HELP FOR THE HOME

(“The Origins of Marriage”)

Genesis 2:4-8, 15-25 (NASU)

¹⁸“Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him’ … ²⁴For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:18, 24)

This morning’s Scripture – which I will be reading in a few minutes – comes from selected verses out of Genesis chapter two, starting at verse four. But first …..

1. REMEMBERING THE PAST CAN OFTEN HELP

US UNDERSTAND THE PRESENT

(1) One way to understand what something is all about is by going back to the beginning and reminding ourselves of how and why it originated.

(2) For example, you women may not believe this, but there hasn’t always been a 24-second shot clock in professional basketball (i.e. where teams have 24 seconds to shoot the ball after gaining possession, or else the other team gets the ball). Prior to the introduction of a shot clock, the first team to get a lead (especially in the second half) would often “sit on the ball”, by dribbling and passing – but not shooting unless they were fouled, or managed to get an uncontested lay-up. As you can imagine, that made for some pretty boring basketball games – which, in turn, wasn’t good for business, because fans weren’t going to keep paying good money for tickets if players weren’t going to shoot the ball.¹

The low-point of this era (no pun intended) came on November 22, 1950, when the Fort Wayne Pistons defeated the Minneapolis Lakers by the scintillating score of 19 to 18. What’s more, the Pistons actually came from behind in the fourth quarter to win the game, by furiously outscoring the Lakers 3 to 1.¹

Just five years after instituting the 24-second shot clock, every team in the National Basketball League averaged over 100 points per game for the entire season.¹ That one rule change saved professional basketball from extinction – and did more to popularize the game than anything before or since, including the 3-point shot, and widening the free-throw lane.

(3) In a similar manner, one of the best ways to understand what marriage is all about is to go back to the beginning, and remind ourselves of how and why it originated. For most Christians, that’s a fairly easy thing to do – we just go to Genesis chapters one and two, and there it is. But the world of lost and unbelieving men and women doesn’t necessarily agree with us – as I was reminded when I decided to see what the Internet had to say about the origins of marriage. Here’s a sampling of some of the wonderful (mis)information I ran across.

One site said: “Marriage dates back several thousand years, emerging as a civil arrangement at about the same time as the emergence of private property. Anthropologists theorize that most primitive marriages were polygamous … and that religious guidelines didn’t develop until the practice was several hundred years old, and then only to keep religious groups from losing their wealthy property owners by not allowing them to marry into another religious group.”² [Hum … I guess that explains why the Bible says Christians shouldn’t marry non-Christians (c.f. II Corinthians 6:14, NKJV), so churches won’t lose access to their people’s wealth!]

Another site says: “The first marriages were by capture – a man would kidnap the woman of his choice, taking her from her tribe with the help of a warrior friend, his best man, who would help him fight off other men who wanted her … when the groom fought off these other men, he would hold onto the woman with his left hand, while fighting them off with a sword in his right hand, which is why the bride stands on the left, and the groom on the right (during a wedding ceremony).”³ [I did not know that!]

Still another site says: “Many anthropologists believe the historical sequence, leading up to marriage as we know it today, started with promiscuity – then moved to (various forms of) group marriage – and finally culminated in monogamy (which isn’t necessarily the same thing as fidelity).”³ However, the site goes on to add that most anthropologists admit they really don’t know how or why marriage began – and say that “it is impossible to unearth its origins.”³ [This kind of stuff reminds me of the passage in Romans chapter one that says: ²¹“… (because) they did not honor Him as God … they became futile in their speculations … ²²Professing to be wise, they became fools … ²⁵(and ended up) exchang(ing) the truth of God for a lie …” – c.f. Romans 1:21-22, 25].

(4) This morning we are going to do what many anthropologists apparently believe is impossible – namely, unearth the origins of marriage. In doing so, however, we will not be uncovering anything new, or previously unknown – rather, we will be reexamining some of the old and tested truths found in the second chapter of the Book of Genesis, that tell us how and why the institution of marriage came into being.

READ – Genesis 2:4-8, 15-25

2. IN THE BEGINNING GOD ESTABLISHED THE

INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE

(1) The Book of Genesis opens with the familiar words: “In the beginning God …” (c.f. Genesis 1:1). This phrase is quite apropos for several reasons. First, the Book of Genesis IS a book of beginnings – or “origins”, which is what the word “Genesis” literally means.⁴

(a) For example, the first three chapters alone tell us about the beginning (or origins) of the universe, including all the various animate and inanimate parts that make up the entire created order (c.f. Genesis 1:1-31) – the beginning (or origins) of humanity, including why there are two different sexes (c.f. Genesis 1:26-28; 2:18-24) – the beginning (or origins) of how and why sin came into the world (c.f. Genesis 3:1-19) – and (the thing we are particularly interested in, namely) the beginning (or origins) of marriage (c.f. Genesis 2:18-24), including the origin of male headship and female submission within the marriage relationship (c.f. Genesis 2:18-24; 3:16).

