• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Is there really such thing as biblical marriage?

Scoop

Scoop

Member
Real Person*
Male
This came to me after fielding criticism from several family members. The term "Marriage" and the term "Wife" and "Wives" do not seem to be at all biblical. I'm hoping those with a better technical knowledge can really chime in here. I see it similarly as translating Chariot as Car. Uh yeah they share some functional similarities but only on a basic level, beyond that we're not talking about the same thing. I've come to the conclusion that I can no longer use this language to describe my relationships. As I move forward and Yah has blessed me with a coming second I will probably be referring to them as my women, and/or possibly Isha's. This both distinguishes us from worldly connotations and saves the hassle of any tenuous legal implications someone might try to pin on us. To a mainstream Christian (I am messianic/hebrew roots) this will look and sound like shacking up, but there again is the disconnect in understanding. I will have a covenant with each of my women, but I just can't see calling it marriage. That is a modern cultural convention with its own twisted definitions, start to finish. So what say you! I think we need a better more biblically sound vocabulary for this. Biblical marriage is beginning to sound like an oxymoron.
 
To me, the term Biblical marriage is a means of defining marriage in a Biblical manner.
As opposed to accepting the manner in which marriage is defined otherwise. Taking a word that is universally known and grounding it in our spiritual beliefs.

I refer to my women as my wives, which is actually less of an adequate statement of who they are because the normal use of the word does not denote ownership. But, for me, it is a term that seems less like I am hiding something. (Even though we don’t proclaim our relationship in the area that we live because that would be detrimental to certain of the ministries, so if you were to call me two faced I wouldn’t argue;))
 
I see no reason to provide people with a deep explanation beyond saying, I'm in a biblical relationship with these two women. They are mine. I will go so far as saying we're not married. It's not the same thing to me.
 
This post got me curious about the etymology of the english word "wife". It seems like it is derived from older german background words basically meaning "woman".

Feminists complain that the word implies possession and ownership. If that is the case, then we probably should use that word. That accords with Biblical doctrine.

A wife/woman does belong to her man and is required to be monogamous to him. She is under his authority, provision, and protection. She is required to respect and submit to him.

The husband/man also belongs to his woman and/or women, but in a different manner, and is permitted to form multiple simultaneous covenants (polygyny). The man owes leadership, love, protection, and provision to his woman or women.

I tend to think we probably should use the words "marriage, wife, and husband", being careful to define them Biblically rather than culturally.

On the other hand, I think it is also fine to refer to the wife as my "woman", my "helper", "helpmate", "helpmeet". All those terms seem Biblically acceptable. If the wife refers to her husband as her "man", her "master, lord, or leader" that is also probably acceptable.
 
Scoop said:
I see no reason to provide people with a deep explanation beyond saying, I'm in a biblical relationship with these two women. They are mine. I will go so far as saying we're not married. It's not the same thing to me.
Click to expand...
What would you think about saying "I am in a covenant relationship with these women"? I think that explains it, and avoids some of the cultural/legal nonsense. Then again, a lot of people might not understand what a covenant is.
 
I think there are two main problems:

(1) words such as "Marriage" have legal implications and obligations (but the legal definitions are getting further away from the scriptural meaning).

(2) it's not really possible to ask people to redefine "marriage" using scriptural language because the lawyers have hijacked the very words the English translators used. To proceed along those lines would mean explaining the Hebrew words and significance. I suppose the advantage of that would be that religious people might learn something and those who might cause problems would get bored before we got to the controversial bits.
 
Bartato said:
This post got me curious about the etymology of the english word "wife". It seems like it is derived from older german background words basically meaning "woman".
Click to expand...
Interesting
Bartato said:
Feminists complain that the word implies possession and ownership. If that is the case, then we probably should use that word. That accords with Biblical doctrine.
Click to expand...
And this is the dadgum greatest reason for using it :)
 
Bartato said:
This post got me curious about the etymology of the english word "wife". It seems like it is derived from older german background words basically meaning "woman".
Click to expand...
Yes, it just means "woman". That older meaning is preserved in the English word "midwife". A midwife is not necessarily married - but she is a woman. I believe over time the word "wife" began to be used for a married woman exclusively, but that was not the original meaning, it's just one of various words in English for woman (woman, female, wife) that has over time been adopted for a specific use.

Just as English has adopted both the Germanic-origin "sheep" and the French-origin "mutton" for an animal, but has then used the Germanic form to refer to the live animal and the French form to refer to the dead animal. This is how language develops.
Scoop said:
The term "Marriage"...
Click to expand...
... fundamentally means "joining" or "union". It's used in engineering and art in this sense. "The delicate flavours of macaroni cheese come from the marriage of pasta and cheese" as a food snob who liked macaroni might say.

The marriage of two people is the act of uniting the two in a close union. It is therefore an ideally appropriate term to use for two people coming together in a Biblical union. In fact, it is the correct term in English for that.

