Your Maker Is Your Husband: The Divine Marriage Metaphor and the New Covenant

By Matthew Haste

Francis Schaeffer called it language “that we would not dare use if God himself did not use it.” [1] Truly, Isaiah’s declaration to Israel that her Maker is her Husband (Isa. 54:5) is one of the more remarkable statements in the Scriptures. [2] In the last twenty years, several scholars have examined this passage and others that contain marriage language describing God’s relationship with His people. [3] While these studies have advanced the overall understanding of this metaphor, far too little has been written about the specific function of this language, particularly in relation to the new covenant. [4] This article will provide an overview of the use of the divine metaphor in Scripture with particular emphasis on how this image points to the new covenant. It will be demonstrated that the divine marriage metaphor communicates the gospel of the new covenant in two key ways: by preparing Israel for her Messiah and by revealing Jesus to be the divine Bridegroom who has come to rescue His Bride.

Old Testament: Preparation For The Messiah

The language of God and His people as husband and wife resides mostly in the background of the Old Testament historical books and wisdom literature. However, several passages are worth noting because they contribute to a biblical understanding of marriage in general. [5] Genesis 1:26-31 sets the stage for the divine marriage metaphor by portraying man as a relational being who uniquely represents God to the world. Genesis 2:24 speaks to the permanency of the marriage covenant, which will provide a backdrop for understanding Israel’s spiritual infidelity. [6] In addition, various passages in the Proverbs set forth the biblical model of marriage by exalting the beauty of intimacy and the joy that fidelity can produce. [7] Finally, the Song of Songs further develops this model by emphasizing the power of passionate love. [8] Thus, these passages provide a backdrop for this metaphor by defining the biblical standards of marriage. As the following survey will reveal, the prophets utilize this picture to indict Israel for her unfaithfulness and to prepare her for the coming Messiah.

Hosea 1-3

The divine marriage metaphor influences the ministry of Hosea more than any other prophet. In order to call Israel back to covenantal faithfulness, Yahweh commands Hosea to demonstrate the Lord’s love for His people in his own life. [9]

In Hosea 1, the prophet receives the command, “Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms: for the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the LORD” (1:2). While this ambiguous imperative has provoked many different interpretations, Kidner is likely correct that the Lord commanded Hosea to marry Gomer, even though she was already a prostitute. [10] While this interpretation can be challenging, Garrett reminds us, “It was not unusual for the prophets to behave in a manner contrary to custom and normal human longing in order to give their words dramatic force.” [11] Furthermore, the primary intention of the living metaphor is not to draw attention to Gomer but rather to illustrate Hosea’s faithfulness in the face of her infidelity. No matter how one understands the details, the primary characters are the same: an unfaithful wife and a compassionate, forgiving husband. [12]

The divine initiative to rekindle the broken romance in verses 14-23 is a bold declaration of the grace of God. Despite her outrageous unfaithfulness, Yahweh plans to allure Israel back (2:14). [13] By drawing Israel to the wilderness setting of their early days together, Yahweh will “take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth” (2:17) and betroth her to Himself once again (2:19-20). Here, the divine marriage metaphor reveals the remarkable grace of the new covenant. Righteousness, justice, steadfast love, mercy, and faithfulness will mark this new betrothal. Such blessings will transform the identity of God’s people. [14]

Hosea’s actions serve to demonstrate to God’s people both the heinous nature of their sin and the relentless character of His grace. Though barely named, Hosea’s unfaithful wife, Gomer, is the central character of the first two chapters as Yahweh uses her infidelity to explain how Israel has committed adultery against Him through pursuing the Baals. In Hosea 3, the prophet himself redeems his wife, this time receiving the command, “Go yet, love a woman…” instead of the less romantic “Go and take” of 1:2. [15] Kidner’s summary articulates the significance of this passage for the present subject: “It is all of grace, and it clothes the new covenant in wedding garb. It makes three things very plain: the permanence of this union, the intimacy of it, and the fact that it owes everything to God.” [16] Thus, Hosea 1-3 reveals that the new covenant will rest on the relentless grace of God.

