0: When does marriage begin? - Structured discussion

[Cap]

@ZecAustin, you can reject this if you like but it is out of love. To me you live life somewhat ridged. You view the word of God as legalistic and hard. Even though the Laws of God are meant to show one the path to light, we are failures and we need a Savior to save us. We can never do it from our work. We are screwed up. We may not get it right all the time but I think if we at least try, we can be forgiven. I see the Laws of God spiritually. It helps me see the mind of God. It also helps me see my failures. But, the Spirit they give is the light we need and it is all based on Love. I trust that He will place them in my heart as I need them. I have come to understand that it is in my mind that matters, "and you can make of it what you want, but I have firmly established in my mind and in my heart and in my experience that" God will show me the way. And so all I have to do is listen to the love of others and show love to them to see the path I am to follow, for me.

I have seen you with your daughter at the retreats. When she fails and cries you comfort her, you love her. She is at peace with you. I feel it. I am sure others do to. God wants to do the same with us, His children. He wants to love us when we fail.

Be at peace.

(I will remove this if you are anyone finds it offensive.)

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Of course the word joined is used to describe sex with the harlot and joining with God.

What besides your assumption and assertion of this proves your interpretation of the word Joined, cleaved, or bound?

I cant find it in either the Greek or Hebrew or any dictionary from the era of the translation into English. Where do you get the idea that joined =sex?

 

[Verifyveritas76]

We spent quite a lot of comments discussing the status change of a woman who is promised but not yet bedded. This is the category Mary fell in to during this period.

Not true. That category is reserved for maidens espoused, but not taken as wife and cohabited with. In these verses, the distinction is made that an espoused Mary was taken as wife and cohabited with for a minimum of 6-9 months as wife without sex.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before† they came together, she was found with child††of the Holy Ghost.
Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily

.the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, . . fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: [Apparently she was already recognized by God as his wife even without cohabitation or sex]

Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:


And whether you acknowledge it or not, that maiden espoused but not taken yet was still Biblically referenced as the neighbors wife, still without having sex.

 

[rockfox]

men in our “Christian” culture with a predisposition and proclivity to both see and allude to sex whenever possible

As opposed to the men of the prior couple centuries with a predisposition and proclivity to refuse to see sex anywhere, even when patently obvious. Not implying that applies to you, just saying that particular quoted argument doesn't fly with me.

We also know that to marry a prostitute or harlot was considered a terrible thing to do in the Old Testament

How do we know that?

was explained to be an insult to the family of Christ in 1 Cor 6.

I see where you get that. Kind of leaves a lot of Christian women unmarriagable though no?

This is the verse that convinced me sex was marriage (a gross over simplification obviously ).

So does Paul there say, 'if you have sex with a harlot you're married to her'? No, but rather...

Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her?

The greek had a word for marrying, G1060, not used here.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

We have a one flesh resulting from a joining that only makes sense if it's sex because other wise joining is completely undefined.

This is how the rest of Scripture defines the word translated as joined in 1 Cor.6

Luke 10:11. Even the very dust of your city, which cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you:
Can dust have sex with us?

Luke 15:15. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country;
Is the prodigal son having sex with this citizen?

Acts 5:13. And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them.
Are the Jews refraining from sex with the disciples/apostles?

Acts 8:29. Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
Is Philip having sex with the chariot?

Acts 9:26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples:
Is Saul attempting to have sex with the disciples?

Acts 10:28. And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;
Are Jews only allowed to have sex with other Jewish men?

Acts. 17:34 Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
Is this an example of Paul engaged in sex with multiple people of both sexes?

Romans 12:9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.
Is this a commandment to have sex with anything that is not evil?

1 Cor 6:16,17 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one†flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Obviously, its ludicrous to define every other use of this word as sex in the New Testament, but this one time we’re supposed to make an exception so that your otherwise unsubstantiated theory can be believable?

 

[Verifyveritas76]

The greek had a word for marrying, G1060, not used here.

True. However there were several other words for marriage (like 1061 & 1062) as well as words that were idioms for marriage, like

#2853 kallao : (which is used here)

1. to glue, to glue together, cement, fasten together
2. to join or fasten firmly together
3. to join one's self to, cleave to

Or # 4347 proskallao

1. to glue upon, glue to
2. to join one's self to closely, cleave to, stick to

Both of these words would have an antonym (a word that means the opposite)
#1210 deo or #1402 douloo. “Bound or bondage”

from ; to enslave (literally or figuratively):--bring into (be under) bondage, ? given, become (make) servant.

1. to make a slave of, reduce to bondage
2. metaph. give myself wholly to one's needs and service, make myself a bondman to him

As opposed and distinguished from words that were idioms for sex like

# 1097 ginosko. Matt 1:25 and Luke 1:34. “To know”

1. Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman

# 2133 eunoia Benevolence
from the same as ; kindness; euphemistically, conjugal duty:--benevolence, good will.

#4905 synerchomai. To come together

1. to come together
   1. to assemble
   2. of conjugal cohabitation

#4202 porneia. Fornication and adultery among others

1. illicit sexual intercourse
   1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
   2. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
   3. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,
2. metaph. the worship of idols
   1. of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols

 

[FollowingHim]

Mark 10:9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate

God creates a marriage. If it can be separated, it's not of God.

