What is the Purpose of Marriage

Why did God create marriage in the first place? What is the purpose for it? And once we understand the purpose, can only heterosexual people accomplish that purpose, or can same sex couples accomplish this purpose as well?

In order to look into this topic, let’s go back to creation, to the first marriage.

God created Adam first. But then, Adam was lonely. So, God gave him the animals and a paradise to hang out in.

Still, Adam was lonely. God realized he had to create someone like Adam, another human being.

EVE WAS A COMPANION

God saw that Adam was lonely and said: “It is not good that the man should be alone.” Genesis 2:18. So, then God first tries animals, to see if that companionship works (Genesis 2:19). It didn’t, so then he decides to make another human being (Genesis 2:19). And he made someone like Adam, another human being. This second human was able to procreate, but that is actually not mentioned in the text, at all. That didn’t seem to be the reason for her creation. The text focuses on the companionship and partnership (Genesis 2:20).

EVE WAS EZER

God saw that the first human he created was lonely, so he created another one. The word used for the second human being is עֵזֶר (ʿēzer). Seen 21 times in the Bible, it describes what kind of help God is to us. God is “ezer” to David, when he writes: “The Lord is my ezer (Psalm 118:7)”. The word “ezer” carries a strong meaning of “ally”, “rock”, “strength”, “rescuer”. It’s about the strength we find in a companion. God is “our help (ezer) and our shield.” (Psalm 33:20).

The Purpose of “One Flesh”

As mentioned in the previous section, God mentions the importance of the man LEAVING his kinship family and CLINGING to his wife (Genesis 2:24).

The text says they become one flesh. This term of being “one flesh” or “of the same flesh” was not only a common way to address strong bonds in that day, but is used 266 in the Bible, usually in a non-marriage way to describe “kinship, union, relative, deep faithful bond”. 

Two people that entered into the unity of a marriage were said to become one flesh. People that entered “To become one flesh” refers to a deep, covenantal union—a bond that is spiritual, emotional, and relational. While often associated with marriage, the phrase “one flesh” (or being of the same flesh) appears approximately 266 times in the Bible, and is frequently used in non-marital contexts to convey kinship, loyalty, and shared identity.

For example, it describes the familial connection between Laban and Jacob (Genesis 29:14), Abimelech and his relatives (Judges 9:2), David and the tribes of Israel (2 Samuel 5:1), David and the people of Judah (2 Samuel 19:12), David and his nephew Amasa (2 Samuel 19:13), and again between David and all Israel (1 Chronicles 11:1). Paul even applies the language of “one flesh” to the relationship between Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:31–32). None of these relationships are sexual in nature. They speak of allegiance, shared purpose, and enduring commitment.

When Genesis 2:24 says a man will leave his father and mother to become one flesh with his spouse, it signals the creation of a new, independent bond—a new family unit. In a patriarchal society, leaving one’s father meant stepping out from under the father’s authority to establish something distinct and lasting.

The Church Bride Illustration

What does it illustrate?

The church is often compared to a bride, a spouse before marriage (Revelations 19, Revelation 21:2, Revelation 21:9, 2 Corinthians 11:2, Matthew 25:1-13, John 3:29). It is not a picture of two people after they are married. It is the picture of two people before they are married. The purpose of the illustration is: waiting, being faithful, staying pure, not giving up. It’s about waiting for Jesus return, to be faithful in the wait. The purpose of the illustration is not the sex between a man and a woman, but the importance of staying faithful as we wait for Christ’s return and not turn to other gods. Every time Jesus talks about marriage, he talks about loving faithfulness. That is the one requirement. Anything else, is secondary and not required.

Why the picture of a female bride?

The author uses the picture of a bride (female), because he chooses cultural tradition to convey a deeper truth, just like he sometimes used slavery as an illustration. To understand the bridal culture of that day, helps us understand the teaching. The expectation of virginity before marriage was placed almost exclusively on women, not men. A daughter’s virginity was tied to family honor, social status, and economic exchange. Not even in the Torah is there a legal expectation that a man must be a virgin before marriage. Male experiences with concubines and other women was often overlooked. Deuteronomy 22:13–21 lays out severe penalties for a woman accused by her husband of not being a virgin on their wedding night (including the possibility of death by stoning if her parents cannot provide evidence of her virginity), but there is not mention of the man’s purity. So when Jesus refers to the bride in his imagery, the audience automatically hears purity and faithful waiting as the imagery for them waiting for Jesus second coming.

Is the Church ever referenced as a wife?

Surprisingly, no. The Church is never directly called a wife in the New Testament. In Ephesians 5:22–32, Paul tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, but the Church itself is not referred to as a wife. Instead, Paul uses Christ’s sacrificial love as the model for how husbands should treat their wives. The emphasis is on reshaping a cultural norm — where men often treated women as property — by pointing to Christ’s self-giving, purifying love. Paul isn’t using the wife to illustrate the Church; he’s using Christ to transform how husbands view their wives.

What about “Procreation”?

Some people still believe today that human relationships are not biblical if they don’t have the potential to procreate. This thought was quite prominent in the church a long time ago. There have been times in history when infertility was at times used as a reason to restrict or annul marriages, especially in circles that were influenced by Augustine and Aquinas. Elderly couples couldn’t get married either. Are people who never have children somehow less legitimate or outside of God’s design? That’s not only theologically flawed—it’s quite dehumanizing. Jesus redefined what it means to be fruitful: it’s about love, justice, faithfulness, service, and spiritual growth (John 15:5, Gal. 5:22-23).

