It has been 70 years that the people of Israel have been without their land and without their temple. But Cyrus, the king of Persia, finally decrees they may return and rebuild their altars. So the remnant returns, despite opposition, and begins to rebuild. It is a time of both sadness and joy. Sadness and weeping for those old men who remembered the past glory of the temple. Joy and shouting for those who saw the hope of the new start. And the sounds of weeping and shouting mixed together and could be heard far away.
After the temple was finished, another group of exiles returned, led by Ezra. Ezra, we are told at least three times, was well versed in the Law of Moses. He would need to use his knowledge to lead the returned people to live well in their new old home. One of the first major issues is that some of the Israelites had married people from the surrounding nations. So after prayer, fasting and counsel, they led the Israelite men to put away their foreign wives.
This story rankles with many, especially since for many people, Christianity consists of or at least very closely aligns with the respectable family - man, woman and kids. Also, love (and society in general) should be 'colour-blind', and the nationality of the other person should not make a difference in how they should be treated. How can we faithfully look at Ezra's instructions? Do we need to enfoce the divorce of any mixed-race couples we see?
First of all, we need to be clear that marriage at that time was not the same as it is today, legally or socially. The language of men that 'have taken some of their daughters as wives' may well be literally true, in that it was common for a man to see a woman, and think 'mm good child-bearing hips, I should give her dad some cows and take her home'. The woman is like property to be purchased. This is in marked contrast to the western modern view which is much more egalitarian and based on mutual feelings.
The main difference between the two contexts is in what it means to be a member of God's people. Under the old covenant, God's people consisted of those who were descendants of Abraham. They were offered God's righteousness, made possible by sacrifices made in the temple. Along with the sacrificial system for dealing with sin, there was the day-to-day living in righteousness, achieved by separation from unclean and unholy "other" objects and actions.
The new covenant was a fulfillment of this old covenant, in that it 'fills it up' and expands its reach. Life under the new covenant is again characterised by living in righteousness, and avoiding outside and unholy things. The sacrificial system is still in place, but it is completed, since Jesus Christ was and is the perfect sacrifice. So personal and repeated animal sacrifices are gone. Finally, the boundaries of 'God's people' have shifted outwards. It is no longer only hereditary descendants of Abraham, but spiritual descendants "grafted in" to the family tree through Jesus Christ (the grafting metaphor comes from Romans 11).
Under the old covenant, the Israelites were warned against intermarrying with other people in the land. This was because the others were not holy or covered by the covenant. For a start, they are unholy simply by virtue of the fact that they are not of God. But they also have their own gods and traditions which would lead the Israelistes into abandoning God and into idolatry. Joining the holy with the unholy makes the holy unholy (except in exceptional circumstances. See: Jesus).
Under the new covenant, our primary heritage is no longer our ancestors but our spiritual heritage, that is, Jesus Christ. Galatians (3:26,28) reads 'For in Christ Jesus you are all sons (and daughters) of God, through faith. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ'. So the great news is that people of every race, tribe and nation can be and are a part of God's family. Thus they are legal marriage material (and there are many couples breathing a sigh of relief).
As I try to apply this passage to today's world, I find myself on shakier ground, as I feel very unqualified to give marriage advice. I think that the modern analogue of of Ezra's situation would be marriages between people of different faiths. If you are a Christian aiming to follow in Christ's footsteps, why would you unite yourself with someone who is not? The situation gets muddied when we consider those who are already married when one comes to faith. The New Testament writers (and I'll include Jesus under this umbrella) were opposed to divorce except for adultery, and in fact Peter even encourages wives to remain in marriage to an unbelieving husband (1 Peter 3:1). But they also are clear about eliminating anything that leads to unrighteousness and/or hinders your walk with God (eg If your eye causes you to sin, pull it out). But then again there's the need for grace and acceptance of "sinners". So, it requires discernment for each situation.
Ezra covers the return of the Israelites to their land, and the re-establishment and re-alignment of their lives according to God's word.
No comments:
Post a Comment