• 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.

Exodus 22:16-17: "pre-marital sex" = the beginning of marriage?

The problem with viewing a wife as mere property gets sticky when viewed against stewardship.

A steward will view all under his care with respect and as needing preservation.

Mere property doesn’t necessarily give rise to expectations of tending and enriching.

When I purchased my home many years ago, I was given sage advise by someone I knew. He told me that my new home was a gift from God and, as such, should be respected and not allowed to go into disrepair. He emphasized routine maintenance and gradual improvements as money and time permitted. Gods gift was to be appreciated and stewarded.
From a legal standpoint - a wife was considered a man’s property. That is a foundational truth found in the Scriptures. There’s a lot of confusion in the church, because this foundation has been twisted. “Cheating - divorce - adultery.”

The apostles saw themselves as property of Messiah. “Slave (bond-servant) to Messiah.

On earth as it is in heaven.

This foundational truth doesn’t nullify the other layers — Provision - love - compassion - grace - leader.
 
Last edited:
From a legal standpoint - a wife was considered a man’s property. That is a foundational truth found in the Scriptures. There’s a lot of confusion in the church, because this foundation has been twisted. “Cheating - divorce - adultery.”

The apostles saw themselves as property of Messiah. “Slave (bond-servant) to Messiah.

On earth as it is in heaven.

This foundational truth doesn’t nullify the other layers — Provision - love - compassion - grace - leader.
You cannot properly protect that which you don’t own.
 
This foundational truth doesn’t nullify the other layers — Provision - love - compassion - grace - leader.
Would that be the case for a pair of shoes?
 
It is a "transaction" but the terms and (bride)price are completely negotiable (seven years labor or commensurate amount in livestock or whatever dear old dad thinks of her worth). Sex simply seals the deal upon insemination. If it is a quiet insemination (unknown to others- horny people that we are) then the proof is the resultant pregnancy. Kinda hard in those days to hide a pregnancy after the first or second month when she is supposed to separate herself for that time of month. That's why scripture conflates "one flesh" with a baby.
As per our usual arrangement, what is the Biblical support for this?
 
Where was the prison in ancient Israel?

It was found in the Talmud and in the synagogues and in the Temple where venal men made the Word of God into a cage for others.

A guy came along and called them out on this.
 
Would that be the case for a pair of shoes?
Exodus 20:17

“Do not desire another man's house; do not desire his wife, his slaves, his cattle, his donkeys, or anything else that he owns.”

The husband owns the wife as his property.

That’s the Word of Truth. A righteous man loves and takes care of his wife (or wives).

This point needs to be ingrained into the church - because then the other aspects - like adultery and polygyny - start making more sense.

If I own a mustang as a car - that car is my property. No one debates if a man is allowed to add an additional car as his possession. Why? Because the foundation is taught correctly. But when it comes to marriage - so many get offended by the flesh of Messiah - and run away from the Living Truth. That’s why the majority of “Christ Followers” don’t even understand “His” definition of adultery (Leviticus 20:10). He says - I do not change - I AM the same forever. That’s why he is the Rock, and not like the sand that changes with the seasons and culture.




IMG_0156.jpeg
 
Last edited:
In one of my past studies, i could fine no "jail" but rather servitude and restitution or physical correction and it was rather immediate, including death penalty.
 
In one of my past studies, i could fine no "jail" but rather servitude and restitution or physical correction and it was rather immediate, including death penalty.
Even Rome was too poor to afford jails. Therefore Hebrews didn't have them.
 
Governors and state police long understood that incarceration was just another way to get free chain gang labor. Another example of dejure battling defacto.
 
very intersting stuff.

my teacher describes the relation between sex and marriage as this: marriage is the covenant, sex is the sign.

but there are passages which seem to problematize even this.

seems there might not be an easy answer.
 
By betrothal,

1) No one considered Dinah Shechm's woman post sex, they did consider him fornicating with her though, then agreed to intermarry.

2) Mary is divorcable by Joseph pre sex.

3) A raped woman is not the rapists, unless the father allows it.

4-6) And if she is already betrothed it is adultery, if she is in the city and doesnt scream it applies to both parties, if she does, then only the rapist is guilty. If she is in the country it only applies to the rapist.

6 scriptural references all contradicting sex = marriage. Betrothal (Aras) is pre Marriage (chathan), which is pre sex (Shakab see Mary above). Sex equaling marriage effectively invalidates fornication as a concept, because if sex alone = marriage you are left with only 2 outcomes, marriage or adultery. Please provide counter scripture.

I actually have a 7th reference, Exodus 21:1-6, again deals with the master giving the slave a wife. The male slave cannot take her from his master, she is the masters to give and her and any offspring remain the masters.

