Meat One Flesh: Restoring God's words around "marriage"

[The Revolting Man]

Wait a minute, I got hoodwinked by @PeteR being interesting.

This thread is about what we should call the relationship, not how to form it.

 

[NickF]

1 ¶ Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 1 καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρός με λέγων 2 Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, 2 υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου διαμάρτυραι τῇ Ιερουσαλημ τὰς ἀνομίας αὐτῆς 3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite. 3 καὶ ἐρεῗς τάδε λέγει κύριος τῇ Ιερουσαλημ ἡ ῥίζα σου καὶ ἡ γένεσίς σου ἐκ γῆς Χανααν ὁ πατήρ σου Αμορραῗος καὶ ἡ μήτηρ σου Χετταία 4 And as for thy nativity, in the day thou wast born thy navel was not cut, neither wast thou washed in water to supple thee; thou wast not salted at all, nor swaddled at all. 4 καὶ ἡ γένεσίς σου ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐτέχθης οὐκ ἔδησαν τοὺς μαστούς σου καὶ ἐν ὕδατι οὐκ ἐλούσθης οὐδὲ ἁλὶ ἡλίσθης καὶ σπαργάνοις οὐκ ἐσπαργανώθης 5 None eye pitied thee, to do any of these unto thee, to have compassion upon thee; but thou wast cast out in the open field, to the lothing of thy person, in the day that thou wast born. 5 οὐδὲ ἐφείσατο ὁ ὀφθαλμός μου ἐπὶ σοὶ τοῦ ποιῆσαί σοι ἓν ἐκ πάντων τούτων τοῦ παθεῗν τι ἐπὶ σοί καὶ ἀπερρίφης ἐπὶ πρόσωπον τοῦ πεδίου τῇ σκολιότητι τῆς ψυχῆς σου ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐτέχθης 6 ¶ And when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live; yea, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live. 6 καὶ διῆλθον ἐπὶ σὲ καὶ εἶδόν σε πεφυρμένην ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου καὶ εἶπά σοι ἐκ τοῦ αἵματός σου ζωή 7 I have caused thee to multiply as the bud of the field, and thou hast increased and waxen great, and thou art come to excellent ornaments: thybreasts are fashioned, and thine hair is grown, whereas thou wastnaked and bare. 7 πληθύνου καθὼς ἡ ἀνατολὴ τοῦ ἀγροῦ δέδωκά σε καὶ ἐπληθύνθης καὶ ἐμεγαλύνθης καὶ εἰσῆλθες εἰς πόλεις πόλεων οἱ μαστοί σου ἀνωρθώθησαν καὶ ἡ θρίξ σου ἀνέτειλεν σὺ δὲ ἦσθα γυμνὴ καὶ ἀσχημονοῦσα 8 ¶ Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine.

No covenant, no marriage.

 

[The Revolting Man]

1 ¶ Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 1 καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρός με λέγων 2 Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, 2 υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου διαμάρτυραι τῇ Ιερουσαλημ τὰς ἀνομίας αὐτῆς 3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite. 3 καὶ ἐρεῗς τάδε λέγει κύριος τῇ Ιερουσαλημ ἡ ῥίζα σου καὶ ἡ γένεσίς σου ἐκ γῆς Χανααν ὁ πατήρ σου Αμορραῗος καὶ ἡ μήτηρ σου Χετταία 4 And as for thy nativity, in the day thou wast born thy navel was not cut, neither wast thou washed in water to supple thee; thou wast not salted at all, nor swaddled at all. 4 καὶ ἡ γένεσίς σου ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐτέχθης οὐκ ἔδησαν τοὺς μαστούς σου καὶ ἐν ὕδατι οὐκ ἐλούσθης οὐδὲ ἁλὶ ἡλίσθης καὶ σπαργάνοις οὐκ ἐσπαργανώθης 5 None eye pitied thee, to do any of these unto thee, to have compassion upon thee; but thou wast cast out in the open field, to the lothing of thy person, in the day that thou wast born. 5 οὐδὲ ἐφείσατο ὁ ὀφθαλμός μου ἐπὶ σοὶ τοῦ ποιῆσαί σοι ἓν ἐκ πάντων τούτων τοῦ παθεῗν τι ἐπὶ σοί καὶ ἀπερρίφης ἐπὶ πρόσωπον τοῦ πεδίου τῇ σκολιότητι τῆς ψυχῆς σου ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐτέχθης 6 ¶ And when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live; yea, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live. 6 καὶ διῆλθον ἐπὶ σὲ καὶ εἶδόν σε πεφυρμένην ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου καὶ εἶπά σοι ἐκ τοῦ αἵματός σου ζωή 7 I have caused thee to multiply as the bud of the field, and thou hast increased and waxen great, and thou art come to excellent ornaments: thybreasts are fashioned, and thine hair is grown, whereas thou wastnaked and bare. 7 πληθύνου καθὼς ἡ ἀνατολὴ τοῦ ἀγροῦ δέδωκά σε καὶ ἐπληθύνθης καὶ ἐμεγαλύνθης καὶ εἰσῆλθες εἰς πόλεις πόλεων οἱ μαστοί σου ἀνωρθώθησαν καὶ ἡ θρίξ σου ἀνέτειλεν σὺ δὲ ἦσθα γυμνὴ καὶ ἀσχημονοῦσα 8 ¶ Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine.

