BIBLICAL CULTURE AND THE FAMILY:

How a Biblical Agrarian Social Order Supports the Biblical Family

The Economics of the Large Family

Fertility is a blessing from God — not only fertile fields and fertile livestock, but the fertile womb. Large families are the biblical ideal. Children in a free agrarian society are useful as workers and producers in the self-supporting homestead. They are the key to the future prosperity of the family, and the providers of support for their aged and invalid family members.

Large families, however, are impossible for most people to support in the technological society. The technological society has a money economy, and as such has made the home a place of consumption, rather than production. Because it usually requires a money-earning workplace outside the home, children cannot meaningfully participate in the support of the family. They are made an economic liability, rather than an asset. Hence, there is a collision of the biblical family ideal with a fundamental feature of technological society.

And because technological society is militaristic, and maintains a standing army, it must induce or else force large numbers of young men to either delay marriage, or to defraud their wives for months or years while they go overseas to serve the economic interests of technological society all over the world.

Social Order and the Eighth Commandment

Sexual restraint is another prominent feature of the biblical familial ethic. This was achieved in biblical times by a system of social institutions and customs designed to promote a culture of modesty, chastity, and generally responsible behavior. Children were intensively trained in the law of God from early childhood. The goal was to inculcate a sense of responsibility to God, the community, the family and oneself, so that the child would achieve maturity of character as soon as practical. Boys who were emotionally and morally men already at the onset of puberty were well-equipped to handle the temptations intrinsic in physical maturity.

Among the other provisions of biblical agrarian culture for sexual restraint was the system for making marriages — a biblical institution little understood today, even by Christians. Ordinarily, it was the parents who chose a mate for their child. The evaluation of prospective spouses was considered a task for the experienced and wise, and marriage was too important to be determined by mere sexual attraction.

In keeping with this was a standard of uncompromised modesty for the women. Biblical society protected women from becoming mere sex-objects to men by concealing their beauty. At the same time, by this measure, men were protected from undue sexual stimulation, and thus assisted in the maintenance of their purity.

By the age of twenty, a young Hebrew male was expected to be settled in his vocation and married. Hebrew maidens could be married as soon as they reached physical maturity. There was to be no prolonged period of sexual vulnerability, with all the desires of a married person, but no legitimate outlet!

There was a general segregation of the sexes, according to their roles. Men and women did not usually work together — even in the home. When they were mingled, as in the marketplace, strict rules of propriety provided substantial protection against temptation.

Coupled with these wise institutions was a law that made adultery a capital offense, and generally punished sexual sins with rigor, making prostitution virtually impossible.

Further, as Edersheim and others have pointed out, there was a universal sobriety that shunned idleness and empty amusements. Israel had no theaters, racetracks, bars, or casinos to exploit the weaknesses of men.

All of these constituent parts of the culture of sexual responsibility worked together as a system — a social order — that was consistent with itself. It could only work while all the parts remained in place. And it could only work in a functioning community — among families that shared these customs and values, and worked together to enforce the standards and laws.

Technological Society: Anti-Marriage and Anti-Family

Technological society, on the other hand, has other priorities than promoting the happiness of men and women and the well-being of the family by supporting the sanctity of marriage. Sex sells, and that’s what technological society is about. Young men and women from Christian families are not doing measurably better in the area of sexual restraint today than the unchurched. And no wonder! They no longer receive intensive spiritual training in the home or the church. They are subjected to a constant assault on their virtue in the world at large, with which they have constant, intimate contact. And they face unrelenting economic pressure to delay marriage far beyond the age of sexual maturity, until at least their late twenties, in order to prolong their formal education.

This last deserves notice. Because the criterion of efficiency demands an ever increasing standardization and specialization, intensive, formal vocational training becomes ever more necessary. Since the establishment schools do such a poor job of preparing children for higher education, the first years of college are often wasted in teaching literacy and basic learning skills. Accordingly, the average number of years spent in school, along with the cost of schooling, will most likely only continue to increase.

Technological society needs the family only until it can figure out a workable — and that means affordable — alternative to produce the slaves it needs. Its technocrats would like to be able to clone workers, determining their personal qualities beforehand according to the work they will be called to do, and producing each type in just the right numbers. But that is beyond their skill at the moment. Robots show some promise of replacing humans in some areas; but they are too expensive, since each one must be individually manufactured, as they cannot reproduce. So the family must be tolerated for the present, although most of its functions have been transferred to other institutions.

The biggest problem with the family is that it is a system of personal relationships. It is a unit whose members tend to take a special interest in each other, to be loyal to each other, to provide for each other. Ideally, in a technological society, each person must have only one loyalty — to his own temporal interests. That way, he can be precisely controlled without resorting to force. He will infallibly pursue what he perceives to be in his best interests, and that perception will be infallibly predetermined by the technocrats who control the schools and the mass media.

Personal relationships have no place in a technological world, for they impair functional efficiency. Eventually, the tattered remnants of the family will have to go.

Howard Douglas King

One comment on “BIBLICAL CULTURE AND THE FAMILY:

Leave a Reply to Dan Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s