Isaiah 54:1-8

While the prophet Isaiah employs the divine marriage metaphor several times, the most extensive example is in Isaiah 54, where marriage language depicts the restoration that Yahweh has in store for His people. [17]

The first few verses of chapter 54 prepare Israel for the blessings to come. In verse 4, as the rhetoric becomes more personal, marriage language begins to intrude on the subject. “Fear not…for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood anymore” (54:4). [18] The promise of a brighter future rests on the key phrase in verse 5: “Thy Maker is thine husband.” Israel’s hope rests on the identity of Yahweh and His unique relationship with His people. [19]

The Lord “hath called” Israel back (54:6). Although He previously had “forsaken” His faithless wife, He will now gather her with “great mercies” (54:6-7). The exile that left her “grieved in spirit” as her Groom hid His face lasted but for “a small moment” (54:6-7). By contrast, however, the Groom will return full of “everlasting kindness” (54:8). Thus, Isaiah provides another picture of the relentless grace of God. Although His bride has wandered far from Him, Yahweh will not only restore their relationship but also take it to even greater heights through a new and everlasting covenant.

Jeremiah 2:1-3:5

Similar to Hosea, the prophet Jeremiah utilizes the marriage metaphor to indict Jerusalem for her spiritual infidelity. In Jeremiah 2:2, Yahweh recalls the early days of the relationship with the nostalgic statement, “I remember thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, when thou wentest after me in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown.” What follows are the accusations of a spurned husband. “What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that they are gone far from me, and have walked after vanity, and are become vain?” (2:5). The extent to which Israel has fled from her husband is exposed in the reply: “There is no hope: no; for I have loved strangers, and after them will I go” (2:25). Her repeated adulteries have left her far from God. She has “played the harlot with many lovers” and, unless she repents, she has no hope of restoration to Yahweh (3:1). Although there is no explicit promise of the new covenant in this text, the possibility of restoration through repentance reveals hope for the future (3:11-17).

Ezekiel 16

Ezekiel 16 provides one of the most provocative descriptions of Israel’s unfaithfulness in the Old Testament, employing the same metaphor of spiritual harlotry used by Hosea and Jeremiah. The chapter’s first fourteen verses describe how Yahweh rescued Israel, who was like a young girl “cast out” (16:5). [20] Yahweh not only provided for young Israel but also made her “exceeding beautiful” and to “prosper into a kingdom” (16:13). [21] This introduction sets the scene to highlight the audacity of Israel’s unfaithfulness.

Verse 15 introduces an abrupt change of tone: “But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot.” The following verses reveal how Israel used the very blessings received from Yahweh to worship false gods and entice foreign neighbors into unlawful alliances. Ortlund summarizes verses 15-29 by pointing out that Israel had committed both “idolatrous harlotry” and “political harlotry.” [22] Again, Yahweh reacts like a scorned husband: “But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband!” (16:32). Israel’s “whoring” is made all the more haughty because she received “no reward” from her pagan partners (16:34). She is living like a prostitute who does not even collect her wages!

The remainder of the chapter is devoted to Yahweh’s verdict against Israel’s lewd behavior. The nation’s punishment will be similar to what “women that break wedlock and shed blood” would receive (16:38). [23] However, a surprise announcement in verse 60 interrupts the negative tone: “Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant.” Despite it all, Yahweh promises to restore Israel to the honeymoon period of their relationship described in verses 8-14. This time, however, their covenant will be “everlasting” as Yahweh will intervene to atone for all of Israel’s unfaithfulness. [24] In spite of her sordid past, Israel could possess a bright future if she will return to her God. While the New Testament will develop the details of this promise, the groundwork is laid here: God Himself will provide atonement for His unfaithful wife and He will renew His covenant bond with her forever.