Slightly off-topic but there's a big difference between "don't do this" and "it is impossible to do this".

God says "do not murder". That does not mean "you cannot murder" - you can. Life is from Him, yet you can take it away. You are forbidden from doing so - yet you still can if you choose to sin anyway.

God also says "do not divorce" (basically, we could debate exceptions but that's off-topic, I'm keeping this simple). That does NOT mean "you cannot divorce". Marriage is from Him - yet that does not mean humans cannot separate it. They may be able to. They are just forbidden from doing so (generally) - yet that doesn't mean they cannot do it.

This is a very important distinction to keep in mind in all these discussions. There's a big difference between "forbidden" and "impossible".

 

[Cap]

Slightly off-topic but there's a big difference between "don't do this" and "it is impossible to do this".

God says "do not murder". That does not mean "you cannot murder" - you can. Life is from Him, yet you can take it away. You are forbidden from doing so - yet you still can if you choose to sin anyway.

God also says "do not divorce" (basically, we could debate exceptions but that's off-topic, I'm keeping this simple). That does NOT mean "you cannot divorce". Marriage is from Him - yet that does not mean humans cannot separate it. They may be able to. They are just forbidden from doing so (generally) - yet that doesn't mean they cannot do it.

This is a very important distinction to keep in mind in all these discussions. There's a big difference between "forbidden" and "impossible".

I already agreed with @Ancient Paths comment in this regard and understand yours, but I was initially thinking a little high thought, but as you say, off topic.

(Could Adam and Eve gotten a divorce?)

 

[FollowingHim]

Yes, I posted that while going through the thread, spotted later that @Ancient Paths had already said it. Great minds think alike...

 

[FollowingHim]

@Verifyveritas76 , I get your point that "joined" does not specifically mean sex. However, how do you become "joined" to a harlot? Does it not make most sense, in the context of this one verse, to read "joined" as being a euphamism for sex?

I take this as meaning "if you have sex (join) with a harlot, you become one flesh (ie have a close marriage relationship that parallels the one spirit relationship of Christ and the church) with her". It really seems to be the plain reading. But I take your point that it can be read differently.

Could you please clearly paraphrase what you take this verse to mean? If you've already said that, and I've forgotten, I'm sorry, this is a long discussion. I'm reading all your detailed discussion on the words where you're saying Zec is wrong, but am struggling to see clearly what you believe is correct.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

@Verifyveritas76 , I get your point that "joined" does not specifically mean sex. However, how do you become "joined" to a harlot? Does it not make most sense, in the context of this one verse, to read "joined" as being a euphamism for sex?

If it were impossible to be married to a harlot, then yes, I’d agree with you that, lacking a better fit/understanding, it by default must mean to have sex.
However, we all know that it is entirely possible to marry a harlot leaving us with two options to examine.

Quite simply, I see it as saying 1. You shouldn’t fornicate with a harlot as thats a sin against yourself per Proverbs 5, and 2. you shouldn’t bind/glue/join/marry yourself to a harlot as that means you are bringing someone into the family of God that brings dishonor to him.

I do not believe that these are a singular issue, rather two separate issues, even though I was raised to believe that it was the same thing. After studying it and comparing it to scripture, I just cant make the Scriptural evidence connect it to sex even though I’ve been assured by those who should know that it must somehow. (I’m not referring to Zec or anyone else here)

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I take this as meaning "if you have sex (join) with a harlot, you become one flesh (ie have a close marriage relationship that parallels the one spirit relationship of Christ and the church) with her". I

Does fornication between a harlot and a John even parallel the relationship of Christ and the church?

There’s really no intimacy, there’s no covenant, there’s no assurance of long term commitment, provision or protection, there’s no cohabitation, no expectation of producing children, no taking her home to meet the Father, no taking his last name or identifying as his, no reverence from her and no nurturing from him, no belonging of either party to each other, nothing to seal the relationship, definitely not a public acknowledgement that they are joined.

At best, its an extremely perverted and abbreviated comparison to an earthly marriage relationship, let alone a divine marriage relationship which I may be wrong about, but I believe is sexless.

If a divine “marriage” is sexless, how could you be “joined” to the Lord?

Is there any other place in Scripture where fornication is referred to as one flesh?

Is there any other place in Scripture where marriage is referred to as one flesh?

Is there any places in Scripture where one flesh (or its equivalent) is used for a relationship that is impossible for it to be sexual?

If so, what is the relationship between the people who are one flesh (or its equivalent)

 

[frederick]

you shouldn’t bind/glue/join/marry yourself to a harlot as that means you are bringing someone into the family of God that brings dishonor to him.

