Hot Topic..What Constitutes a Biblical Marriage?

Bartimaeus

... I do not follow the discussion very well.

... I do not know any scripture that told the Jews not to marry converts to Judaism ...

... How did we determine that Moabites were Gentiles?

 

I believe a Christian should obey the law of the land made by the people of that land who control it.

Mane Indian nations had very elaborate ceremonies lasting several days, and in the eyes of those peoples, a couple wasn't considered married unless they'd participated in such a ceremony. But they generally didn't question a white couple or a couple from another Indian people who introduced themselves as hubby & wife. Other Indian peoples were married by the prospective bride and groom's fathers passing a pipe back and forth, with each father taking a hit from it. Again, they generally didn't question the marital status of a couple from elsewhere who said they were married. THIS WAS LEFT UP TO THE EUROPEANS. More than one frontiersman who had married an Indian by an Indian rite had his marriage questioned or even not recognized as legal by some self-righteous white man's authority.

The general law of THIS nation, far as mainstream native population is concerned, states marriage is between man & woman not closely related & free of communicable disease, and is licensed by the local govt. & is authenticated by a person given legal authority to both perform marriage ceremonies and to validate a written marriage license. However, we have no right to not recognize marriages occurring under different standards, laws, and traditions. I believe this falls under Jesus' command to obey the law of the land, and when people are married in the eyes of one land or people, WE have no right to question their marital status. And that includes the Indians who are married under the laws of THEIR people.

 

Bartimaeus

... I did not follow your point very well.

... what scripture references are there?

 

OK I'm confused.. I read this and was struck BLONDE for a moment!
I AM blonde, but that's beside the point.

YOU SAID:
I believe a Christian should obey the law of the land made by the people of that land who control it.
Hmm.....

NOT ALL COUNTRIES ACKNOWLEDGE "CHRISTIAN" MARRIAGE. OR CHRISTIAN ANYTHING.

Would you be referring to TRADITIONS?
Example:
If a Christian marriage were to take place, it would be according to their cultural TRADITIONS?

 

OK. Here is a question for the "do the deed" equals "getting married" folk. When Jesus spoke to the woman at the well He stated that she had had five husbands and the one she now had was not her husband (John 4:18). If this were true, two unmarried people who had sex would not be sinning, they would be getting married, wouldn’t they?

OK, now add the commitment aspect. If two people “do the deed” and have a “lifelong commitment” to each other are they married? If there is no formal marriage (church or state) there is no need for any divorce. The state does not recognize them as married does God? (no time to deal with whole state/church issue in much detail now) I think we need to admit that the NT does not directly address this issue in a clear manner. Besides, what does “lifelong commitment” really mean in our modern culture?

Re Abraham/Hagar and other examples. A & H were never married! No passage ever said that H was A’s wife. On the contrary, she is continually referred to as “Sarai’s maid”, “the Egyptian” or some other manner which makes it clear that she was not his wife.

Sometimes the OT records things of which God does not approve. It presents the social custom of the day that involved a maid becoming a surrogate mother for a wife who could not have children. God never says this is OK. Scripture simply records that this is what happened. Jacob had two wives. God never approves this arrangement, only recognizes it and regulates it.

If we are going to establish a Biblical pattern for marriage we had better go to Gen 2 & 3 and to the comments by Jesus on this passage (Matt 19). One man, one woman, one lifetime. Leave, cleave, joined as one flesh. I am not sure that the manner in which different cultures solemnize a marriage can be argued for or against in a general sense. Certainly, common law marriages that have no formal “leaving or cleaving” would seem to fall short of most all patterns for marriage in the Bible.

I agree that marriages by a JP at the courthouse are no more or less binding than those by a Pastor in a church.

But to argue that having sex equals getting married has no support in the Word of God!

 

Genesis 16:3 says Sarai gave Hagar to Abram to be his wife.

Billy

 

Billy,

I stand corrected. Can I do that without getting up? In any case, Yep, you are right, I was wrong. It WAS polygamy, not just surrogate motherhood.

 

rjprince wrote in a different thread:

rjprince, I am looking forward to your post on the above issue.

Concerning Biblical marriage:

I have heard it said that a Biblical marriage includes the idea that the man and woman’s intentions are to be a monogamous couple.

I think of Jacob and Leah, his intentions were to marry Rachel. He was tricked into taking Leah. If his intentions were to marry Rachel, and he was deceived, was he still married to Leah? Did he accept Leah as his wife because of the one-flesh union or because he was alone in a dangerous place and afraid?

In Deuteronomy 22:28-29, in this situation, I doubt the man or woman’s intentions were to ever be married but God says that they must be married. Because of the one-flesh union?

Billy

 

Billy,

It is there now.

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/10/4585/5.html?