Skip to main content

News Flash- Marriage across race lines is not itself immoral

   I have encountered people in my life who hold to the dogmatic notion that marriage across racial lines is immoral according to "The Bible." I've studied the topic from Genesis to Revelation and I would have to admit that there is no such command which prohibits people from marrying those of other races just based on the category of race or nationality alone. It is therefore morally acceptable for believers in Christ to marry people of other races and nationalities if the spouse is a believer in Christ as well (2 Corinthians 6:14). There is concern throughout the Scriptures, however, when it comes to believers in the true and living God marrying foreigners who worship other gods because of the fact that the foreigners might/will turn their spouses to false gods and idols. One does not even need to understand various paradigms of covenant theology to understand this. One need only look at the various obvious examples which are prominently featured in the arguments concerning interracial marriage.
   Deuteronomy 7 is one of the first direct commands in which God directs people to avoid marrying foreigners. However, the passage must be considered in its full context, not just the surrounding passage, but in historical context, and in the context of redemptive and covenental history.
Deuteronomy 7-
When the Lord your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you,and when the Lord your God delivers them before you and you [a]defeat them, then you shall[b]utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them.Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your [c]daughters to [d]their sons, nor shall you take [e]their daughters for your [f]sons. For [g]they will turn your [h]sons away from[i]following Me to serve other gods; then the anger of the Lord will be kindled against you and He will quickly destroy you. But thus you shall do to them: you shall tear down their altars, and smash their sacred pillars, and hew down their [j]Asherim, and burn their graven images with fire. For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His [k]own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the [l]earth.
[endquote]  
   It should be fairly obvious that the command was specifically given to the children of Israel on their journey through the wilderness to Canaan and concerns how they were to deal with the foreigners who occupied the land which they were to inherit- they were to obliterate them completely. Marriage would have been completely out of the question as the idolatry of the nations had been so prolonged and reprehensible to the Lord God, that it called for judgment in the form of military conquest. Specifically, verse 7:4 gives the reason why Israel was not to marry any of the foreigners from those nations- the spouses would cause them to turn to and serve other gods. Furthermore, the commands to completely obliterate them preclude the possibility of marriages being formed with them. 
   In no way does the passage mean that Christians have license to conquer unbelieving countries by brute force simply because they worship other gods. The biblical New Testament commandments call for us preach the gospel to all nations. I am reminded of Greg Bahnsen's writing on Theonomy, in which although he gave lip service to postmilllenialism, he insisted that the Christian faith must be spread to the whole world by the preaching of the gospel, not the sword, before Jesus returns. What we see in Deuteronomy 7 was part of the Mosaic Covenant (insofar as it was part of the pentateuch, or the books of the law) which was temporal and temporary, and replaced with a better covenant at the cross of Jesus Christ. Ceremonial commands and commands which have to do with preserving Israel's national identity and distinction were done away with (or fulfilled) at the cross of Jesus Christ. The destruction of the temple of Jerusalem in 70 AD brought an end to the Mosaic economy completely in the most practical and necessary sense. 
   Even a study of Ezra and Nehemiah will reveal that concerns about interracial/international marriage had to do with the influence of false religion and idolatry on the people of God. 
   I will have to finish this later. It is a huge topic of interest to me.
   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Night Fever," new song of mine could have many biblical implications

    Many people think of going to do something for the Lord like the preach the gospel, but will they really consider what the backlash would or could be like against them in many forms?     During my years of preaching with and alongside Third Street Ministries the typical level of discomfort normally experienced was just the prodding of scoffers and mockers in the mission field. It was kept from encroaching on our personal lives for an extended time, even despite posting videos. My testimony would indicate just how cautious, circumspect, and in agreement with your fellow believers you have to be in order to avoid a problem. That is especially true if you are working at the "trenches" level of confronting the unbelieving world.     In this new song "Night Fever," I just describe in vague terms one day in July 2011 when my ministry efforts with them finally got derailed more seriously. Tom of 1tmoch fame called my cellphone (or we called each other) and I planned to

A Song No One Knew Could Be About John the Baptist

     I’ve recently come to the conclusion that “One More Try” by George Michael could have one interpretation as being about John the Baptist. This would indeed a highly compelling interpretation of the song. The song seems to depict a man, sung in first person narrative (I interpret as being John the Baptist), upset by his previous teacher (I interpret here as Jesus), and trying to reason with another person he wants as his lover. This third person, (the lover), for the sake of my interpretation could be Salome, or someone else. The way that the video depicts him confined in a room with stained glass windows makes me feel like it’s John singing from prison before he was beheaded. He’s saying that it’s too bad he can’t see Jesus any longer, and could she please give him one more try even though he’s behind bars.       I happen to like this interpretation a lot, because it makes John the Baptist look like a rockstar. He was indeed said by Christ as being “Elijah who was to come” Matthe

Say "Hello" to the Man Behind the Curtain (He's the stalker you wanted to know about)

    I'm sure that a lot of people have sensed or noticed heightened vigilance in society over "stalkers." What most people have not probably considered is that the cause of the phenomenon of concern could be subterfuge of subconscious mechanisms (in coordination possibly with covert or subliminal efforts by corporations) by which people's unconscious guilt for participating with, being compliant with, complicit with, (or otherwise silently approving) harmful systems that do actually "stalk" average citizens for real, is projected on someone other than the real cause of their inner distress, worry, and heavy-laden guilt. These systems could include corporate America, the banking industry, the government (the IRS mostly comes to mind- thank you David Foster Wallace for The Pale King, the book from which I took down some nice notes to go over later, mainly concerning the political/economic theories of Alexis de Tocqueville, participatory democracy, corporations