In this series, we are examining some of the many commandments which are contained in the Law of Moses.  It is our aim to understand them better, build faith, and answer critics.  We are considering them topically.

1.  God’s Plan.  God created one man and one woman (Genesis 1:26-28).  This forms the pattern for future marriages (Genesis 2:24-25).

Approximately 4,000 years later, when Jesus was asked about marriage – divorce – and remarriage, he returned to the pattern of creation (Matthew 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-9).  One man and one woman joined together so closely that they are called “one flesh,” this was/is God’s plan and ideal.

2.  Incest.  Marriage and/or sexual relations between certain ones of close relation was prohibited (Leviticus 18:6-18; 20:11-21; Deuteronomy 27:20-23).  This list includes: (1) parent and child, including stepparent and child (Leviticus 18:7-8; 20:11; Deuteronomy 27:20).  (2) brothers and sisters, including half-brother and half-sister (Leviticus 18:9,11; 20:17; Deuteronomy 27:22).  (3) grandparent and grandchild, including by marriage relation (Leviticus 18:10, 17).  (4) uncle and niece or aunt and nephew (Leviticus 18:12-14; 20:19-20).  (6) father-in-law and daughter-in-law or mother-in-law and son-in-law (Leviticus 18:15); 20:12; Deuteronomy 27:23; (7) brother-in-law and sister-in-law (Leviticus 18:16), levirate marriage is an exception (Deuteronomy 27:23); (8) marriage to the sister of one’s wife, during the wife’s lifetime (Leviticus 18:18); (9) marriage to a woman and her daughter or a woman and her granddaughter (Leviticus 18:17).

Critics point out that some of the great Bible characters married relatives.  (1) Cain must have married a sister or niece (Genesis 3:20; 5:1-4).  Moreover, it would not just be Cain, but all descendants of Adam and Eve must have done so, early in Biblical history.  (2) Noah’s family must have done so, following the flood (Genesis 9:1 cf. 6:13-22).  (3) Abram married Sarai, his half-sister (Genesis 20:12).  (4) Jacob married Leah and Rachel; they were sisters and his cousins (Genesis 24:29 cf. 29:15-30).  (5) Amram married Jochebed his aunt (Exodus 6:20).

Here are a few thoughts.  First, these marriage occurred before the Law of Moses was given.  There is no indication that these same marriages restrictions were in place at that time. 

Second, it may be that marrying close relation was not a great health risk early in Biblical history.  The Defending The Faith Study Bible comments on Cain’s wife saying, “It is generally assumed that the reason God outlawed incest… was due to the state of the human genome by the time of Moses, Incestuous relations significantly increased the likelihood of birth defects, as well as deleterious psychological problems… When God created Adam and Eve, however, their genomes were pristine – without defect… ultraviolet radiation (especially radiation from the flood) as well as other mutagens and DNA replication errors have increased the accumulation of mutations in the genome.  After over two millennia of genetic entropy, by the time of Moses the number of mutations within the human genome would have begin to make incest a dangerous practice… God stepped forward at the right time and prohibited the dangerous practice.” 

Third, we should understand that when the Bible records history, it does not always mean approval. However, In the marriages mentioned may well have been fully approved.  Again, they occurred long before there are any restrictions mentioned on marrying relatives. 

3.  Polygamy.  The Law of Moses regulated the practice (Exodus 21:10; Leviticus 18:17-18; Deuteronomy 17:14-17; 21:15-17).

This was not God’s ideal arrangement for the home.  He created one man and one woman (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:24-25).      However, it appears that God allowed polygamy under the Law of Moses, and before.  He, at times, seems to sanction it, or at least tolerate it (e.g. Genesis 30:1, 22; 2 Samuel 12:1-3, 7-8).  Kerry Duke has written, “Though some Old Testament marriages were composed of one man and several wives, they were marriages nonetheless.  Concubines were not adulteresses, but half-wives in terms of their right to be supported by their husbands.  That they were actually married is evident from the fact that the Levite’s concubine played the harlot against… her husband” (Leviticus 19:2-3).  Unless they were married, she could not have committed adultery against him, and he could not have been her husband” (Kerry Duke, Ox in The Ditch, p. 74).  Note: New Testament authority is lacking.