(b) Because of the time and culture in which you and I live, we should note in passing that the Book of Genesis makes NO PROVISION for things like – living together without being married (which is either adultery or fornication), polygamous marriages, or gay marriage (c.f. Genesis 2:24). Prior to the Fall, marriage was solely and only between one man and one woman. Note that in verse eighteen of our text God says: “I will make … a helper (singular) for him” – not “helperS” (c.f. Genesis 2:18). Note, too, that verse twenty-four says: “a man (singular) shall … be joined to his wife (also singular)” – and that this “joining” is between “a man (and) his wife”, not “a man and his man”, or “a woman and her woman” (c.f. Genesis 2:24). It was only AFTER THE FALL that these sinful distortions of marriage began to be practiced.

(2) The other reason the phrase, “In the beginning God …” (c.f. Genesis 1:1) is so apropos for the Book of Genesis, is because it credits the beginning or “origin” of all things – from the creation of the world to the establishment of marriage – (it credits all these things) to God, rather than mankind.

(a) Hence, we’re told that it was God who created the universe and all things in it – not man (c.f. Genesis 1:1-31). It was God who created mankind – man did not create himself (c.f. Genesis 1:26-27; 2:21-22; see also Psalm 100:3). And it was God who established marriage for the benefit and welfare of mankind (c.f. Genesis 2:18, 21-24) – as opposed to being something ancient humanity eventually came up with, out of some kind of civil or financially-driven necessity.

(b) Marriage literally dates back to the sixth day of creation (which is what much of Genesis chapter two is about – i.e. it’s an elaboration of what was summarized for us in Genesis chapter one, particularly in verses twenty-six through thirty (c.f. Genesis 1:26-30; 2:7, 15, 18, 21-22). The institution of marriage dates back to the beginning or “origins” of humanity – even to the first two people God ever made, namely Adam and Eve. Marriage predates the Fall – marriage was in effect before sin entered the world – marriage is, as I’ve already said, part of the sixth day of creation, just as surely as dry land and seas were part of the third day of creation (c.f. Genesis 1:9-13), or the sun and moon were part of the fourth (c.f. Genesis 1:14-19).

(c) This is why Jesus answered the Pharisees’ questions about divorce by referring to the creation, saying (in part): ⁶“… FROM THE BEGINNING of creation, God made them male and female. ⁷FOR THIS REASON (i.e. because this is how it was at the beginning of creation) (FOR THIS REASON) a man shall leave his father and mother, ⁸and the two shall become one flesh (which is direct quote from verse twenty-four of this morning’s text) … (Jesus then concludes, by saying) ⁹What therefore God has joined together (i.e. in this manner, ever since the beginning of creation), let no man separate” (c.f. Mark 10:6-9) (i.e. “separate”, not only in terms of coming between a man and his wife via infidelity or divorce – but also by redefining God’s definition of marriage, like many people are trying to do today).

(d) On a related tangent, it should also be noted that Paul’s argument in First Timothy chapter two about “women not teaching or exercising authority over a man” (c.f. I Timothy 2:11-12) (especially in the church, but also in the home), (this argument) is not based on chauvinism, or the cultural mores of the time in which Paul lived – nor is it based on any supposed male superiority or female inferiority (c.f. I Peter 3:7). Rather, it’s based to a large extent on creation – specifically, as Paul says in verse thirteen, that “Adam was created first, and then Eve” (c.f. I Timothy 2:13).

(e) My primary point, however, is that the origins of the institution of marriage are rooted in God’s creative activity on the sixth day of creation. To paraphrase part of a familiar passage found in Psalm 100 – ¹“Shout joyfully to the Lord, all the earth. ²Serve the Lord with gladness; come before Him with joyful singing. ³Know that the Lord Himself (has given us the institution of marriage; and that we did not come up with the idea) ourselves …” (c.f. Psalm 100:1-3).

(3) But suppose (as is common today) that someone doesn’t accept the Bible, or the Book of Genesis, as God’s word? Suppose a couple doesn’t believe the Scriptures have any authority over them, or their marriage? Suppose persons contemplating marriage don’t think the Bible has anything relevant to say about the matter? What then?

(a) While certainly sad – and potentially devastating for a person’s marriage if they persist in their disbelief (not to mention their eternal future!) – the fact some people reject the origins of marriage as described in this morning’s Scripture lesson, doesn’t change a thing. Truth is not determined by polls – or a majority vote. Truth is not decided by political power – or bombs and guns. Nor can something be true for one person, but not for another. Truth is truth, even if no one believes it (c.f. Romans 3:4; II Timothy 2:13).

