The Levirate Marriage Custom
|
Written and compiled by Gary Kukis
These studies are designed for believers in Jesus Christ only. If you have exercised faith in Christ, then
you are in the right place. If you have not, then you need to heed the words of our Lord, Who said, “For
God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten [or, uniquely-born] Son, so that every [one]
believing [or, trusting] in Him shall not perish, but shall be have eternal life! For God did not send His
Son into the world so that He should judge the world, but so that the world shall be saved through Him.
The one believing [or, trusting] in Him is not judged, but the one not believing has already been judged,
because he has not believed in the Name of the only-begotten [or, uniquely-born] Son of God.”
(John 3:16–18). “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life! No one comes to the Father except through
[or, by means of] Me!” (John 14:6).
Every study of the Word of God ought to be preceded by a naming of your sins to God. This restores
you to fellowship with God (1John 1:8–10). If we acknowledge our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive
us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1John 1:9). If there are people around, you
would name these sins silently. If there is no one around, then it does not matter if you name them
silently or whether you speak aloud.
Preface: There was an ancient world custom, found in many cultures, that when a husband died, not
fathering a child, the wife could marry his brother, and their first son would be raised as the
son of the deceased husband. For us today, it is a very peculiar custom.
There are many misconceptions and distortions of the levirate marriage custom of the ancient
world. In fact, this custom has been used in the political propaganda of gay marriage
advocates. Ideally speaking, this short doctrine will clear up any confusion.
The ESV; capitalized will be used throughout, unless otherwise noted.
Levirate And Sororate Marriages
Under this method, marriage is observed less like
an union associated with two people and more
being an alliance among families that have to
continue even with the dying of a partner. It
stresses the legal rights and responsibilities
between family member groups. Inside a levirate
relationship, a man marries the widow of their
deceased sibling. In some cases, kids born from
the union are seen as the sons from the first
spouse. They stay part of their descent team and
they are therefore avoided from becoming
separated using their mother. Levirate marriages
are usually practiced within tribal areas in the
Americas, Africa, Indian, and Sydney.
In a sororate marriage, used among indigenous
tribes within North America plus India, the
deceased moms kin team offers a sibling as a
spouse to the widower. Some ethnicities arrange
sororate marriages when the first spouse proves
to become barren. The kids born from the second
spouse are considered in order to belong to the
very first. In circumstances when an appropriate
brother or even sister is just not available for
relationship, other suitable kin relationships may
be provided instead.
|
Picture and text is taken from Unorthodox Types
of Marriages; accessed June 6, 2016.
|
There are only 3 passages which discuss a levirate marriage in Scripture: Gen. 38, a portion of
Deut. 29, and the book of Ruth.
|
Passages Which Mention the Levirate Marriage Custom
|
Scripture
|
Text/Commentary
|
Gen 38:1–5b It happened at that time that Judah went
down from his brothers and turned aside to a certain
Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. There Judah saw
the daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was
Shua. He took her and went in to her, and she conceived
and bore a son, and he called his name Er. She
conceived again and bore a son, and she called his
name Onan. Yet again she bore a son, and she called
his name Shelah. Judah was in Chezib when she bore
him.
|
This gives us the names of most of the
people pertinent to this historical narrative
on this subject.
There are several hints in Gen. 38 that this
Canaanite gal was not a great marriage.
The fact that she is giving birth to a 3rd son
and he is not there is one of those hints.
|
Gen 38:6–7 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn,
and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah's firstborn, was
wicked in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD put him
to death.
|
Although Judah chose his own wife, he
goes out of his way to select a wife for Er,
his firstborn. Judah does this when Er is
quite young (he will marry around age 14
or 15). Er dies the sin unto death.
|
Gen 38:8–10 Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your
brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to
her, and raise up offspring for your brother." But Onan
knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he
went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen
on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother.
And what he did was wicked in the sight of the LORD,
and he put him to death also.
|
Judah then speaks to his second son, who
was to marry and raise up seed to his
deceased brother. What this means is, his
brother’s name would be preserved in the
firstborn child; and that child would have
the privileges of being the firstborn [grand]
son of Judah.
|
Gen 38:11 Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, "Remain a widow in your father's house, till Shelah
my son grows up"—for he feared that he would die, like
his brothers. So Tamar went and remained in her father's
house.
|
Up until this point, Judah had been acting
within the expectations of his culture. But,
sending Tamar back to her father is
outside of the proper customs of that day.
