Originally posted by ZahlanziThis is so ignorant that a response could only make it more ignorant.
So sayeth the bible:
marriage is between man and woman: bride who cannot prove her virginity is stoned to death. generally arranged, with the bride having no say over the matter.
marriage is between widow and her brother in law: Gen 38: 6-10
marriage is between rapist and victim: the victim must marry her rapist and be raped again and again. (well it ...[text shortened]... es that marriage is between man and woman, remind them what is also in the bible about marriage.
So I'll refrain.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by vivifyMarriage in the bible, has also been between a man and 1,000 other women (Solomon).
Marriage in the bible, has also been between a man and 1,000 other women (Solomon).
Marriage was also between a man and his sister (Abraham & Sarah)
Marriage was also between a man and his cousin (Jacob & Rebecca)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people recognize that there is a difference between what the Bible teaches and what the Bible records as having happened.
Solomon's 600 wives and 300 concubines is not set up as a teaching - " Now you go and do likewise." It is a record of something a Israelite king did.
Marriage was also between a man and his sister (Abraham & Sarah)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd have to look more deeply into this one. But for sure the way the story is told is that Abraham kind of munipulated the truth to make it appear that he married his sister.
IE.
"And Abimelech said to Abraham, What did you see that you have done this thing?
And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely there is no fear of God in this place, and they will slay me because of my wife.
But she is also truly my sister, the daughter from my father's house, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife.
And when God caused me to wander from my father's house, I said to her, This is the kindness which you must do to me: At every place wherever we go, say of me, He is my brother." (Gen. 20:10-13)
Marriage was also between a man and his cousin (Jacob & Rebecca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see any offense in this marriage to a cousin.
In fact the symbolism of Rebecca being in the same family as Isaac is spiritually significant. It speaks of Christ being God incarnate to "marry" the church which is composed of human beings as Christ was incarnated.
From Life Study of Genesis by Witness Lee, Msg. #61, Living Stream Ministry
http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?n
b) A Type of Christ Marrying the Church
In Genesis 24 we see a marriage which is a type of Christ marrying the church. In the New Testament we cannot find a verse which says that this marriage is a type of Christ marrying the church. However, the New Testament clearly reveals that Isaac, the son of Abraham, was a type of Christ being Abraham's unique seed (Gal. 3:16). Based upon the fact that Isaac was a type of Christ, we may infer that Isaac's marriage was a type of the marriage of Christ.
...
In Genesis 24 we have four main persons: the father, the son, the servant, and the bride. This is very meaningful. As we come to the New Testament, we see that the Triune God is working together to obtain a bride for the Son. What is the subject of the New Testament? If you say that the subject of the New Testament is just Jesus as our Savior, I would say that this is good, but that it is not all-inclusive. The subject of the New Testament is the Triune God, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, working together to obtain the bride for the Son. The Father made the plan, the Spirit carries out the Father's plan, and the Son enjoys what the Father has planned and what the Spirit carries out. Who is the bride? The bride is a part of the human race which will marry the Son and become His counterpart. Matthew 28:19 speaks of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. In the Acts and Epistles we see how the Spirit works according to the Father's plan to obtain the bride for the Son. At the end of the New Testament, in the book of Revelation, we see the bride. Revelation 19:7 says, "The marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife has made herself ready." Ultimately, the whole New Jerusalem, a city-lady, will be the bride (Rev. 21:2, 9-10). Although such a term as city-lady may sound strange, there is nothing wrong with using it, because the New Jerusalem will be a female, the wife of the Lamb, the counterpart of the Son of God. The entire New Testament is simply a record of the Triune God working together to gain a part of the human race to be the bride, the counterpart, of the Son.
...
As we have seen, God the Father planned to take a bride for His Son out of the human race. Abraham, a type of the Father, charged his servant, a type of the Holy Spirit, not to take a wife for his son from the daughters of the Canaanites but from Abraham's kindred (24:4, 7). In typology, this indicates that the counterpart of Christ must come from Christ's race, not from the angels nor from any other creatures. Since Christ was incarnated as a man, humanity has become His race. Do not always think of humanity as being so poor. Humanity is not poor. Because humanity is the race of Christ, it is dear and precious to God. Only out of humanity can God obtain the counterpart for His Son. Therefore, we all must be proud of being a part of humanity and must say, "Praise the Lord that I am a man! Thank Him that I was not created as a part of the angelic race but as part of the human race."
My bolding.
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonshipSarah could also be what we call his half-sister today.
[b] Marriage in the bible, has also been between a man and 1,000 other women (Solomon).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people recognize that there is a difference between what the Bible teaches and what the Bible records as having happened.