Old Testament Summary

The Old Testament use of the divine marriage metaphor takes various shapes as the narrative progresses. While the foundations for marriage are set forth in the historical books and developed in the wisdom literature, the prophets apply this language to describe Yahweh’s covenant relationship with Israel. Jeremiah and Ezekiel primarily employ the metaphor to illustrate Israel’s unfaithfulness to the covenant, while both Hosea and Isaiah draw attention to the way Yahweh has and will intervene in the story as a compassionate and forgiving Husband. The relentless grace of the divine Groom will establish an eternal covenant with His people. The primary function of the divine marriage metaphor in the Old Testament, therefore, is to prepare Israel for this day when her Messiah will arrive.

New Testament: Revelation Of The Messiah

In the New Testament, the divine marriage metaphor helped God’s people recognize their Messiah. The Gospels reveal that Jesus is the long-awaited Bridegroom of the New Covenant community and this community is identified as the Bride of Christ.

Matthew 9:15, 25:1-13, And John 3:29

In the Synoptic Gospels, there are two specific instances where Jesus identifies Himself as the Bridegroom. [25] In Matthew 9:15, after the Pharisees ask why His disciples are not fasting, Jesus replies, “Can the children of the bridechamber mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them?” [26] The arrival of the kingdom of God should be a celebratory time similar to a marriage ceremony, and therefore the disciples should not mourn in the presence of the heavenly Bridegroom. The second instance occurs in Matthew 25:1-13, where Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to virgins in a wedding party awaiting the arrival of the bridegroom. In this parable, the emphasis is on the unexpected timing of the bridegroom’s arrival, but again, the identity of the true Bridegroom is clear. Ortlund summarizes the significance of this language: “Allowing for subtle variation of the basic marital metaphor in his discourses, Jesus clearly perceives and presents himself in the role of Yahweh in the divine marriage with the covenanted people.” [27]

In the Gospel of John, John the Baptist uses marriage language to reveal the identity of Jesus. In John 3:29, while explaining to His own disciples that he is not the Christ, John says, “He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.” John uses the divine marriage metaphor to make clear that Jesus is the Messiah that God’s people have anticipated. [28] As the mere “friend of the bridegroom,” John knows that he is the less significant person of the two, and yet he rejoices at the Bridegroom’s arrival. [29]

2 Corinthians 11:2-3

In the Epistles, the Apostle Paul twice uses the divine marriage metaphor as a means of describing the new covenant relationship between Jesus and His people. In the first instance, he casts himself in the role of spiritual father to the Corinthians, saying, “I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:2). Paul views his ministry to the Corinthians like a father who has presented his daughter for betrothal. According to the customs established in Deuteronomy 22:13-21, a bride’s father was responsible for ensuring her purity up until the consummation of the relationship. In the context of 2 Corinthians 11, Paul is concerned that although the Corinthians are betrothed to Christ, they are not remaining pure while they await the heavenly consummation of their relationship. [30] Their betrothal through faith in Christ is not a casual commitment. They belong to their divine Groom, who, as in the Gospels, is none other than Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:21-33

The theme of a covenant relationship anticipating future consummation is also visible in Paul’s use of the divine marriage metaphor in Ephesians 5. This passage is probably the most recognizable use of this language in all of Scripture. Paul’s primary purpose in the text is to instruct husbands and wives in how to submit “one to another in the fear of God” (5:21), but the apostle’s basis for these exhortations is the covenant relationship of Christ and His people. This point comes first in verses 23 and 24 but is most explicit in verse 32. After quoting Genesis 2:24, Paul states, “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (5:32). This comment introduces a paradigm shift in understanding marriage. According to Paul, the purpose of marriage is to bring glory to God by reflecting the covenant relationship of God to His people. The metaphor used throughout Scripture is more than just an image; the divine marriage is the ultimate reality from which the human institution of marriage gets its meaning and purpose. The relationship of a husband and wife is secondary to the primary covenant bond of Christ and His people. [31] This concept radically transforms the institution of marriage and the function of each spouse (5:22-24, 28-29, 33).

