepts of punishment and reform with restitution and removal. Scrap 95% of all laws and send all the lawyers to an internment camp on the shores of the Beaufort Sea. The ones we don't just give to old Billy, anyways. All future judges in local courts must be unpaid and must be respected and successful men of the general public.

Then I think we might be getting somewhere. ;-)

What Was Sarai's Status in Pharaoh's House?

From Genesis 12:15 - "...the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house."

Sarai was taken to live in Pharaoh's house, but only in a state of semi-betrothal (v19). Apparently, it was a widespread practice for a wealthy man to take his prospective bride into his house--often against her will--as a sort of hostage in order to influence negotiations with her family and to forestall other potential suitors. Other possible reasons for this practice may have been to ensure the bride's purity and to watch for indications of sickness which appear over time. The same practice can be seen in...

1. The similar events at Gerar (Genesis 20:1-18).
2. In the story of Dinah and Shechem (Genesis 34).
3. The betrothal of a captured war bride (Deuteronomy 21:10-14)
4. In the story of Queen Esther (Esther 2:1-18).

There is something similar among some modern polygamous families. A prospective bride might live with the groom and his family for a period of several months to a year so that she can be certain their lifestyle will suit her and so that any personality conflicts with existing wives might become obvious before a binding commitment is made. Close knit communities who worship and work together would eliminate the perceived need for such "trial periods" because everyone would already have a good idea of each other's character and lifestyles.