(b) The psalmist once said (of God): “… Your law is truth” – and again: “… all Your commandments are truth” – and once more: “The sum of Your word is truth …” (c.f. Psalm 119:142, 151, 160). Jesus Himself once said (in one of His prayers): “… Your word is truth” (c.f. John 17:17) – while the apostle Paul called Scripture “… the word of truth” (c.f. II Timothy 2:15). What’s more, the church of Jesus Christ is supposed to be “… the pillar and … support of the truth” (c.f. I Timothy 3:15).

Paul also said that by God’s grace some people “… come to the knowledge of the truth” (which begins with the knowledge of God and the way of salvation) (c.f. I Timothy 2:4; II Timothy 3:15) – while others are “… deprived of the truth …” (c.f. I Timothy 6:5), or are “always learning (but) never able to come to (a) knowledge of the truth” (II Timothy 3:7) about things like redemption, or marriage, or anything else of a spiritual nature.

(c) My point is this – while there may be some here today who have no spiritual life in themselves – no ears to hear, no eyes to see, no heart of flesh to believe – the majority of you (by Christ’s grace) know full well that God’s word is true and authoritative, whether it’s talking about the way of salvation, or what happened to the ancient city of Nineveh in the days of Jonah and Nahum, or the origins of marriage.

Hence, there is always a sense in which it doesn’t matter what someone else believes or doesn’t believe about what the Bible says – or what the Book of Genesis has to say about marriage. By faith, you know what it says is true – which means you also know you have an obligation to obey it by arranging (or rearranging) your marriage according to whatever you find in the Scriptures (albeit never by your own strength, but always and only by that which Christ supplies – or as the Book of Galatians says, “never by the flesh, which is foolishness, but always by the power of the Spirit”! (c.f. Galatians 3:3).

(C) WHO’S UP FIRST?

(1) When we take a closer look at this morning’s Scripture lesson, to see what it has to say about the origins of marriage, one thing we find (as we noted earlier in passing) is that the man was created first – and then the woman. It’s the man whom “God formed from the dust of the ground”, in verse seven – and the man whom God “put in the garden of Eden to take care of it”, in verse fifteen. It’s the man whom God commanded “not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (in verses sixteen and seventeen) – and the man of whom God says (in verse eighteen) that “it is not good for him to be ALONE”. Indeed, the woman doesn’t even enter the biblical picture in Genesis chapter two until verse twenty-two, when “God fashions her out of one of the man’s ribs and brings her to him” (c.f. Genesis 2:7, 15-18, 22).

(2) At this point, however, someone may ask: “So what?” “Does it really make any difference what order the man and woman were created in?” “Someone had to be first, and it just happened to be the man!” Actually, the order does matter! For example, the respective roles of husbands and wives in marriage are founded upon the order in which they were created – roles which can be summed up by those two politically incorrect words, “headship” and “submission.”

Moreover, as we’ve already noted, Paul not only applies the roles of male headship and female submission to marriage, he also applies them to the church, when he says (in First Timothy chapter two) that: ¹¹“A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire SUBMISSIVENESS. ¹²But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise AUTHORITY (i.e. headship) over a man, but to remain quiet. (Why?) ¹³FOR (or because) IT WAS ADAM WHO WAS (CREATED FIRST), AND THEN EVE” (c.f. I Timothy 2:11-13).

Hence, the order in which God created the first man and woman was not random, or without purpose. On the contrary, God was actually laying part of the foundation for why men and women have different roles in marriage (as well as in the church).

(3) Now some people attempt to counter this interpretation by saying that the roles of headship and submission were established AFTER the Fall, as part of the curse – when God told the woman, in Genesis chapter three: “… your husband … will RULE over you” (c.f. Genesis 3:16). They then go on to say that, since the New Testament tells us “there is (now) neither … male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (c.f. Galatians 3:28), that means this part of the curse has been lifted, and that the roles of headship and submission in marriage have been done away with in Christ.

Not so! The roles of headship and submission actually predate the Fall – as Paul confirms in First Timothy chapter two (c.f. I Timothy 2:13). Hence, those roles are perfected in Christ – not abrogated. In Christ, rather than being dismissed or set aside, Christian husbands and Christian wives are more nearly able to carry out their respective marriage roles the way God originally intended! Even the way Adam and Eve did prior to the Fall.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

¹http://www.nba.com/analysis/00422949.html: NBA 101 –

History of the Shot Clock

²http://www.modern-communism.ca/mc43103.htm

³http;//faculty.oxy.edu/tobin/honors/justina/justinadraft4.html

⁴MacArthur: The MacArthur Bible Commentary; p. 4.