Jesus gave His own life in order to provide Himself with a bride “that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish” (5:26-27). [32] Larkin points out that the verb in this passage (παραστήση) “alludes to the wedding custom of presenting the bride but with emphasis on the completeness of Christ’s work.” [33] Jesus is both the One who presents the bride, having made her pure, and the Groom who receives her joyfully. [34]

Thus, Ephesians 5 contributes much to the present study. The divine marriage is revealed to be the ultimate reality behind the very institution of marriage. Husbands and wives are called to love one another in a living drama that displays the gospel to the world. Jesus, the divine Groom, will empower them in this endeavor as He continues His work of preparing the church for the consummation of their covenant relationship.

Revelation 19-21

In the final three chapters of the book of Revelation, the Apostle John anticipates the culmination of history through the vision of a wedding celebration between the Lamb and His bride. The divine marriage metaphor first appears in Revelation 19:6-10, when a mighty throng shouts in exultation, “Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come” (19:7). [35] As the following verse makes clear, the bride in this scene is the church who has “made herself ready” for this moment even as it has been “granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen” (19:7-8). [36] The emphasis is on the triumphant Lamb who, as Paul envisioned back in Ephesians 5, has prepared His bride for Himself through His victorious death on the cross. [37]

The language of marriage appears again in 21:2 as John envisions “the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” According to Mounce, this designation “draws attention to the contrast between the great harlot (the wicked city Babylon) and the bride of the Lamb (the holy city of Jerusalem).” [38] This observation is especially significant when one recalls how often God’s people in the Old Testament were compared to an unfaithful harlot. In the new creation, through the triumph of the Lamb, God’s people will finally realize their role as the holy wife of a holy God. [39]

Thus, in the book of Revelation we find a preview of the consummation of the divine marriage. Although God’s people have proven to be a faithless companion, the grace of God Almighty is more than sufficient to cover their shame. The victorious Lamb has prepared His bride for Himself and she is now ready to enjoy His presence for all of eternity.

New Testament Summary

Therefore, the New Testament use of the divine marriage metaphor reveals the identity of the true Bridegroom and expands the identity of God’s bride. In the Gospels, both Jesus and John the Baptist use the metaphor to identify Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah. The Apostle Paul uses the language of marriage to instruct the church by helping her understand her identity as the bride of Christ. The divine marriage is revealed to be the ultimate reality on which human marriage is based, and human marriage is shown to be a significant way to portray the gospel message to the world. Finally, the book of Revelation previews the day when the marriage of Jesus and His bride will reach its consummation at the culmination of history.

Conclusion

Thus, the divine marriage metaphor communicates the gospel of the new covenant. In the Old Testament, the metaphor prepares God’s people for their Messiah by articulating both the atrocious sins of the harlot Israel and the relentless grace of her divine Husband. In the New Testament, this same language identifies Jesus as the heavenly Bridegroom who has come to rescue His people. Jesus fulfills the Old Testament promises and institutes a new covenant founded on His own atoning work. This survey yields several observations about the function of this metaphor in Scripture.

First, this metaphor helps us understand the various purposes of marriage. In the Old Testament, marriage provided an arena for intimacy and a means of physical multiplication within the confines of a covenant. Against this backdrop, the prophets accuse Israel of being an unfaithful wife and making a mockery of the marriage bond altogether. In doing so, the biblical standard for marriage becomes clearer. Under the new covenant, marriage takes on a greater spiritual significance as well. Like the prophet Hosea, every marriage tells a story about God to the world. Marriages should communicate the gospel of the new covenant to the world through the mutual love of husband and wife.

Second, this metaphor draws attention to the awful reality of sin. Our unwillingness to obey God is as offensive and heartbreaking as the unfaithfulness of a wayward spouse. Christians ought to think of themselves as betrothed to Christ, awaiting a heavenly wedding.

