Posted on 03/16/2012 11:30:32 AM PDT by Monorprise
All other things being equal where would religious marriage would begin: 1: First Sexual encounter (between parties).
2: First conception of a child (between parent parties).
3: First child birth (between parents parties).
4: Religious ceremony at the Church.
5: State Government Sanction.
6: Mutual personal commitment between the parties?
-------------------------------------------------
I realize Marriage involves all of theses things. But supposing that they could happen out of order which one would start the marriage in the eyes of God, science, and most of all your personal opinion?
God: "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female. And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?"
God created heterosexuality. Reprobate man changed the truth of God into a lie. Because of this God gave them over to vile affections...without understanding, convenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful; who knowing the judgment of God, that they which practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:18ff,32)
Praeger is wrong and miopic. The ancient world was originally hetero, but sinful man corrupted God's design. The filthy Romans, Greeks, Jews, etc. all fell into these vile sins. God's law sheds the light of truth on this abominable behavior. Men know it. Even the most reprobate will not brook criticism of their filthy conduct. They use the law to not only force it upon us, but require us to enshrine it, giving it a place of honor. Alcoholics behave this way, looking for affirmation. Never.
“I’ve heard the idea that originally God meant “marriage” to being the act of intercourse.
I just wonder where that leaves the young girl who might have been raped. Is she bound to her rapist (husband) in the Lord’s eyes?
I say maybe back in the biblical days but doesn’t God deal with us differently now wherein he looks at the heart of the matter as opposed to focusing on law and ritual”
There is in fact a consent issue hence the reason for annulment. Which is to find that the marriage never legitimate took place. I would say in the case of rape it would perhaps indisputably fall in that category of not having consent.
Historically and currently there is still an age of consent issue, and historically there is additionally a fathers consent issue. A few of the posters here have explored that general area rather well.
An unfortunate reflection of the decay of our church & state. I do agree with one man who said it is important to announce the marriage publicly as a voves & otherwise practical living issue.
You’ve ‘heard’ the idea?
I don't recall Jesus taking any polling data before he issued His commands. The position of the Church is not to conform to the popular and fashionable, but to the truth.
"So a woman or man who was cheated upon or beat up can never marry again or find love in your mind?"
The bottom line is that the institution of marriage, and with it our country and culture, has already been severely damaged by the secular culture. As a culture we enter into marriage far too casually and often for the wrong reasons. Everyone has an obligation to themselves and their future children to thoroughly check out their future spouse to see if they have a proper values; if they have a history of cheating and abuse; or any addictions or personality issues.
Do you want to know the number of couples I know who are having problems with a marriage to someone who had previous marriages? Who met their spouse in a bar or a club? Who started dating when the other person was still married? Who cohabitated before marriage? Who had no problem helping their spouse to cheat on a previous spouse but then acts completely surprised when that same person cheats on them? who knows about previous children but has an absolute fit if the child support cuts into their life style? How many people do you know that make the suitability of parenting skills and commitment to potential children a major component of acceptability of their future spouse?
Do you want to hear the number of times I have heard the reason for a spouse wanting a divorce is because "I'm just not happy" and puts their own undefined search for happiness over that of their spouse and children? How many divorced couples do everything in their power to belittle and undermine their ex to the children is some kind of tug-o-war? Do you want to hear the number of times I have heard divorced and those contemplating divorce rationalize that kids don’t need both a mother and a father or have fallen for the false secular idea of sainthood as being a struggling single mom? How many people do you see that effectively believe that they can divorce their children too? That believe that their current family takes precedent and priority over their obligations to children from previous marriages?
Yes, too many families have been broken and too many children damaged and shaped by divorce and remarriage.
Excellent point!
—The woman at the well had had five husbands, but the one she was living with now was not her husband. I’m certain Jesus was not saying that because they weren’t sleeping together!
That is why sex does not equal marriage. Sex without marriage is called fornication.
In most cases, it’s best to interpret Scripture with Scripture—as you did. Sometimes churches have traditions that are simply not based on actual Scripture or a false interpretation of it.
I agree, wholeheartedly!
In a nutshell:
SIN COMPLICATES THINGS!
God does not give us instruction to be mean, cruel, and controlling—
He is trying to protect us!