No covenant, no marriage.

Nice passage, we have a whole long debate about it somewhere back in the depths of the forum.

I don’t want to derail this thread about what to call the man/woman relationship but I do have to ask, based on the order of events in that last verse are you accusing God of the sin of sex before marriage? That’s a bold move Cotton.

 

[FollowingHim]

"Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine."

I don't think this is saying that one thing happened and then the other. I think the "yea" is connecting the two statements in a poetic parallelism (very common in scripture) where two statements are made that mean the same thing but say it in different ways to give a more well-rounded picture. The structure is like "I ate eggs on toast this morning: yea, I had an excellent breakfast".

This does support @NickF's suggestion - that the physical act itself constitutes a covenant, the two are not separate but simultaneous and interlinked.

In other words, by having sex - by becoming one flesh - the couple are necessarily committing to be together for life, because to abandon each other after that act would be sinful. If both people know this to be true, then the act of sex has much more meaning than a simple physical act. It is the point at which there is no turning back. It is a promise, it confirms that the relationship will be permanent, and that is part of the joy of it. So simultaneously the couple is both becoming one flesh, and making a not-verbalised but completely understood covenant with each other.

 

[NickF]

Nice passage, we have a whole long debate about it somewhere back in the depths of the forum.

I don’t want to derail this thread about what to call the man/woman relationship but I do have to ask, based on the order of events in that last verse are you accusing God of the sin of sex before marriage? That’s a bold move Cotton.

I said nothing of the sort, nor have I ever. I’ve said if a person has sex without a covenant, they are required to obtain permission to covenant with the woman. Ownership must be transferred. That’s what scripture shows. If a man and a virgin woman sleep with each other, he is required to go to her father and pay the bride price and obtain permission to take her to be his wife.

Don’t put blasphemy into my mouth. Now that IS a bold move.

 

[NickF]

This does support @NickF's suggestion - that the physical act itself constitutes a covenant, the two are not separate but simultaneous and interlinked.

My position is the physical act itself does not seem to constitute a covenental relationship. It could, but I’m unconvinced. IF it is, the father of the once maiden has the authority to revoke the covenant bond in the day he hears of it. Which would explain why the father can utterly refuse him.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I said nothing of the sort, nor have I ever. I’ve said if a person has sex without a covenant, they are required to obtain permission to covenant with the woman. Ownership must be transferred. That’s what scripture shows. If a man and a virgin woman sleep with each other, he is required to go to her father and pay the bride price and obtain permission to take her to be his wife.

Don’t put blasphemy into my mouth. Now that IS a bold move.

You’re the one claiming God had sex with Israel without a covenant.

 

[The Revolting Man]

My position is the physical act itself does not seem to constitute a covenental relationship.

But what your position needs is a reason why a covenantal relationship is needed.

 

[NickF]

You’re the one claiming God had sex with Israel without a covenant.

Are we reading something different? It literally says he entered into a covenant. I don’t get the disconnect here..

 

[NickF]

But what your position needs is a reason why a covenantal relationship is needed.

I’ve explained it a few times already. But since it’s not getting communicated well or understood, it’s gonna have to wait until I can write everything out thoroughly. These little snippets are insufficient it seems.

 

[DustinM]

Very good writeup, glad you're back... I'm interested to see where this thread goes.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Are we reading something different? It literally says he entered into a covenant. I don’t get the disconnect here..