Finally, this metaphor helps us understand the nature of grace. The prophets utilized the divine marriage metaphor to articulate both the atrocious sins of the harlot Israel and the relentless grace of her divine Husband. Through this lens, we see a clearer picture of how much our sin offends God but also how much He loves us nonetheless. It therefore reminds us that the compassion of God shines brightest when understood in contrast to the deepest darkness of man.

The divine marriage metaphor proves to be a significant image for communicating the gospel of the new covenant. Regardless of the context, each instance of this language has the same primary goal: to glorify God by calling His people toward their Maker, their Husband.

Notes

1. Francis Schaeffer, The Church Before the Watching World (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1979), 31.
2. Isaiah 54:5 states, “For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name.”
3. Most recently, Seock-Tae Sohn has produced a helpful study entitled, YHWH, the Husband of Israel: The Metaphor of Marriage Between YHWH and Israel (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 2002). Sohn focuses on how this language is developed according to the marriage customs of ancient Israel and draws attention to how these customs provide a means for understanding YHWH’s election of and subsequent covenant with Israel. Nelly Stienstra’s YHWH is the Husband of His People (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1993) looks at the marriage metaphor as an illustration of her particular theories regarding the intersection of translation and metaphor in general. Raymond Ortlund’s excellent work, God’s Unfaithful Wife: A biblical theology of spiritual adultery (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), examines the language of marriage as applied to God’s relationship with His people but primarily focuses on the spiritual harlotry of Israel. For a more condensed treatment of the subject, see also Richard D. Patterson, “Metaphors of Marriage as Expressions of Divine-Human Relations,” in The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 51, no. 4 (December 2008): 689-702.
4. Sohn has the most extensive treatment on the subject, but his focus is primarily on how the metaphor describes YHWH’s relationship with Israel. He provides only a five-page section on the use of the metaphor in the New Testament. Stienstra focuses so much on the theories behind the use of metaphor that barely one-third of the book addresses the specific function of the divine marriage metaphor and, like Sohn, her primary emphasis is on Yahweh and Israel. Ortlund’s biblical theology of spiritual adultery does include some helpful discussion of related New Testament passages but his focus is on the language of spiritual harlotry rather than the divine marriage metaphor in general.
5. Two additional collections of texts that could contribute to a better understanding of this language would be those specific commandments in the law regarding sexuality and the examples provided by Old Testament marriages. For a discussion of the former, see Ortlund, God’s Unfaithful Wife, 27-45 or Geoffrey Bromiley, God and Marriage (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 15-20. For a helpful examination of Old Testament marriages, see Andreas Kostenberger, God, Marriage, and Family (Wheaton: Crossway, 2004), 55-60.
6. The context clearly reveals that this statement is not a continuation of Adam’s speech in verse 23. It must be read as stepping outside the story because the man in this story has no father or mother to leave. Therefore, the statement should be viewed as both an interpretation of the present relationship of Adam and Eve as well as a prescription for future marriages. Furthermore, Jesus speaks as if God Himself interrupted the story with this statement in order to set forth a proper paradigm for the purpose of marriage. Note that the Creator is the one who speaks this word in Matthew 19:4-6. “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
7. In the book of Proverbs, marriage is viewed as a normal part of human society and as a means of experiencing the blessing of God. Particular emphasis is placed on the gift of finding a “virtuous woman” (Prov. 12:14) because “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing” (Prov. 18:22; cf. 19:13-14; 31:10-31). The Proverbs also call for covenantal faithfulness, expressed positively through sexual intimacy within the marriage relationship (5:15-20) and negatively by avoiding foolish situations that could lead to adultery (7:1-23).
