In this post, I’d like to discuss marriage, specifically, Christian marriage. I do this without any intention to disparage how one society or another views marriage (e.g. child marriage), or the other customs that relate to marriage in different societies. So, my focus will be on what the authors of the Bible and those ecclesiastical authorities who followed during the two millennia later taught and practiced.
In the most succinct terms, Jesus defined marriage in Matthew 19:5, 6 where He said:
“For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’. So, they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
I also want to avoid a discussion of marriage through the ages, common law marriage, plural marriage (i.e., polygamy), gay marriage, the requirement of some denominations for church leaders to remain celibate and so on, else I might never finish this post.
Be that as it may, I wanted to focus on several different passages, particularly those that compare marriage to a team of oxen. While most of us in the West likely have never been face-to-face with an ox, I have, and that’s no bull. In third world countries, a trained pair of oxen may be more valuable to a farmer than even his house!
ΣΥΖΥΓΕ IN CLASSICAL GREEK
In Philippians 4:3, the Apostle Paul gives a shout out to his σύζυγε (yoke fellow.) While this word can and is used from time to time in classical literature to mean “close companion” or “co-worker,” the primary context is marriage.
“While the term can extend to partnerships outside of marriage, in classical contexts, it is predominantly used to refer to married couples, thereby encompassing the notion of mutual responsibility and support.[1]”
Thus, in his Symposium, Plato embellishes this thought as follows:
“In the dialogues of Plato, the concept of σύζυγος emerges in philosophical discussions that transcend mere romantic entanglement to explore the nature of love and companionship in a broader, more intellectual context. The dialogues suggest that true companionship extends beyond physical attraction to include a sharing of values and a mutual pursuit of knowledge, indicating that the essence of being a “σύζυγος” is deeply intertwined with personal growth and moral development.”[2]
So, in some sense, this “entanglement” appears in other interpersonal domains between a man and woman. Consider the Celtic art that appears in many different iterations. Part of the appeal (at least as far as I am concerned) is the intricacy of the knot or design, and the difficulty one might have in tracing the line(s) from start to finish, yet alone unraveling it. Think of the photos of co-joined twins that you may have seen. In some cases, each has their own vital organs, and the connection may be at the hip or some superficial flap of skin. In those cases, they can be separated without serious consequence. However, sometime they share a vital organ like a heart or a liver, and to separate them in that case would assure the death of one to guarantee the life of the other.
Plato, incidentally, was highly respected by the early Church. He was born and died 347 or 348 B.C., but was seen by the apostolic fathers as a sort of “righteous gentile” though Scripture assures us that righteousness cannot be earned or achieved on one’s own. Virgil, for example, reported that Plato was in the first circle of hell while Dante was a bit more charitable and observed Plato in Limbo, instead.
The term “σύζυγος” (syzygos) in classical Greek embodies more than just a straightforward definition of “spouse” or “partner.”
“The etymological roots, deriving from σύν (syn), meaning “with,” and ζυγός (zygos), meaning “yoke” or “pair,” suggest a profound connection between two individuals, emphasizing friendship, companionship, and shared life experiences. This term encapsulates a reciprocal relationship that is foundational to social and familial structures in ancient Greece.”
Incidentally, the medical word for “egg” comes from ζυγός (zygos). Identical twins are referred to a “monozygotic” or from the same egg.
So, while the term σύζυγος could be used to describe a Platonic (pardon the pun) relationship between two people regardless of sex, Greeks usually reserved it for making a point about marriage.
Famous Greek writers such as Aristophanes, Xenophon, Hippocrates and others all used σύζυγος in the sense that they were speaking to, or of, someone’s spouse.
What I’d like to do next is explore the notion of being yoked together. By the way, there is a 1958 film called “The Defiant Ones” where two prisoners, Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis escape custody while handcuffed together. Curtis does not like black folks and Poitier has little love for white people. They have different ideas of where to go to evade capture and how to survive, but they cannot free themselves from the bond (read “yoke”) of the handcuffs. By the end of the movie which is creatively filmed in black and while, they become fast friends willing to die for the other. It is well worth watching, almost inspirational.
EQUALLY YOKED
Over the centuries, cultures that have used oxen to plow or perform other laborious tasks such as pulling great weights have developed a time-tested approach to choosing a successful team. There are several principles that should be scrupulously observed when selecting a pair of oxen (or draught horses as well.)
The first principle is to yoke only animals of the same species. Never yoke a horse and an ox together, or a water buffalo and a cow. In general, oxen of roughly the same strength are preferred in pairing, but a weaker ox is complimented by a stronger ox in any case. The temperament of the oxen is also important. Carelessly yoking together two oxen with equally strong wills or competitively dominant dispositions will cause a farmer and the oxen, themselves, frustration. These oxen will struggle against each other rather than cooperate together. This brings to mind the horses of Plato’s Chariot Allegory.
The second principle is that the oxen must be trained to work together, to develop a rhythm between them. This does not happen overnight. It taken time and effort. Lack of synchronized effort can lead to injury to either man or beast. A less experienced ox is not afraid to learn from a more experienced partner.
The third principle is to avoid breaking up an experienced pair, because yoking an ox to a different partner is stressful to both animals. Familiarity is important to both beasts. Oxen also form strong bonds with each other, and this natural social tendency to bond together is particularly important when precision is needed, or when the ground ahead of them is rocky or uneven. A successful pair of oxen will nurture each other, particularly when one is tired or needs encouragement.
Last but not least, the oxen must be taught to listen to and obey the commands of the farmer or teamster as the situation applies. In these cases, he (or she) is the master with the grand design of what is to be accomplished by their labor.