As mentioned in the History of Marriage, procreation was seen as the primary purpose of marriage for most of history.

Marriage existed not just as a romantic or spiritual union, but as a contract for family structure and legitimate heirs. In many societies, a respectable woman was expected to be chaste and reserved, her sexual activity reserved for the duty of bearing children. Marital sex was often defined almost exclusively in terms of childbearing.

But is this how the Bible defines the purpose of marriage? In Genesis 1:28, God blesses the first humans and says: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it…” This is often cited as evidence that procreation is a divine command. Was this a command for all people, for all time? Does this mean that anyone who doesn’t marry, or who marries but doesn’t or cannot have children, is sinning or missing God’s purpose?

If procreation were the ultimate purpose of marriage, this would raise serious concerns about the many faithful believers in Scripture who were single or childless—including Jesus himself and the apostle Paul, who even praised singleness (1 Corinthians 7) as a way to be fully devoted to God.

Many Christian leaders today still teach that the union of a man and woman must be oriented toward procreation:

• John Piper argues that one of the core purposes of marriage is to “make babies” reflecting God’s original command in Genesis.
• Christopher Ash (The Gospel Coalition) says that humanity’s creation as male and female is intrinsically linked to the command to be fruitful and multiply
• James Dobson has stated: “Marriage was designed by God to thoroughly join two image bearers in a permanent commitment, enabling them to fulfill their purpose of filling God’s world.”

The Catholic Church has long held that procreation is essential to the purpose of marriage. In fact, the Church teaches that impotence—if permanent and known before the wedding—can invalidate a marriage. If a couple is unable to consummate their union physically, this may even be grounds for annulment, as procreative potential is viewed as inseparable from marital union.

While procreation is certainly a blessing and a part of God’s design for many, the Bible does not declare that childbearing is the only, or even the defining, purpose of marriage. Marriages are also places of mutual support, love, companionship, and spiritual growth (see Genesis 2:18, “It is not good for the man to be alone”). Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7, emphasizes that marriage serves practical and emotional purposes, including preventing isolation and offering a context for fidelity—not just for reproduction.

To say that a marriage is only valid or godly if it leads to children risks reducing people to their reproductive capacity. It also undermines the dignity of countless marriages that are marked by love, service, intimacy, and partnership, even if no children are born

Can a marriage be blessed, even without babies? Can a marriage carry out God’s purpose, even without making a baby?

The is no command anywhere in the Bible that people should marry. Jesus never tells people to get married. The apostle Paul doesn’t command anyone to get married. Procreation is never mentioned in the New Testament as a requirement for marriage. 

So what about the command to multiply?

In Western society with its strong emphasis on individuality this command is often taken as a prescriptive of separate responsibilities between the females and the males and a burden for each couple to accomplish. In an Eastern society with their strong emphasis of community the command is more often seen as a collective responsibility for the whole community to accomplish together. Jesus did not marry, was not fruitful and did not multiply. Neither was Paul. Were they disobedient? Paul even advocates for not getting married.

The Influence of St. Augustine

St. Augustine (354–430 CE) was incredibly influential in shaping early Christian theology around sex, marriage, and procreation — and his impact is still felt today. He solidified the theology of procreation as primary theological justification for sex within marriage. He argued that the only morally acceptable reason for sex was reproduction — and while he reluctantly acknowledged that pleasure was unavoidable, he considered it a concession to human weakness. In his view, even within marriage, sexual activity was only truly virtuous if it was oriented toward having children.

He wrote that it was “pardonable” if married people enjoyed sex, but still encouraged sexual abstinence as the higher path — even for married couples. His writings leaned heavily on the idea of sin being transmitted through sexual desire, which led him to view sex (even in marriage) as something inherently tainted unless carefully restrained.

Augustine’s ideas deeply influenced:

• The doctrine that procreation is essential to marriage.
• The development of natural law theory, which defines sexual acts as “natural” only if they are open to procreation.
• The concept of gender complementarity, which frames male and female roles as biologically and spiritually distinct but interdependent — often in hierarchical ways.

His theology did not emphasize love, mutual partnership, or companionship as central to marriage. These elements, while present in Scripture (e.g., Genesis 2:18), were downplayed in Augustine’s framework. As a result, marriage became viewed more as a safeguard against lust than as a loving partnership.

To this day, Catholic canon law reflects his influence. The Church teaches that marriage must be open to procreation, and it officially prohibits marriage if permanent and irreversible impotence (not infertility) is present, because it prevents consummation.

The Purpose of Faithful Companionship

God says, “Two are better than one” (Ecclesiastes 4:9).

Sometimes that companionship takes place within marriage — but it doesn’t have to. The core value is not being alone. There is deep beauty, power, and strength in shared purpose and faithful love, whether in friendship, community, or covenant partnership.

Yes, some traditions have reduced marriage to a reproductive function, but Jesus and Paul never defined it that way. In fact, the New Testament never makes childbearing a condition for blessing. Neither singleness nor infertility disqualify anyone from a full life in God’s kingdom.

Instead, the purpose of marriage — when it happens — is found in mutual support, sacrificial love, and faithful companionship. It is not about fulfilling a biological mandate, but about forming a relationship that reflects God’s love, grace, and commitment.