It is worth pointing out that polygamy has resulted in certain problems.  It has brought unrest into the family.  It did so in Abraham’s house (Genesis 16, 21; Galatians 4).  It did so in Jacob’s house (Genesis 29, 30, 37).  It did so in Gideon’s house (Judges 8-9).  It may have been a source of problems in David’s house (2 Samuel 13; 1 Kings 1-2). Furthermore, while a shortage of men, at times, may encourage polygamy (Isaiah 4:1), men who had many wives, like Solomon, must create a situation where many men cannot find a wife (1 Kings 11:1-3).

4.  Religion.  Mixed religious marriages were forbidden (Exodus 34:11-16; Deuteronomy 7:1-4).

This was not about race.  It was about faith.  Rahab, a Canaanite, and Ruth, a Moabite, are listed in the genealogy of Jesus (Matthew 1:1-6).  Both exhibited faith in the one true God (Joshua 1:8-ff; Ruth 4:16-17). 

5.  Levirate law.  This concerns the duty of a husband’s brother (Deuteronomy 25:5-6).  “Levirate” is from the Latin “levir,” meaning “husband’s brother.”

If a man died without having produced a son, then the next brother (who lived contemporaneous) was in line to marry her.  This practice predates the Law of Moses (Genesis 38:6-11).

The purpose?  (1) The firstborn son would carry on the lineage of the deceased husband.  This included inheritance and property rights.  (2) This provided a way for the widow to stay in the family, and receive economic support. 

The husband’s brother could refuse to marry her (Deuteronomy 25:7-10).  If he refused, she could bring him before the elders of the city.  If after they spoke to him he still refused, then she could publicly shame him.  (1) She would remove his sandal from his foot.  This seems to signify that he had forfeited marriage rights (Albert Barnes cf. Ruth 4:7-8; Psalm 60:8; 108:9).  (2) She would spit in his face.  This was designed to publicly shame him (cf. Numbers 12:14).  She then would be free to marry another (Ruth 4:1-10). 

Could the woman refuse to marry the brother-in-law?  This is not explicitly stated.  However, it seems that a woman had a choice whether or not to accept (cf. Genesis 24:58).

6.  Divorce.  If a divorce took place, then a certificate of divorce was to be given (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). 

There has been much controversy over what is meant by “he has found some uncleanness in her.’ (1) Some in Jesus’ day thought that one could divorce over anything found to be unpleasing to him in his mate.  The word “unclean” (ervah) may refer to things other than sexual sin.  It may refer to something unpleasing (Deuteronomy 23:12-14).  (2) Others thought that one could only divorce for some sexual sin, perhaps only for fornication.  Forms of the word are applied to unlawful sexual activity (Leviticus 18:6-ff); 20:18-19).

A certificate of divorce was to be given.  This did a couple of things.  (1) It slowed things down.  Dennis Prager comments, “It… served to prevent a man from banishing his wife on the spur of the moment: forcing him to go through a legal process meant he would have time to calmly reconsider his decision” (The Rational Bible, Deuteronomy, p. 380).  (2) It made public the divorce. 

If the divorced woman remarried, then the previous husband could never take her back.  Verse 4 is really the major point.  Verses 1-3 form the protasis, which specifies the conditions.  Verse 4 forms the apodosis, the consequence.  Why could he not take her back?  Perhaps, it is designed to cause a man to think twice before divorcing. 

7.  Adultery.  It is expressly forbidden (Exodus 20:14; Deuteronomy 5:18).

Fidelity in marriage is expected.  Adultery was grounds for divorce (Jeremiah 3:8 cf. Deuteronomy 24:1-4).  It could also result in the death penalty under the Law of Moses (Leviticus 20:10-21; Deuteronomy 22:22).