Solomon's 600 wives and 300 concubines is not ...[text shortened]... eated as a part of the angelic race but as part of the human race." [/b] [/quote]
My bolding.[/b]
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziLet me apologize for detracting from your thread. You brought up some really good points about the bible's actual view on marriage, rather than the more romantic view that Christians today tend to claim or believe came from the bible. Now, everyone's focusing on my post.
So sayeth the bible:
marriage is between man and woman: bride who cannot prove her virginity is stoned to death. generally arranged, with the bride having no say over the matter.
marriage is between widow and her brother in law: Gen 38: 6-10
marriage is between rapist and victim: the victim must marry her rapist and be raped again and again. (well it ...[text shortened]... es that marriage is between man and woman, remind them what is also in the bible about marriage.
Sorry.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Deut 22.13-19: 13 If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," 15 then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. 16 The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, `I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
In this passage, the reputation of the women, and the lifelong provision for her needs are focused on. God architects this situation to protect the woman against capricious men.
Compare to a similar case in the Laws of Lipit-Istar (ca. 1930bc), 33, anyone can accuse a woman of promiscuity, and the penalty for slander is only TEN shekels.
The Recovery Version in verse 20 reads -
But if the claim is true - the girl was not found to be a virgin.
All I see is the for stoning the claim had to be true. The assumption I make is that another means, any means proving the claim was not true would disallow a false rumor causing her reputation to be lost and an execution to result.
The critic assumes that a husband tired of his wife would of course wish her to be put to death.
Why not assume men like Joseph existed who when finding Mary with child chose to put her away quietly.
And Joseph her husband, being righteous and not willing to disgrace her openly, intended to send her away secretly. (Matt. 1:19)
The OT indicates that Moses recognized very difficult cases would arise. And judges were appointed to handle difficult cases on successively higher levels.
We should not assume God was not among the people to sovereignly guide godly priests and judges on less than cut and dry cases where a scoundrel husband might conceivably falsely accuse his wife.
Jethro the priest of Midian advized Moses to create levels of judges which might act even as appellant courts:
"You also should look for able men among all the people who fear God, men of truth, who hate unjust gain; and place them over them, as leaders of thousands, leaders of hundreds, leaders of fifties, and leaders of tens.
And let them judge the people at all times, and let them bring every great matter to you, but every small matter let them judge themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you." (Exodus 18:21)
1.) I don't assume every husband wanting to get rid of his wife wanted to have her stoned to death.
2.) I don't assume that difficult cases were never pushed upwards to some higher level of detective work and examination.
3.) Since Moses as the law giver heeded the counsel of Jerthro he must have realized that there were levels of difficulty to cases with marriage as with other cases.
4.) In the immediate following case with two consenting adults in an adulterous affair, both are executed. That it is not just the woman executed indicates that there was an equality of responsibility there.
The man was not LESS punished just because he was a man (v. 22)
Plus the fact that other atoning offerings like the sin offering, the trespass offering, the peace offering, indicate that propitiatory procedures circumvented the most severe punishments from always being the result of a sin.
23 Jun 15
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipHere's the problem: not all women bleed the first time they have sex. Look it up.
In this passage, the reputation of the women, and the lifelong provision for her needs are focused on. God architects this situation to protect the woman against capricious men.
And since the only acceptable 'proof'' of virginity is the 'cloth' (used to clean up the blood) any virgin who doesn't bleed during penetration is in danger (or doomed) to getting stoned.
" I don't assume every husband wanting to get rid of his wife wanted to have her stoned to death."
There shouldn't be a law where the life of a virgin who fails to bleed during sex is at the mercy of her husband.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
23 Jun 15
1 edit
Originally posted by vivifyGod created the woman and the reproductive organs and their functions. He didn't come first to you and I for help to figure out how to do it.
Here's the problem: not all women bleed the first time they have sex. Look it up.
And since the only acceptable 'proof'' of virginity is the 'cloth' (used to clean up the blood) any virgin who doesn't bleed during penetration is in danger (or doomed) to getting stoned.
" I don't assume every husband wanting to get rid of his wife wanted to have her s ...[text shortened]... e a law where the life of a virgin who fails to bleed during sex is at the mercy of her husband.
And the version I quoted said that the accusation had to be true. I include God in the discernment work. I include God in the detection work.
I simply don't reason the matter subtracting God's involvement completely out and just think of a computer like flow chart.
Originally posted by vivifyYou were evidently unaware of the differences between a concubine and a wife? Or that Sarah was actually Abrahams half sister? Your statement was inaccurate, you have learned something, you should be happy.