8. As expressed through the adoration of the couple for one another, love is as “strong as death” and capable of producing “jealousy [as] cruel as the grave” (8:6). This article intentionally focuses on those particular passages where the language of marriage is explicitly applied to the relationship of God and His people; therefore, debates about the various interpretations of the Song of Songs are beyond the scope of this study.
9. Hubbard calls this action “enacted prophecy.” David Allen Hubbard, Hosea, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2007), 59.
10. Derek Kidner, The Message of Hosea: Love to the Loveless (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981), 19. Davies sees this statement as a command to have extramarital relations with a prostitute, but it seems unlikely that Yahweh would call His prophet to sin against his spouse to make a point about how Israel has sinned against her divine Husband. G. I. Davies, Hosea, The New Century Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 50. Hubbard argues that Hosea was commanded to marry an ordinary Israelite woman who would later become a prostitute. While this view would absolve Hosea of any questionable moral decisions, it is difficult to postulate how Hosea would know how to choose a woman who would later become a prostitute or why the Lord would call her “a wife of whoredom” before she ever acted in such a way. Hubbard, Hosea, 61. He also points out that harlotry can mean “literal acts of illicit lust” or “religious acts of infidelity.” Hubbard, Hosea, 67.
11. Duane Garrett, “An Introduction to Hosea,” [on-line] Criswell Theological Review 7, no. 1 (1993):11. Accessed 27 October 10, 2011; available from faculty.gordon.edu, Garrett-IntroHosea-CTR.pdf; Internet. Garrett references Isaiah walking naked (Isa. 20:3-5), Ezekiel eating food made with manure (Ezek. 4), and Ezekiel being commanded not to mourn his wife’s death (Ezek. 24:15-18) as further examples.
12. Although some commentators argue that Chapters 1-3 should be viewed as mere allegory with no historical basis, Garrett explains that there are several problems with this view along with the notion that Chapters 1 and 3 refer to two different women. Garrett, “An Introduction to Hosea,” 9.
13. Ortlund explains, “His response to her indifference is not further judgment but, in this case, the artful strategy of an ardent lover.” Ortlund, God’s Unfaithful Wife, 67. Hubbard points out that the word “allure” can be “so strong as to suggest enticement or even seduction” and the phrase “speak tenderly” can be used in “romantic contexts.” Hubbard, Hosea, 91. Davies further notes that “speak tenderly” is an idiom that literally means “speak upon the heart.” Davies, Hosea, 79.
14. This transformation of identity is illustrated in the renaming of Hosea’s children in verse 23, “I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God.” This statement is applied to the church twice in the New Testament in Romans 9:25-26 and 1 Peter 2:10.
15. Stanley Grenz sees this notion of “love” as a key component of the use of the marriage metaphor in the Old Testament. “The introduction of the marriage metaphor added the idea of love and willing fidelity to the concept of covenant that in the ancient world originally carried the connotations of a contract between a king and his vassals.” Stanley Grenz, Sexual Ethics: A Biblical Perspective (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1990), 47.
16. Kidner, The Message of Hosea, 34.
17. For other references to the divine marriage metaphor in Isaiah, see 49:18, 61:10, and 62:1-5.
18. This time of widowhood likely refers to when the Lord withdrew from Israel and allowed them to experience the Assyrian exile, although various points in Israel’s history could fit the picture. Smith lists several options and commentators who argue for each possibility, including the period of Egyptian bondage, the period of the monarchy, and the times of pagan Baal worship before settling on the idea that the primary referent is the exile. Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 40-66, The New American Commentary (Nashville, Tenn.: B&H Academic, 2009), 480.
19. He is the “LORD of hosts…the Holy One of Israel…Redeemer…God of the whole earth” (54:5).
20. The text actually portrays this rescue in two stages. Daniel Block summarizes, “First, Yahweh saves the baby’s life and adopts her as his own daughter…. Second, Yahweh saves the woman’s purity and marries her.” Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 1-24, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 480-82.
21. Ortlund summarizes, “All that has exalted Israel as a special nation, all that has dignified her in the eyes of other nations, has been the bestowment of Yahweh, who loved Israel with a covenant generosity.” Ortlund, God’s Unfaithful Wife, 102.