He covered her nakedness before there was a covenant. It’s right there in the last verse. If the covenant is the “marriage” in that passage then God slept with Israel before he “married” her.

 

[NickF]

He covered her nakedness before there was a covenant. It’s right there in the last verse. If the covenant is the “marriage” in that passage then God slept with Israel before he “married” her.

You say it was before. Does the text explicitly say that or are you assuming? It seems to me that according to the text, it’s not only possible but plausible that what was described was all done at the same time.

 

[Bass Reeves]

@The Revolting Man I have personally opted to call it Covenant, and the "wife" Covenant Isha to avoid any legalities. I also believe there are different statuses that can exist within a family where what has been traditionally understood as "married" or "marriage" doesn't exactly fit so various terms to differentiate these connections are needed.

 

[NickF]

It does not say “afterward, or then”.

8 ¶ Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee,

The time of love “and” spreading his skirt were concurrent.

and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee,

These are also written as a concurrent action.

saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine.

After all of these things listed she became His. If you’re correct then “and thou becamest mine” should be immediately after the spreading of his skirt.

So please don’t be pedantic about the first this then that. Especially when doing so would similarly destroy your own argument.

The simple fact that we have a whole list of actions given to us by the one we should be emulating, and the final result of this whole process is that she became His woman should be the slam dunk you were looking for. Who else should you be looking to for a bullet point list of “how to get married” than our God?

God set the standard. Showed us how to do it. Nuffin but net.

 

[MemeFan]

I said nothing of the sort, nor have I ever. I’ve said if a person has sex without a covenant, they are required to obtain permission to covenant with the woman. Ownership must be transferred. That’s what scripture shows. If a man and a virgin woman sleep with each other, he is required to go to her father and pay the bride price and obtain permission to take her to be his wife.

Don’t put blasphemy into my mouth. Now that IS a bold move.

Does transfer of property title over woman happen with sex or bride price?

If transfer happens with sex then sex = marriage. If transfer happens with bride price then price bride = marriage.

Can man get married in any form without paying bride price? It is also possible that bride price and sex must happen in same transaction.

 

[MemeFan]

My position is the physical act itself does not seem to constitute a covenental relationship. It could, but I’m unconvinced. IF it is, the father of the once maiden has the authority to revoke the covenant bond in the day he hears of it. Which would explain why the father can utterly refuse him.

How does this stops prostitution?

Girl sleeps with guy, guy leaves gift and father refuses marriage as part of deal. Repeat with next guy. So here we have father pimping his daughter.

I don't believe Lord would leave such legal prostitution loophole in His law. So final solution for our dilemma here must not enable prostitution loopholes.

I have read somewhere that Islam has similar loophole, just without father. Get married officially, leave gift and divorce tomorrow. All righteous as per their law.

 

[The Revolting Man]

You say it was before. Does the text explicitly say that or are you assuming? It seems to me that according to the text, it’s not only possible but plausible that what was described was all done at the same time.

I don’t say it, read the verse:

8 ¶ Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine.

It lays out a sequential list of things in the order that they happened; He walks by, He sees her, notices that she’s nubile, then He uses two different euphemisms for sex and THEN there’s some swearing and a covenant.

If you’re right and the “marriage” happens at the covenant then this is a very concerning verse.

 

[FollowingHim]

I have already explained with reference to the language and how Hebrew poetry works why those things were not sequential. My above post has apparently been ignored.

 

[NickF]

Zec, with all due respect. You are doing exactly what the ATF and anti-2A crowd does. You're trying to reduce what a complex thing is, down to a single part. This is nonsensical. A gun is not a piece of copper jacketed lead. A gun is the functional and complete construction of all the necessary components to make the thing what it is. You don't have a gun when you have a trigger assembly. You don't have a gun when you have a lower receiver. A gun is the complete assembly.

You're trying to make the "gun" just the bullet. Scripture does not do this, you're trying to force an interpretation that is not supported by scripture. I don't think you're willing or possibly even incapable of seeing this differently. That's fine, I'm not mad about it, and It honestly doesn't make much difference to my life what you believe about how marriage is made or what it is.

I've got fence to build, a video course to launch, trees to ship, books to write, and a family to take care of. This whole debate is vanity and dumb. Have fun with it! And may you all come to some good conclusion!