She married into Judah’s family when she
married Er. Furthermore, she was
selected specifically by Judah.
|
The rest of the chapter is not really pertinent to this subject. Tamar tricks Judah into fathering a child
by her, and thus performs the duties of a levirate husband.
|
Deut. 25:5 “If brothers dwell together, and one of them
dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not
be married outside the family to a stranger. Her
husband's brother shall go in to her and take her as his
wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.
And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the
name of his dead brother, that his name may not be
blotted out of Israel.
|
The book of Deuteronomy are the
judgments and the thoughts of Moses, at
age 120, before he is about to die, and
before the children of Israel enter the Land
of Promise being led by Joshua.
Moses speaks of the conditions necessary
to require a levirate marriage.
|
Deut. 25:7 And if the man does not wish to take his
brother's wife, then his brother's wife shall go up to the
gate to the elders and say, ‘My husband's brother
refuses to perpetuate his brother's name in Israel; he will
not perform the duty of a husband's brother to me.’
|
The brother has an out. He can refuse to
take part in this sort of marriage.
|
Deut. 25:8–9 Then the elders of his city shall call him
and speak to him, and if he persists, saying, ‘I do not
wish to take her,’ then his brother's wife shall go up to
him in the presence of the elders and pull his sandal off
his foot and spit in his face. And she shall answer and
say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who does not build
up his brother's house.’
|
There was some social stigma attached,
but this clearly requires the woman to
pursue the levirate marriage arrangement
and for the brother to refuse it.
|
Deut. 25:10 And the name of his house shall be called in
Israel, ‘The house of him who had his sandal pulled off.’
|
There was some societal disapprobation
attached to refusing the levirate
responsibility.
|
The Book of Ruth is about Ruth, who marries a son of Naomi; but that son dies. Ruth is determined
to go with her mother-in-law into the Land of Promise. Ruth 1:16–18 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me
to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will
lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will
I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” And
when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more.
|
|
Life was not easy for single women who had
husbands who died. Often they were able to eat
only by going into harvested wheat fields and
gathering up what had not been harvested.
Ruth 2:1–3 Now Naomi had a relative of her
husband's, a worthy man of the clan of
Elimelech, whose name was Boaz. And Ruth
the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the
field and glean among the ears of grain after him
in whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to
her, “Go, my daughter.” So she set out and
went and gleaned in the field after the reapers,
and she happened to come to the part of the
field belonging to Boaz, who was of the clan of
Elimelech. Boaz, a relative of Naomi, owned the
field, and he married Ruth. Ruth 4:13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in
to her, and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son.
Ruth in the Field of Boaz; from Duns Scotus Bible Centre; accessed June 6, 2016.
|
Interestingly enough, one of the children of Judah and Tamar was Perez, and he was the great, great,
great, great grandfather of Boaz, who was the great grandfather of David (Ruth 4:18–22).
|
It ought to be clear from these passages that, God nowhere requires the custom of levirate marriage;
but God does not disapprove of it either. Moses laid down some laws regarding this custom, which
also gave the man a way out.
|
We are studying Gen. 38 and we have come upon the first mention of a levirate marriage in the Bible.
A levirate marriage is when the husband of a wife dies, the wife is childless, and so his brother (or
another close relative) steps up and marries the woman. In the Bible, this is always done with the
expressed desire to raise up a son in the name of the deceased brother; but these kinds of marriages
can come about even when a family has already been started.
The people involved in Gen. 38 are these:
|
The People of the First Recorded Levirate Marriage
|
Person
|
Description
|
Judah
|
Judah is the 4th son of Jacob, the grandson of Abraham. Judah appears to be
estranged from his family at this time. Judah will be the line of Messiah, although
no one would have known this at this time.
|
Er
|
Er is the first son of Judah. Judah arranged a marriage between Tamar and Er; but
Er will die the sin unto death before fathering a child by Tamar.
|
Tamar
|
Tamar is a woman of unknown origin. Judah finds her and arranges a marriage
between her and Er. She and Er marry as a very young couple (Er could be as
young as 14).
|
Onan
|
Onan is Judah’s second son, who had the responsibility to marry Tamar and raise
up a child by her. He married her, but went out of his way not to have children by
her. The likely reason is, a child raised up as Er’s child would have deprived Onan
of a sizable inheritance.
|
Shelah
|
Shelah is the 3rd son of Judah, who had been promised to Tamar; but Judah had
no intention of delivering here, believing Tamar to be bad luck (a black widow, if
you will).
|
This scorecard will make it easier to understand the names and actions of those mentioned below.
|
The overall time frame appears to be a around 20 years, during which time, Judah returns to his father,
and then separates from his family. He marries a Canaanites and has 3 sons by her. These sons
grow up old enough to be married (probably mid-teens), and Judah’s wife dies. There are constraining
factors of other portions of Genesis which confine this time period to 22 years or less.
|
Judah, one of the sons of Jacob, married a Canaanite woman and had 3 sons by her. He found a wife
(Tamar) for his first son (Er), but that first son died the sin unto death early on in the marriage.
