• 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.

Meat One flesh is “marriage” and here’s why.

AbrahamSolomon said:
The point behind this is to show Kings sometimes seem to get a pass to point to the fact women who normally cheat was put to death along with her male friend as a reply to @steve

“I gave you … your master’s wives” (2 Sam 12:8), Levenson and Halpern argue that David’s marriage to Ahinoam constituted a claim to Saul’s throne (see Absalom’s actions in 2 Sam 16:22). Perhaps David, like other kings who appropriated the harems of their predecessors or rivals, strengthened his claim to the throne in this way.


And King Solomon gave offerings to fake gods and was not put to death so he got a pass on that as well.

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 specifically prescribes the method of execution to stoning
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
Click to expand...
1) That David had Saul’s wife with him when he was running from Saul would be a ridiculous claim. Yah did give him Saul’s wives, but not until after Saul was dead. Or that would have been David’s first instance of adultery, which didn’t happen because Yah didn’t list that one in the “except for” statement.
So that clearly establishes that there were at least two women with the same name, and out of the millions of women, you cannot convince anyone that there weren’t more.
So it is a nonsense claim.

3) As far as Solomon not being stoned for worshiping other gods, it seems that many were backsliding (is that even a concept nowadays?) right along with him and a righteous culture was not there to carry out the required punishment. It was a cycle that Israel went through multiple time without evidence that the penalty being carried out. Yah usually stepped in when it had gone long enough and allowed the nation to be conquered. Something that we would do well to remember in our own lives.
Remember that David’s son rebelled and the penalty was stoning also.
Penalties existed, there wasn’t always a culture that was willing to carry them out. What is interesting is that, in spite of the harshness of the penalty, Yah didn’t consider David’s failure to carry out the punishment a big enough infraction to list against him.

So you haven’t established your claim that Kings were treated differently by Yah.
 
Oh dear, a moment of silence for our beloved departed brother.
May he return with a sweeter tongue.
 
StudentofHim said:
Is there a way to see how long that ban lasts or is the length not posted?
Click to expand...
I’m sure that it lasts as long as RM wants it to, unless I miss my guess.
I don’t think that it is posted, or there would have been a notification.

Edit: I am glad to have been wrong.
 
Last edited:
StudentofHim said:
Is there a way to see how long that ban lasts or is the length not posted?
Click to expand...
In the thread 'Forum Rules' in the Website and Forum section.
  • Any breach of the above guidelines will result in a formal Warning from the moderators.
  • If you receive the following number of warnings within the space of 30 days, you will be restricted as follows:
  1. No consequence.
  2. No ability to post on the forum for 48 hours.
  3. No ability to post on the forum for one week.
  4. Permanent ban from the entire forum (also lose access to private messaging, chat etc. Can never log in again).
Click to expand...

So, number 2, no ability to post for 48 hours.
 
steve said:
Penalties existed, there wasn’t always a culture that was willing to carry them out.
Click to expand...
@steve the penalties listed were a maximum, not a requirement. For example, an eye for an eye, or a tooth for a tooth (cf. Ex. 21:23-25) meant the punishment could not exceed the crime. Just as God doesn't exact more than is due when we sin, nor should we when someone sins against us. And we ought to be ready to show mercy and forgiveness as we receive mercy and forgiveness from our Father.
 
steve said:
That David had Saul’s wife with him when he was running from Saul would be a ridiculous claim.
Click to expand...
Exactly @AbrahamSolomon. David may have taken Saul's wives when Saul died - but this was long before Saul died. There was absolutely no opportunity for David to have Saul's wife at this stage, not to mention that it would have been sin if he had, which proves conclusively that these are two separate women with the same name.

Also - I asked you to describe your findings in your own words. But once again you just copy/pasted from one of your Jewish encyclopaedias. Something isn't true just because you found it on the internet. Please stop copy/pasting, if you want to refer us to somewhere just paste the link. It will automatically format like this:

Ahinoam: Bible | Jewish Women's Archive

Ahinoam is a Hebrew Bible character appearing in the Book of Samuel as King David’s wife and mother of his eldest son, Amnom. Since Ahinoam’s name usually precedes the name of David’s other wife Abigail, it is suggested that the name order signifies Ahinoam’s elevated status as the mother of...
jwa.org jwa.org
 
Last edited:
AbrahamSolomon said:
I'd like to see if someone can prove it wrong as well, I've heard people claim it's wrong but it has just been them saying it just can't be so with no proof.
Click to expand...
You need to consider a concept called the "burden of proof". The burden of proof is on the person who is proposing something new - they have to prove that thing. It is not up to others to disprove it.