22. Ortlund, God’s Unfaithful Wife, 109.
23. Readers ought not to take offense at this section for the way it portrays Yahweh as a vindictive husband. Block has a helpful section that cautions against this reaction that culminates in the reminder that we must not “sit in judgment over God.” Block, Ezekiel, 468-70.
24. Bromiley adds, “It is a forgiving and self-giving love that refuses to be defeated by the resistance of the beloved but steadfastly persists and conquers.” Brom­iley, God and Marriage, 31.
25. A third related passage is Matthew 22:2-13, where Jesus compares the kingdom of God to a wedding feast. This parable is consistent with the arguments of this section, but it does not contain a specific reference to Jesus as the bridegroom.
26. The parallel to this story is in Luke 5:33-39.
27. Ortlund, God’s Unfaithful Wife, 139.
28. Jocelyn McWhorter points out that John the Baptist “recognizes that Jesus is the Messiah, the prophesied bridegroom, and rejoices to hear his voice.” McWhorter argues that this Gospel contains several more allusions to the divine marriage metaphor as well. Jocelyn McWhorter, The Bridegroom Messiah and the People of God: Marriage in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 58.
29. According to Craig Keener, “Palestinian Jewish wedding parties included the shoshbin, apparently an esteemed friend” who aided the groom throughout the marriage ceremony. This concept is likely the background for John’s use of the phrase “friend of the Bridegroom.” Craig Keener, “Marriage” in Dictionary of New Testament Background, ed. Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2000), 686.
30. To understand this point, one must remember that the Jewish concept of betrothal was different from modern notions of engagement. According to David Novak, the betrothal is “less than what we normally call a marriage but more than what we normally call an engagement.” David Novak, “Jewish Marriage: Nature, Covenant, and Contract,” in Covenant Marriage in Comparative Perspective, ed. John Witte Jr. and Eliza Ellison (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 31.
31. Bromiley points out, “Neither the intratrinitarian relationship nor the union between the heavenly bridegroom and his bride is a good copy of a bad original. Earthly marriage as it is now lived out is a bad copy of a good original.” Bromiley, God and Marriage, 77.
32. Though some commentators see an allusion to baptism in the phrase “washing of water with the word,” Larkin is correct in seeing here a reference to the Gospel similar to Paul’s use of the word ῥημα in Romans 10:8, 17 and Ephesians 6:17. William J. Larkin, Ephesians: A Handbook on the Greek Text (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2009), 134. So also Francis Foulkes, The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 158. For an example of an argument for the allusion to baptism, see J. Armitage Robinson, Commentary on Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1979), 207.
33. Larkin, Ephesians, 135.
34. Note the nuances previously discussed in John 3:29 and 2 Corinthians 11:2-3.
35. Smalley sees here a combination of the imagery of the divine marriage metaphor and “the notion in Judaism of marriage as a joyful festival” that anticipates “the messianic time of salvation.” Stephen S. Smalley, The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse (Downers Grove, In.: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 482. This combination of metaphors highlights the significance of the Old Testament passages studied above.
36. Beale concludes that the phrase τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἁγιῶν in verse 8 is a plenary genitive that “connotes both righteous acts performed by the saints and their vindicated condition resulting from God’s righteous acts of judgment” on their behalf. G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 941. He also sees here an allusion to Ezekiel 16:8-10 where Yahweh’s commitment to young Israel is expressed through covering her nakedness. Beale, Revelation, 944.
37. In verse 9, the wedding metaphor shifts slightly to provide a different perspective on the scene. Beale explains, “In verses 7-8, the bride, the corporate church, was viewed as about to wed the Lamb, but now the individual Christians are portrayed as guests at the marriage banquet.” Beale, Revelation, 945.
38. Robert Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 377.
39. Mounce notes that the double metaphor of “bride” and “wife” in verse 9 is not contradictory but rather, “As bride the church is pure and lovely, and as wife she enjoys the intimacy of the Lamb.” Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 377.