It should be obvious how these principles apply to intimate human relationships, specifically marriage. There are indeed verses in the Bible that speak to the need for submissiveness of the women to the male in marriage. There may even have been times when verses such as Ephesians 5:22-23 were interpreted by men as a license to bully and abuse their spouse, which is certainly not what God has in mind. And. it is true that often Scriptural verses are viewed and practiced through the lenses of a given period in time. Today, many Christians see marriage as something of a partnership, where each seeks to please and support the other and this view is equally supported in the New Testament and in the lives of the Patriachs.
Why a partnership? Well, if, for example, my wife has a talent of saving and spending money wisely (and she does), and I was personally less inclined to do so (as I am), it would be foolish of me to not consult her in the finances of our marriage.
UNEQUALLY YOKED
When speaking of Christian marriage, St. Paul has one more important consideration. He tells us not to be “unequally yoked.” In II Corinthians 6:14ff, he uses this phrase in a religious context. It is important for Christians to exchange views of their faith in discussions with a potential spouse. A frank and open talk of the two people’s faith is just as important as discussing whether they hope to have children, or know the other’s state of health, debt and credit score and so on (perhaps even more so.) All too often, a person’s faith can be a cause of friction in a marriage and it can be an obstacle that ultimately leads to divorce. In his first letter to the church in Corinth, Paul has some advice, sort of “damage control,” for a believer who finds themselves to be unequally yoked in this regard (verses 12-14):
“To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.”
Now, I would be less than truthful if I did not admit that there are some passages in the Bible that are difficult to understand, or even to reconcile with other passages. Perhaps this might be a good post for the future in this blog. Verses 12-14 here seem to suggest that if there is at least one Christian in the home, somehow through that person the nonbelieving spouse and the nonbelieving children are better off than if the believer left the household. Maybe Paul was thinking of mentoring—being a role model—or maybe there is some subtext here that speaks to the mysterious moving of the Holy Spirit. I just don’t have wisdom or insight to unpack this passage any further. But I do believe that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16), so he does not want us to set ourselves up for failure by being unequally yoked.
Still, I have to weigh this passage in Malachi with the evil and conceit and spite I’ve seen in people during my lifetime. I read comments once from a young psychologist living in the Dallas metropolitan area of Texas. After hanging her shingle on her office door, she was horrified at what she heard while she conducted marriage counseling. She described in painful terms the head games people play with each other, the violence they perpetrate on each other, the manipulation, revenge and so on and she regretted ever becoming a marriage counselor. She could not deal with this. So, because a spouse may be in danger physically or otherwise, Jesus says that God allowed Moses to offer divorce in the Torah.
THE APOSTLE PAUL
I cited Paul just above. The question is, what did he know about marriage? Most Christians who have an opinion of the apostle Paul’s marital status would say that he was a bachelor. After all, in I Corinthians 7:8 he does say “Now to the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.” He cannot be any plainer than that. Yet, the full sense of New Testament Scripture with an important caveat added suggests otherwise. Paul apparently came from a well-to-do, influential family. After all, Paul’s father was able to convince Gamaliel to accept Paul as his pupil. And Gamaliel, the first religious leader to receive the venerated title “rabban” from the Jews, themselves, was himself a member of the Sanhedrin in Israel. Around the time of Stephen’s death, it seems that Paul may been admitted to the assembly himself. This is based on his word choices when he spoke to King Agrippa in Acts 26:10 as reported by Luke. It is a bit more tedious to explain (and comprehend) the grammar and word choices that Paul used when speaking to Agrippa, I’ll pass on this. But it would be easy for you to search for yourself. It sounds like Paul was claiming to be a member of the Sanhedrin in a way that Agrippa would understand.
The Sanhedrin was the Council of Elders that met daily in the Temple in Jerusalem. Most of them were fairly advanced in age and Paul was a relatively young man even at the time of his conversion. Yet, there were occasionally younger men such as Paul that sat on that religious body as well. One thing is certain. If Paul were indeed a member of this august body, he would have had to have been married, because marriage was a prerequisite for membership. Perhaps it was an arranged marriage negotiated by his parents when Paul was still a minor? There is just no way of knowing.
In I Corinthians 9:5, Paul notes that Peter and other apostles had wives, and he defends his right to have a wife as well.
“Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas.[3]”
So, it is quite possible that Paul was married at some point in his life, perhaps earlier than later. And we know Peter was married because Jesus healed his mother-in-law and Peter’s wife is recorded as having been executed along with Peter in Rome.
“Clement of Alexandria wrote that Peter and Philip, and even Paul, were married and had children. This is not from the Bible, of course, but it is interesting nevertheless. Clement was what we call a ‘church father,’ an educated convert to Christianity who was skilled in classical Greek literature.”
AFTERWORD
In today’s world (in the U.S. at least), there are many competent and professionally licensed Christian psychologists and psychiatrists. I watched a Christian psychiatrist treat my late wife several weeks before she died. One minute he’s ordering the nursing staff to administer heated HFNO (High Low Nasal Oxygen) and increase her Levophed to treat her respiratory failure, pulmonary HTN and systemic htn, and the next minute he was reminding her that God was very near and that Jesus loved her. It was amazing to watch.
Like the oxen, we need to pace ourselves and develop a rhythm in our marriages. We need to practice bearing one another’s burdens. We can’t always get our way. And we need to listen to our master’s voice as he teaches us how to navigate the landscape ahead. He can reveal pieces of this through special revelation, but nine out of ten times we can find the answer to our troubles in his Word.
[1]Per Apple AI and supported elsewhere in the literature.
[2]Ibid.
[3] [i.e., Peter.]