The only problem is that it carries complex legal ramifications, and for that reason there may be cause not to use the term in some circumstances. But when simply describing reality, it's the right word to use.
 
And...

'Biblical Marriage' v 'Traditional Marriage'

Christendom fears the firmer and defends (ti the death) the latter... demonstrates that they know the difference.
 
FollowingHim said:
Scoop said:
The term "Marriage"...
Click to expand...
... fundamentally means "joining" or "union".
Click to expand...
On looking into this more, I see that the more general meaning of union is actually a later figurative use and not the root of the word. The Online Etymology Dictionary has an interesting entry on "marry", which states:
c. 1300, marien, of parents or superiors, "to give (offspring) in marriage," also intransitive, "to enter into the conjugal state, take a husband or wife," from Old French marier "to get married; to marry off, give in marriage; to bring together in marriage," from Latin marītāre "to wed, marry, give in marriage" (source of Italian maritare, Spanish and Portuguese maridar), from marītus (n.) "married man, husband," which is of uncertain origin.

Perhaps ultimately "provided with a *mari," a young woman, from PIE *mari-, *mori- "young wife, young woman" (source also of Welsh morwyn "girl, maiden," Middle Welsh merch "daughter"), akin to *meryo- "young man" (source of Sanskrit marya- "young man, suitor").
Click to expand...
If that highlighted part is correct, the term really is exactly what you are trying to refer to but using far more words @Scoop.
 
PeteR said:
And...

'Biblical Marriage' v 'Traditional Marriage'

Christendom fears the firmer and defends (ti the death) the latter... demonstrates that they know the difference.
Click to expand...
Nailed it!
The Biblical Marriage is the firmer one. :rolleyes:
 
Scoop said:
my women, and/or possibly Isha's.
Click to expand...

I too like 'my woman'. It's English, and also the literal rendering of the Hebrew scriptures translated 'wife' (woman, female).

Scoop said:
. The term "Marriage" and the term "Wife" and "Wives" do not seem to be at all biblical. I'm hoping those with a better technical knowledge can really chime in here.
Click to expand...

Ancient Hebrew (and Greek) has no term for wife (only woman). Nor does the Hebrew have a word for marriage or marry.
'Marry' is a translation of various different words such as rule over, dwell, own, take/carry/lift, woman, man, virgin, and a few others.
'Marriage' as such isn't in the text but is a translation of words such as give, sent, father-in-law, woman, etc.
'Engaged' is actually 'betrothed', which comes from the meaning "pay the price, & so gain the right of possession". Which goes along with dowry ("purchase price (of a wife)").

As you can see, this Biblical marriage in the language looks a lot different than anything we see today or what is commonly thought of as 'traditional'.

PeteR said:
And...

'Biblical Marriage' v 'Traditional Marriage'

Christendom fears the firmer and defends (ti the death) the latter... demonstrates that they know the difference.
Click to expand...

What they defend is actually 1970's 2nd wave feminist marriage which looks nothing like traditional marriage.
 
FollowingHim said:
QUOTE;
c. 1300, marien, of parents or superiors, "to give (offspring) in marriage,"
UNQUOTE
Click to expand...

I do like that bit of the definition. It fits very nicely with

Mal 2:15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed.

and that rules out several varieties of so-called "marriage".
 
I suggest we all get into ECARS.

ECARS are not the latest new-fangled electrical forms of conveyance but rather
Edenic Covenants of Abrahamic Relationship.

Edenic: ECARS predate sin and therefore predate all, every, and any form of religion. Quite obviously ECARS also predate any national laws. They also predate both monogamous and polygamous forms of marriage. (They also predate sex and children if we need to go there.)

Covenants: ECARS are lifelong agreements made between men and women in accordance with divine laws for the procreation of children (Mal 2:15). Although each ECAR is made between one man and one woman, a man can enter into a number of ECARS with different women simultaneously.

Abrahamic: This takes us straight past Adam to Abraham who established ECARS with multiple women which was a means of blessing. Christ recommended that we do the works of Abraham (John 8:39) but where is it recommended that we do the works of Adam?

Relationship: An in word that avoids saying "marriage".

Example: "Oh, we're all into ECARS here..."
 
Last edited:
Quartus said:
Mal 2:15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed.

and that rules out several varieties of so-called "marriage".
Click to expand...

Including mine of 20+ years with a barren woman? We meant to have children, and tried to, but failed. :(

Sorry for the depressing comment
 
Last edited:
Quartus said:
I do like that bit of the definition. It fits very nicely with

Mal 2:15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed.

and that rules out several varieties of so-called "marriage".
Click to expand...
Holy matrimony is from latin and means holy (set apart) mother making. That kinda rules out a lot of so called marriages, including those between people who just want a "partner in crime" to travel and see the world with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top