But if the slave had a wife to begin with she belongs to the slave. If a man lays with a slave woman who is betrothed to another that is a violation, though its punishment is not akin to adultery, nor its it called adultery, but its still fornication, as she is another mans, but she is not free.

Again we see the violation is based on her betrothal status, not her ownership status, nor her sex status.

8th! Note even with a warbride there is a procedure to be completed before she is a valid wife, you cannot just sex her down.
1) We can't use Dinah as any example of how to do proper biblical marriage.

Shechm is Canaanite, so we take him as follower of Torah. Maybe they did marriage differently. And since Canaanite will become so bad they will become deserving of genocide, we can reasonably assume they did marriage wrong too. Starting from when, well, too little evidence. Maybe they were fans of current boyfriend/girlfriend setup where instead of abortion they throw baby as offering to their gods?

And Israel's sons were evil, all of them literally. This guys killed entire city and then steal everything. Lol, taking moral lesson from murderers, thieves and enslavers :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:. No wonder everybody hated them. They were danger to society. In current times, I would put them all forever behind bars.

Now, I have checked several translations. So Dinah is either raped or implied to be raped. Well, in that case you kill only rapist, not the whole city full of innocents.

2) First, conditions for getting into state "divorced" don't have to same as ones for getting "married". And per my definition, Mary wasn't even being married, but betrothed. And of course, Mary can be given leg. Key point of marriage is woman being sexually faithful. And when woman takes another man in bed, well, there is point in such a marriage.

To make analogy. We make contract where you will sell me your car starting new month. What will happen if you sell your car to someone else this month? Contract is finito.

And what is interesting is that only command we have is mandatory breakup for woman's cheating. What about other's cases of dishonesty pr fraud. His lying about place to live, income levels, other wife(s), her lying about sex history, being in love with another man? No way something like this never happened. And I don't doubt marriage contracts before sex weren't made void.

3) No comment as there is already big enough discussion does father's approval matter

4-6) Marriage is voluntary sex, not by involuntary. Rape commands don't matter for my case. As I'm against rape as method of wife acquiring and it's illegal in current legal legal, so either, I don't care since these command don't apply.

No everything in Torah applies to now, starting with sin sacrifices.

7) Read again text. He goes out as free man, not a slave and not a divorced man. There is no hidden divorce law there, only his wife and children are still slaves.

Hello, same situation as when man sells his children with special case for wife.

I highly doubt any master could forbade man from visiting his slave wife/children. Lord likes to keep family together, so I doubt this would pass.

8) But you can sex her down after mourning period.

And soldiers were purified after campaign, so pattern is same here. First "ritual cleansing", then normal back to regular activities.
 
Marriage (chathan) is consumated by sex (shakab), consumation is not the marriage. If it was, there is no reason to call it marriage (chathan), marriage would be described instead just as (shakab). Betrothal would be unnecessary. The father would not be able to anull as he would have had that authority stolen from him. Yet he can anull because the rapist is not yet the husband. The daughter has not been given.

You cannot unconsumate, but you can divorce (kerithuth). Betrothal (aras) preceeds consumation, shakab can happen before betrothal in some situations, yet adultery only applies after betrothal or the giving of the daughter. Adultery does not apply to rape/seduction(shakab) nor prostitution(qedeshah)/harlotry(zanah), instead it is fornication (taznûṯ), except if the woman is betrothed or already chathan. Note it does not require that she have a child, therefore one flesh in this aspect does not require with child or to have bore child as a qualifier for being married.

Adultery is also the only reason for "divorce" without a git, and punishable by death for consentual parties. Divorce (kerithuth) can be applied with and without a bill. Only adultery allows for without a bill. Its worth noting kerithuth is from karath which is to cut a covenant, where kerithuth is to cut a marital bond.

Matthew 1:25, Joseph was going to divorce Mary, never having lay with her. You cannot divorce that which is not your's to divorce, which has not been given or promised to you. If sex = marriage, Joseph does not have the right by the law to divorce Mary as he had not had sex with her yet. Adultery is entirely based on the womans status of belongining. That status can start before sex. Marriage has to start at the giving or the promising. Adultery and divorce are two marriage only applicable concepts, both can apply pre sex and dont always apply post sex.

Interesting thought, the sons of gods took wives for themselves, I wonder if this was forced or agreed?
You can promise to enter into marriage at later date. There is no Biblical ban against that just like there is no ban against starting employment later.

Also, you didn't mentioned case of Ruth where Naomi basically says Ruth to seduce Boaz. Why else would Naomi beatify herself and they visited Boaz during night when he is alone? Sex is only reason. Anything else could be done during day. If some privacy was needed, it could be requested by asking for some time alone.
 
very intersting stuff.

my teacher describes the relation between sex and marriage as this: marriage is the covenant, sex is the sign.

but there are passages which seem to problematize even this.

seems there might not be an easy answer.

Unless sex is the covenant…….
 
Back
Top