In this case, the idea that David married a woman and her mother is a novel and very controversial proposal. You were proposing it, it was therefore your responsibility to prove it from scripture - not from an encyclopaedia, but from scripture. It was not everyone else's responsibility to disprove it.

The reason for this is that it is really easy to make statements, but much harder to prove or disprove them. I can easily suggest a load of new things ("Peter's mother-in-law had breast cancer", "Jesus was barefoot when he walked on water, it wouldn't have worked otherwise", "Elijah's coat was dyed red"...). Is it reasonable for me to believe these things until you disprove me? That would be simply impractical.

It is my responsibility to demonstrate that what I say is true. That way I will only propose things I think I can back up from scripture.
 
Last edited:
steve said:
Why wasn’t King David put to death along with Bathsheba?
And why did Yah use them in the lineage of His son, if your theory is correct?
Click to expand...
Not supporting his theory but David most likely was not stoned because no one charged him/lack of witnesses, they were not found in Adultery. Neither did any man accuse him of Murder for Uriah. Remember Deuteronomy 19:15 “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established."
There had to be an accuser and evidence/witnesses. Also want to note that in the case of the adultery it was not given to the husband to kill either his wife or the man who laid with her. This possibly being the reason why a divorce is even possible, otherwise there would be no need as an adulterous woman would always be put to death, can't remarry when your dead (unless your a necromancer?). Stoning calling for community participation, after prosecution. The only time someone is allowed to kill another outright is the avenger of blood and that was only for Murderer/Manslaughter, and again only after prosecution and judgement by the elders/judges with witnesses, and still only under certain circumstances post judgement.
 
AbrahamSolomon said:
This Broken Idea would allow women to leave as simple as I cheated so give me a GET so I can marry the man I cheated with.
And this would be seen a Allowed by G-d there would be nothing to stop them.
Click to expand...

If the maximum penalty for this "simple cheating" was death, the woman would have to really want to cheat and risk death just to get out of that marriage to do so.

The adulterous man also would also understand he could be put to death for it as well. The law is supposed to be both a consequence and a deterrent.

If the society got the point where they weren't enforcing the law at all (no death penalties) you can be sure that women would do that, sleep with another man, make it known to the husband, get a GET from him, and marry the guy she slept with.

However you can also be certain that men would be divorcing their wives without a lawful reason, and without consequences, forcing those women into adultery, and is that any better than the adulterous woman choosing it on her own?
 
I think something that is also often overlooked is the fact that not only was Messiah correcting the Pharisees perversion of the law, but also he was doing so while the Jews were in captivity among the Romans. @PeteR can probably extrapolate on this a bit more being more learned in the history of the times. We know that Roman law/culture allowed for divorce and remarriage for any reason. If the Jews had begun following after Roman practices this may also be what he is addressing in Matthew 19:6. I think much of the NT should be read with this in consideration, especially the letters of Paul. A good example of this would being that many of the things Messiah mentions of himself were often being attributed to other Roman gods at the time, who's stories the people would be familiar with. Janus being a big one.
 
DustinM said:
If the maximum penalty for this "simple cheating" was death, the woman would have to really want to cheat and risk death just to get out of that marriage to do so.

The adulterous man also would also understand he could be put to death for it as well. The law is supposed to be both a consequence and a deterrent.

If the society got the point where they weren't enforcing the law at all (no death penalties) you can be sure that women would do that, sleep with another man, make it known to the husband, get a GET from him, and marry the guy she slept with.

However you can also be certain that men would be divorcing their wives without a lawful reason, and without consequences, forcing those women into adultery, and is that any better than the adulterous woman choosing it on her own?
Click to expand...

The hard part is we live in America and follow their rules so murder is not allowed, nor would i root for women to die.
It is my belief that Yeshua changed it to her never being able to marry again till her husband dies and could be to keep women and men from doing it. I personally hate killing but as Paul said this me and not The L-rd saying this. We might point out that unless one of us or without sin we can stone anyone as well.
 
steve said:
Oh dear, a moment of silence for our beloved departed brother.
May he return with a sweeter tongue.
Click to expand...

I think he offers good points, hopefully he will be back soon.
 
FollowingHim said:
Does sex with another man automatically destroy the marriage? Or is it just a permissible reason to divorce?

If sex with another man automatically destroyed the marriage, then if your wife gets raped she's no longer your wife, and you've got no say in the matter, she's now the wife of another man - and you can't take her back either according to Torah.
Click to expand...
I just want to understand bc I think he was talking about adultery? Do you beleive if a woman is rapped she has committed adultery??
 
Hisdaughter said:
I just want to understand bc I think he was talking about adultery? Do you beleive if a woman is rapped she has committed adultery??
Click to expand...

A married woman who is Raped is blameless and the rapist in this case holds the blame.
He can't marry her because is another man's wife.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top