Are arranged marriages immoral? If so, why did God allow it?

[AgnosticBoy]

There's something missing in this love & marriage story:

Genesis 29:16-20

16 Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. 17 Leah had weak eyes, but Rachel had a lovely figure and was beautiful. 18 Jacob was in love with Rachel and said, “I’ll work for you seven years in return for your younger daughter Rachel.”

19 Laban said, “It’s better that I give her to you than to some other man. Stay here with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.

Noticeably, there's no mention of Rachel loving Jacob prior to their marriage nor is there mention of her consenting to marriage. But rather she is "given" to Jacob in exchange for the work that he promises to do for her father. This is an arranged marriage and no different than what we hear about happening in Middle Eastern countries today.

This is obviously different than marriages in modern Western societies, where it is based on love and the consent of both partners involved. So for Christians and anyone else to answer..

Are arranged marriages moral or immoral? Do they cause harm?

If arranged marriages are harmful to women, then why did God allow them instead of speaking out against it?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Are arranged marriages moral or immoral? Do they cause harm?

To answer this question, I really think it comes down to how arranged marriages are practiced. I don't believe that arranged marriages are inherently immoral or bad. In general, I don't consider it bad because people are often bad at picking relationship partners, and I see it being good letting a relationship experts pick for you.

Practiced in a negative way would probably involve matching up two people who have no idea of what each other are like, no known chemistry, may not even have physical attraction, etc. This also includes practicing it the Middle Eastern way, where brides have no choice.

Practiced in a positive way, I think can be done with expert help, like letting a dating match service (a serious one - eharmony?) do some of the work for you. Just imagine you are given a survey on different dimensions of personality and attraction that are relevant to dating/relationships. And then a expert finds matches that would be compatible to you. I think part of this scenario would also have to involve educating people about relationships as well because people may have standards that are just too low or unreasonable and we wouldn't want those being part of any survey.

If arranged marriages are harmful to women, then why did God allow them instead of speaking out against it?

While I don't think they are harmful, but I believe the way that the ancient Jews practiced it was potentially harmful. I wouldn't call it harmful in all cases because marriages played a different role back then. They weren't so much about love as they are now. Consider these points:

Marriages helped families to build economic and political bonds and alliances.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marri...lies to build,heirs to their parents' estates.

When did love enter the picture?
Later than you might think. For much of human history, couples were brought together for practical reasons, not because they fell in love. In time, of course, many marriage partners came to feel deep mutual love and devotion. But the idea of romantic love, as a motivating force for marriage, only goes as far back as the Middle Ages. Naturally, many scholars believe the concept was "invented" by the French.

Did love change marriage?
It sure did. Marilyn Yalom, a Stanford historian and author of A History of the Wife, credits the concept of romantic love with giving women greater leverage in what had been a largely pragmatic transaction. Wives no longer existed solely to serve men.

Source: https://theweek.com/articles/528746/origins-marriage

So perhaps it wouldn't be fair to judge marriages in ancient times by today's standards since they served a different purpose and the conditions were different back then- esp. economically - no structure in place for women to survive economically w/out being dependent. I would see any points otherwise as being culturally biased or anachronistic.