700 plus 300 equals.....what? I know you're a creationist, but give it a try.
"Sarah was actually Abraham's half sister, we must assume that you simply made it up that he was his sister or failed somehow to report the matter accurately."
Does that make it better?
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by vivifyNo you are being unreasonable, the verse is hardly pivotal to jaywills faith as a Christian and its unreasonable to expect him to know and remember every single verse.
That's a very important verse in the Bible. It's not just some esoteric scripture very that only scholars know about. A Christian who spends as much time as Sonship being a biblical apologist should've known about such an oft quoted verse.
Oh dear it seems that the anti biblical rascals have attempted to take a verse out of context and have failed once again to discern the real intent of the verse for it becomes rather self evident upon inspection that when viewed in context the entire process was one to protect a women from a husband who sought to defame her and divorce her on purely fabricated grounds.
If a man takes a wife and has relations with her but then comes to hate her and he accuses her of misconduct and gives her a bad name by saying: ‘I have taken this woman, but when I had relations with her, I did not find evidence that she was a virgin,’ the father and mother of the girl should produce the evidence of the girl’s virginity for the elders at the gate of the city. The girl’s father must say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he hates her and is accusing her of misconduct by saying: “I have found out that your daughter does not have evidence of virginity.” Now this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ They will then spread out the cloth before the elders of the city. The city elders will take the man and discipline him. They will fine him 100 silver shekels and give them to the girl’s father, because the man defamed a virgin of Israel, and she will continue to be his wife. He will not be allowed to divorce her as long as he lives. - New world translation of the Holy Scriptures
Now one must wonder why these detractors have underhandedly taken a verse out of context with the sole intent to once again launch their cyber rockets against the revealed word of God. Are they unaware of how important lineage was to the Israelites and why? Have they taken no steps to attempt to understand just why the law was so strict on sexual immorality? or will they simply continue to view the text through the distorted lens of modern secularism because it suits the purpose of their anti religious bias? Who can say?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSonship has been involved in several discussions involving Deuteronomy 22:20-21 over recent years. I reckon it would be unreasonable to expect him to have forgotten it, especially in view of its nature.
No you are being unreasonable, the verse is hardly pivotal to jaywills faith as a Christian and its unreasonable to expect him to know and remember every single verse.
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by RJHindsi knew we would spend a page of posts if i didn't put bible verses next to each of the statements just because you couldn't click the damn link where it says next to each and every statement where in the bible it is endorsed.
Where in the Bible does it say a bride who can not prove her virginity is stoned to death? I believe you are confusing the Quran and islamic practice with the Holy Bible.
A widow woman can get married according to your own reference from the Holy Bible, which prove your first assertion incorrect.
I did not check your source because I can tell it is not from the Holy Bible, but from some one with propaganda to support an evil agenda.
and to make it clear just how much of a goldfish memory you have, the wife being stoned to death has been discussed. in a thread made by me. where you defended the right of the israelites to stone the little harlot.
if a bride is accused on her wedding night by her husband to not be a virgin, the burden of proof that she is stands on the accused (her parents). if they cannot provide proof, she is stoned to death (considering what the age of marriage was, it would mean stoning a little girl). if she does provide proof and her husband turns out to be a liar, he will pay a fine. and never divorce her. meaning a girl must spend her life with the man who wanted her dead.
DEUT 22:13
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by vivifyit's ok. if it wasn't your post it would have been something else. or i would have been ignored entirely.
Let me apologize for detracting from your thread. You brought up some really good points about the bible's actual view on marriage, rather than the more romantic view that Christians today tend to claim or believe came from the bible. Now, everyone's focusing on my post.
Sorry.
it is much easier to focus on "marriage between cousins is not that bad, arkansas people do it all the time" rather than "stone a little girl to death if she cannot prove she is a virgin" or "go to war, kill the male relatives of a woman (maybe even her children), take her back home and force her to marry you"
23 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonship" The critic assumes that a husband tired of his wife would of course wish her to be put to death.
[quote] Deut 22.13-19: 13 If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," 15 then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. 16 The girl's fathe ...[text shortened]... atory procedures circumvented the most severe punishments from always being the result of a sin.
Why not assume men like Joseph existed who when finding Mary with child chose to put her away quietly. "
i very much assume that there would be decent people who would not accuse their wives of such. the problem is that it is an evil law, given by god. First of all, you don't make laws and hope people will not obey them and secondly we know full well how incredibly exaggerated the punishments were for those that disobeyed god's laws