Therefore, Judah compelled his next son, Onan, to impregnate her and marry her (the first son would
be brought up as a son of Er rather than the son of Onan). Onan appeared to go along with this idea,
but he spilled his seed on the ground so that he would not impregnate Tamar (this happened on
numerous occasions). Onan had probably figured out that, if he fathered a son in Er’s name, that son
would have reduced Onan’s own inheritance considerably (because Er died, Onan would now get the
double portion of his father’s inheritance; however, if Onan has a son under Er’s name, that son would
get the double portion). Because he did not father a son as he had agreed to, God took him out by the
sin unto death.
Judah promises Tamar his next son, Shelah; but he does not follow through on this promise, apparently
blaming Tamar for the deaths of his other two sons. How this plays out is found in Gen. 38 (HTML)
(PDF) (WPD).
In any case, had Onan followed through and impregnated and married Tamar, this would have been a
levirate marriage with a resultant son raised up as Er’s son.
There are many things which might surprise you about the Levirate marriage: (1) there are only 3 Old
Testament passages which speak of it and (2) this is a custom practiced all over the world (see
Wikipedia on Levirate Marriage). (3) There is no indication that God instituted levirate marriage; but He
seemingly condones it, as Moses made it a part of the Mosaic Law in Deut. 25. Once this study is
complete, you will understand why. God’s laws, as given to Moses, seemed to take into account some
of the cultural norms and standards of that era.
The levirate marriage is made fun of by those in the gay marriage movement, who found a number of
unusual marriages in the Bible and said, “If you are okay with these kinds of marriages in the Bible, then
surely you cannot object to gay people marrying.” (Or words to that effect.) The logic was, religious
Christians were the main people who objected to gay marriage; so unusual marriages were found in the
Bible (and gay marriage proponents put the worst possible spin placed on them). Furthermore, gay
marriage proponents presented these marriages as God-approved marriages (some were, some were
not; and some were distorted). The reasoning being, “God approves of these marriages, so you cannot
object to gay marriage.” This particular topic is covered in Marriage Alternatives in the Bible (HTML)
(PDF) (WPD).
The problem is, God does not approve of all forms of marriage found in the Bible (God does not condone
polygamy, but He tolerates it). Nor do all of these forms of marriage originate with God (the levirate
marriage appears to be a very common custom of that era). Also, gay marriage proponents often portray
some sets of marriages in the Bible inaccurately (you should not expect expert exegetical information
from the gay community when it comes to the Bible and the few who put some stock in Scripture, twist
it about in order to justify their own behavior).
The passage we are studying, Gen. 38, appears to be the oldest literature (that I am aware of) which
speaks of such a marriage arrangement; but it is recorded in Genesis as an existing custom. Judah does
not look the situation over and say, “Hey, I’ve got a great idea here!” God does not speak to Judah,
saying, “Listen, son, this is what I want you to do...” What takes place in Gen. 38 simply falls within the
cultural norms of that day, and given that day and time, this is not a bad cultural norm.
There are some things which are not clear about this custom (known to us today as a levirate marriage).
Could Judah have divorced Tamar (his daughter-in-law) from the family? Could he have come and said,
“Look, we will not be providing for you a kinsman to stand in for Er.” Or was it his responsibility to see
that Er’s first child would be raised up through her? The latter seems to be the case. In fact, there
appears to be a reasonable amount of social pressure for Judah, the father-in-law, to take care of this.
Furthermore, near the end of Gen. 38, Judah will try to have Tamar executed for being pregnant; and
that would make sense if she is married or promised in marriage; but it would make less sense if she is
simply a widow.
Primarily, a Levirate marriage is described from the man’s point of view in the Bible. The doctrine
below considers both the men and the woman in the arrangement.
|
Robert Dean and Jack Ballinger on the Levirate Marriage
|
1. A levirate marriage (or levirate obligation) is the marriage of a childless widow to her husband's
brother. This seems very odd to us. If a woman is married and her husband dies before they
have children, then his brother has the responsibility to come in and to marry her for the purpose
of raising up children in the dead man's name. The first son is considered the son of the
deceased husband; not the brother's. The term Levirate derives from the Latin word for
brother-in-law.
