I must disagree with your principle that "When two people have sex, they become one flesh. It creates a soul tie to the other person."
Taken strictly, this leads to the rule that a rapist is required to marry his victim. Earlier this year I read about a 16-year-old girl in Morocco who committed suicide because of the decree under Sharia that she marry her assailant. The same is true in Deuteronomy.
A little reflection reveals that this one-intercourse=one-flesh view, paradoxically, would require most Christian spouses to annul their present marriages, since surveys show that the majority of Christians do not marry the first person they had intercourse with. In other words, even in the Christin world, most marriages are not marriages of two virgins.
There cannot be a covenant without an agreement to the terms of the covenant, and in the case of Christian marriage, there cannot be a Sacrament if the vows of one or the other wee fraudulent or intentionally deceptive from the git-go.
For a Christian marriage, the spouses must be eligible to marry, and choosing freely. They must intend a union which is permanent until death, exclusively faithful, open to the transmission of life; and the spouses must physically engage in marital intercourse, which consummates their union.<> Without these spiritual dispositions, there is no sacrament.
Unless you think that mere ritual words and physical actions convey the grace of the sacrament, regardless of the spiritual reality.
???
IN which case, I would be very much surprised!
Which IMO, could be the very reason for the death penalty for rape. God never tells us the reason for the consequences for breaking His law. He just tells us what they are.
But in the NT, Paul explains that in a marriage, a woman is freed from the marriage and not an adulterer on the death of her husband.
Not that I am saying that the rapist is a husband (sadly I've had enough experience with stuff I've said being twisted that I feel I need to make that disclaimer).
And you are right. That is NOT a legitimate marriage. Whether that act creates a soul tie or not, I don't know.
A little reflection reveals that this one-intercourse=one-flesh view, paradoxically, would require most Christian spouses to annul their present marriages, since surveys show that the majority of Christians do not marry the first person they had intercourse with. In other words, even in the Christin world, most marriages are not marriages of two virgins.
That is true. It is a problem.
I heard a preacher once talk about premarital sex and on his teaching about the soul tie did bring that issue up. His advice was that the past is the past and cannot be undone and that no-one can expect a person to end their current marriage, as that would also be wrong. His advice was to repent of the previous sin and ask the Holy Spirit to break that soul tie that was created in those other encounters.
Unless you think that mere ritual words and physical actions convey the grace of the sacrament, regardless of the spiritual reality.
Marriages done by a justice of the peace are also marriages, legally binding. I recall that the Catholic church does not consider marriages done outside it as legitimate, but the problem with that is that there are marriages all around the world done by non-Catholics. Since they did not receive the sacrament of the Catholic church, are they not legitimate marriages?