Hey, just a thought in regard to your comment; Rahab was a prostitute/harlot (cf. Joshua 2:1) and is identified in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (cf. Matt. 1:5). Shalom

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Neither do the terms husband or wife. The Bible only refers to men and the women they've mastered.

I knew this was there, but just ran across it again.
Hosea 2:16. And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ishi (my husband); and shalt call me no more Baali. (My master/lord)

Apparently there’s a difference between husband and master.

 

[The Revolting Man]

@ZecAustin, you can reject this if you like but it is out of love. To me you live life somewhat ridged. You view the word of God as legalistic and hard. Even though the Laws of God are meant to show one the path to light, we are failures and we need a Savior to save us. We can never do it from our work. We are screwed up. We may not get it right all the time but I think if we at least try, we can be forgiven. I see the Laws of God spiritually. It helps me see the mind of God. It also helps me see my failures. But, the Spirit they give is the light we need and it is all based on Love. I trust that He will place them in my heart as I need them. I have come to understand that it is in my mind that matters, "and you can make of it what you want, but I have firmly established in my mind and in my heart and in my experience that" God will show me the way. And so all I have to do is listen to the love of others and show love to them to see the path I am to follow, for me.

I have seen you with your daughter at the retreats. When she fails and cries you comfort her, you love her. She is at peace with you. I feel it. I am sure others do to. God wants to do the same with us, His children. He wants to love us when we fail.

Be at peace.

(I will remove this if you are anyone finds it offensive.)

I don't find that in the least bit offensive. I would say that I actually agree with you. I do see the Word of God as rigid but everything else you said is spot on.

 

[The Revolting Man]

What besides your assumption and assertion of this proves your interpretation of the word Joined, cleaved, or bound?

I cant find it in either the Greek or Hebrew or any dictionary from the era of the translation into English. Where do you get the idea that joined =sex?

I'm afraid I can't help you here. If you don't think the context of the verse makes it clear then I don't know that anything else will. You still haven't given a sufficient explanation for what it might be if it's not sex.

 

[The Revolting Man]

, . . fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife.

This is referring to some future event. It doesn't say that she was a "wife" at that moment.

and took unto him his wife: And knew her not .

So there was something significant about the fact that he knew her not?

And whether you acknowledge it or not, that maiden espoused but not taken yet was still Biblically referenced as the neighbors wife, still without having sex.

The term wife here is not correct. You know that. The word is woman and her legal status is not included in the title. There's no need for us to back through this. The debate is still available for others to see

That category is reserved for maidens espoused, but not taken as wife and cohabited with. In these verses, the distinction is made that an espoused Mary was taken as wife and cohabited with for a minimum of 6-9 months as wife without sex.

You're a little muddled here sir. So a woman who has been espoused but not taken and cohabitated with is not a wife? That is the exact opposite of your normal claim. In this statement you say that taking her and living with her make the marriage and not the alleged covenant that we are to assume happened at the "espousing." Would like some time to untangle that?

 

[The Revolting Man]

So does Paul there say, 'if you have sex with a harlot you're married to her'? .

Yes. The phrase one flesh is pretty clear.

 

[The Revolting Man]

This is how the rest of Scripture defines the word translated as joined in 1 Cor.6

Luke 10:11. Even the very dust of your city, which cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you:
Can dust have sex with us?

Luke 15:15. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country;
Is the prodigal son having sex with this citizen?

Acts 5:13. And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them.
Are the Jews refraining from sex with the disciples/apostles?

Acts 8:29. Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
Is Philip having sex with the chariot?

Acts 9:26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples:
Is Saul attempting to have sex with the disciples?

Acts 10:28. And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;
Are Jews only allowed to have sex with other Jewish men?

Acts. 17:34 Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
Is this an example of Paul engaged in sex with multiple people of both sexes?

Romans 12:9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.
Is this a commandment to have sex with anything that is not evil?

1 Cor 6:16,17 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one†flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Obviously, its ludicrous to define every other use of this word as sex in the New Testament, but this one time we’re supposed to make an exception so that your otherwise unsubstantiated theory can be believable?

Lol, that's cute. So what does it mean? How do you join yourself to a harlot? What is being warned against in the passage? I can't wait for you to say "marriage" so I can then ask you if it's okay to have sex with a harlot since it doesn't mean we're marrying her. And if there is any unsubstantiated theories around here it's still your covenant idea that can only be implied if one squints just right and turns his head the right way. At least be serious.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Does fornication between a harlot and a John even parallel the relationship of Christ and the church?

No. It's a mockery of God's metaphor. That's why it's forbidden.

Is there any other place in Scripture where marriage is referred to as one flesh?

This is why I question your seriousness. Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19:5. You still haven't dealt with these foundational passages of "marriage." You will flit all over the place but you won't actually deal the establishment of the institution. God literally tells us what forms a marriage in Genesis and then Christ reaffirms it in Matthew but you don't think either verse is really relevant. Maybe they're referenced in the Babylonian Talmud. You should check. That might mean they're semi-legitimate.