2. This custom preserved the name and inheritance of any son who died prematurely.
3. The custom, which may seem to be somewhat bizarre to the modern reader, was widely
practiced among Israel’s neighbors. The Assyrians and the Hittites, and Nuzi and Ugarit held to
this custom.
4. The brother-in-law, in this case Onan, is supposed to come in, marry Tamar, and their first child
that they have would not be considered his. They are considered hers and Er’s, because he is
the oldest. As a result, their first child would be the beneficiary of double the inheritance.
5. The Mosaic law incorporated Levirate marriage into the law in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. It is
designed to protect widows in society who have lost their husband, who don't have a source of
income. Such women do not have a male to protect them, and, because they are childless they
don't have sons top grow up and take care of them. That is part of the reason for this custom.
The book of Ruth is based on this practice, although in Ruth, it is a distant relative who marries
Ruth.
6. The Sadducees also used this law in an attempt to trap Jesus (Luke 20:27-44).
7. The passage in Deuteronomy provides a way out for the brother of the deceased to avoid this
obligation. There was some humiliation, but if he truly objected to this marriage, he could get out
of it.
8. The principle provided for the widow who was left without a husband, without protection, and
without a source of income. It was designed to take care of her.
9. The law was also designed to protect the family inheritance. There is a significant emphasis in
Scripture on protecting inheritance and providing inheritance for the next generation.
|
The Levirate Marriage from the woman’s perspective: The Bible explains the levirate marriage
primarily from a male viewpoint. A man and a woman are married; the husband dies, but before giving
his wife a son. A member of the man’s family is then brought in to impregnate the woman, to raise up
a child in the name of her deceased husband. Logically, this son would continue the line of the
deceased husband and this son would be entitled to his inheritance as well.
This custom is confusing and even troubling for many, but perhaps if I put a slightly different spin on the
custom, you might better understand and appreciate it. Unlike today, when a woman might have many
sexual encounters and several husbands, and yet still manage to get married once again, that was not
the way things were done in the era of ancient Canaan (later Israel).
Marrying a virginal bride was so important in the ancient world that the bloodied bed sheets from the first
night of their marriage bed were collected and delivered to the father of the bride, and he saved them
as proof of his daughter’s virginity (Deut. 22:13–17). This indicates that the father delivered a virginal
bride to her new husband; and that the new husband is now responsible for this woman—the woman
whose virginity he took.
Most of the time in the ancient world, once a woman has had sexual intercourse, even within the confines
of marriage, that made her nearly ineligible for a second marriage, regardless of the circumstances of
the first marriage. Furthermore, it was much more difficult in that era for a woman to make it on her own
(hence the Bible often speaks of caring for the widows and orphans).
Therefore, a woman whose husband has died early, without giving her a son, has several strikes against
her: (1) she is not as marriageable as she was as a virgin; (2) it is not very easy for such a woman to take
care of herself; and (3) she has no son to care for her in her old age. Since these are not considerations
for a woman in 21st century America, a levirate marriage would be inappropriate. On the other hand, in
its cultural context, you might understand how a levirate marriage provided protection for the widow.
When this woman married into a family, she became a part of that family. If her husband died, then she
was still a member of her new family, and it was up to them to look after her. This was done through a
levirate marriage.
There are other factors at play as well. There is a natural yearning in most women to have and raise
children. Even though there are obvious exceptions to this, it is normal for both men and women to
desire children. Furthermore, even in today’s deviant society, the family is still the essential building
block of society.
A union with another member of the family (her kinsman-redeemer, as it were) offered this woman a
family as well as the protection and provision of marriage. So, such a woman is not cast aside in society,
but she embraced by the family that she originally married into; and provided for and protected by that
family (usually by the brother of her deceased husband).
In summation, the name of the brother who dies prematurely is preserved; and the woman who married
into his family continues as a part of that family, and she is protected and provided for.
By understanding all the ramifications of such a marriage, it helps us to better understand why it was
important to ancient culture, in that it protected and provided for the weak. This also explains, from a
human standpoint, why the Bible would allow and even support such a marriage.
In conclusion, it ought to be clear that the levirate marriage was not imposed upon a woman whose
husband had just died, but provided for such a woman. In Deuteronomy, it is clear that the woman might
initiate a levirate marriage and it is also clear that a surviving brother might decline as well.
At no time is God requiring that this sort of marriage take place; the laws of Moses simply allow for all
parties to this custom to participate as a result of their own free will.
|
The Abbreviated Doctrine of
|
|