“Fair questions:
I mention the Catholicism reference only because of the commonly-held cultural belief that consummation is required to ‘complete’ a marriage. Roman Catholics are also the only mainstream faith (I think that’s true) that permits the annulment of an un-consummated marriage. [I’m not sure of the Anglican/Episcopalian church... particularly since it was formed from a disagreement between Rome and the King of England over this point... and I’ll ignore the historical details on that story!].”
Hold on here Is consummation first child or sexual intercourse?
Catholicism: oaths and consummation (Marriage is also elevated as one of their 7 sacraments)
Protestants: oaths alone (Protestants believe there are only 2 sacraments: baptism and holy communion (the eucharist))”
Now that is fairly strait forward Catholic are #1 or #3 depending upon your answer to the first question.
Your branch of Protestants are #4.
Absolutely! Marriage is a gift from God. It is both a Sacrament and a Vocation (from the Latin Vocare - to call). It is a holy union that we are called to. It is diminished if it is entered into impulsively, tentatively or out of lust or expedience. It is not to be taken lightly.
In Genesis, when Satan temped Eve, the scripture says, "She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate." Gen 3:6. Gen 3:20 refers to Eve as Adam's wife, These references predate their first child, and any reference to having sex.
Good point!!
For the record I remember reading about civilizations where that was in fact the case. Indeed i’m pretty sure it was the case in our own civilization just 150 years ago.
Although to be fair it was more along the lines that they would not recognize the divorce period, and therefore cannot recognize any subsequent “marriages” and related actions as legitimate.
However instead of condemning the separation they simply recognize that separation and refuses to recognize the abusive spouses marital rights. Hence they are still married they are just not married in the practical sense due to abusive behavioral by one or both parties.
I find myself most moved by your points. If marriage is to mean anything from a rational point of view it must be centered upon children, and thus also from a practical point of view be as indivisible as it originality claims to be.
This is what I would call the “scientific/logical reasoning” point of view.
That still leaves the religious point of view.
Wow. that’s a keeper.....
“”I think science/logic should resolve that marriage begins with the birth of your first child.”
In Genesis, when Satan temped Eve, the scripture says, “She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.” Gen 3:6. Gen 3:20 refers to Eve as Adam’s wife, These references predate their first child, and any reference to having sex.”
Here we are distinguished between the logical roll of marriage and the religious meaning & duties of marriage.
Logically we need marriage to keep parents together for the sake of their children and stability. Therefore logically marriage is most important at birth.
The religious question is a slightly different matter, that obviously differs not only with faith but denominations of faiths and in many cases individual interpersonal of faiths.
I asked for all of theses interpretation so that I might really examine the true meaning and propose of marriage.
The propose of this examination is a resolution of “the essence of marriage” and thus the most logical policy in going about entering & upholding a marriage.
For your help in this regard I am thankful.
“I asked for all of theses interpretation so that I might really examine the true meaning and purpose of marriage.”
Ahh, if that’s what you wanted to know then let me propose this: An earthly picture of Christ’s relationship to the Church (all believers—not a specific denomination)—a picture of salvation. The moment one says, “I do,” he is married. The wedding ring symbolizes your marriage of your unending bond, and the consummation symbolizes becoming “one flesh.”
Marriage is the example used over and over again in the Bible regarding Christ and His bride. That’s why Satan wants to destroy the institution of marriage, and it’s true meaning—it messes up God’s picture to the world of His love, and the relationship He wants to have with all men.
Study scripture and it becomes rather clear. Whether in a church or anywhere else when the couple make their commitment to each other in the presence of witnesses it becomes a marriage. Look that the Old Testament Jewish wedding ceremony. The couple was betrothed until the father told the son to go get his bride. After the public commitment the couple spent seven days secluded after which the celebration began.
Consumation.
“The first act of what we consider fornication (premarital nookie) would be a wedding.”
Exodus 22:16-17
16 “If a man ENTICES a virgin who is NOT BETROTHED (engaged), and lies with her, he shall surely PAY the bride-price for her to be his wife.
17 If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall PAY MONEY according to the bride-price of virgins.
So, under the Old Covenant, it kind of did work like that. They weren’t married automatically, but they were pretty much betrothed automatically unless the woman’s father refused. Also, later verses say that the man would be forbidden to divorce her all of his days, so he would be well stuck with her.
“And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, EXCEPT FOR SEXUAL IMMORALITY, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Matthew 19:9
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.