What is Biblical marriage?
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
They will consider them married if they request and fill out the forms for common law, but not if they don't. No one is going to automatically enter you into any state records as married unless you request it. That is why when you break up with a girl who you lived with for 7 years and she claims common law marriage and tries to claim alimony the lawyers won't take it because it does not work that way, and yet the myth is still alive even in the age of Google.
I see it as a marriage, which it is.
I'm sure that happened often but the concept of eloping is also something that would have happened.
Nope. Adam and Eve became one flesh and they were married. There was no discussion with others or paperwork or even a wedding. All those things are extras which are not required by God.
I'm sure that happened often but the concept of eloping is also something that would have happened.
Nope. Adam and Eve became one flesh and they were married. There was no discussion with others or paperwork or even a wedding. All those things are extras which are not required by God.
I suggest Matthew chapter 1 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 1&version=KJV the reason is that Joseph was going to put her away privately(verse 19) and then in verse 25(he had not yet known her)... So he(Joseph) considered himself married to Mary(he was going to put her away privly/letter of divorce) but had not yet known her(verse 25) and so the marriage was considered valid before he had known her. It was valid because Mary and Joseph agreed and because their fathers(or head of house) agreed on it(see other Scriptures,,,Abraham sending his servant to find Isaac an wife ect. and the agreements made by both fathers).
-
1
- Show all
No marriage means no divorce is needed. "putting her away" simply means to break up with her and cancel any possible marriage.
Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
espoused
G3423
μνηστεύω
mnēsteuō
mnace-tyoo'-o
From a derivative of G3415; to give a souvenir (engagement present), that is, betroth: - espouse.
Total KJV occurrences: 3
This would be what we call an engagement, ie: a fiance' not a wife.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Are we debating? If so then you must answer the question, Did you know that the rules of ending an engagement in 1st Century Jewish Culture required certain rules and included a writing similar to a writing of divorce?
If you did not know this then this is nothing to be ashamed of, we all had to read about it before we learned it. You can Google it if you have questions. Once you read about what Joseph would need to do to "put her away" and then if you were to then insist that Joseph did not need to do anything but break up and not go through with the wedding, then you would be being belligerent.
As in willfully rejecting facts about the 1st Century Jewish rules about breaking up an engagement and pretending that you have not just learned them and sticking to your own ideas that have been proven wrong. At which point the debate is over because you don't know how to abide by debate rules.
If you did not know this then this is nothing to be ashamed of, we all had to read about it before we learned it. You can Google it if you have questions. Once you read about what Joseph would need to do to "put her away" and then if you were to then insist that Joseph did not need to do anything but break up and not go through with the wedding, then you would be being belligerent.
As in willfully rejecting facts about the 1st Century Jewish rules about breaking up an engagement and pretending that you have not just learned them and sticking to your own ideas that have been proven wrong. At which point the debate is over because you don't know how to abide by debate rules.
This is just naive and foolish talk. The Bible says Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God (1 Cor 10:32)
A Christian would be giving offence to a lot of people by ignoring the customs and conditions required for a marriage to be recognized by both God and man.
A Christian would be giving offence to a lot of people by ignoring the customs and conditions required for a marriage to be recognized by both God and man.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Betrothal and the Wedding
Until late in the Middle Ages, marriage consisted of two ceremonies that were marked by celebrations at two separate times, with an interval between. First came the betrothal [erusin]; and later, the wedding [nissuin]. At the betrothal the woman was legally married, although she still remained in her father’s house. She could not belong to another man unless she was divorced from her betrothed. The wedding meant only that the betrothed woman, accompanied by a colorful procession, was brought from her father’s house to the house of her groom, and the legal tie with him was consummated.
This division of marriage into two separate events originated in very ancient times when marriage was a purchase, both in its outward form and in its inner meaning. Woman was not recognized as a person but was bought in marriage, like chattel.
Marriage, as with any type of purchase, consisted of two acts. First the price was paid and an agreement reached on the conditions of sale. Sometime later the purchaser took possession of the object. In marriage, the mohar was paid and a detailed agreement reached between the families of the bride and groom. This betrothal was followed by the wedding, when the bride was brought into the home of the groom, who took actual possession of her.
In those days the betrothal was the more important of these two events and maintained its importance as long as marriage was actually based upon a purchase. But as women assumed more importance as individuals, and marriage ceased to be a purchase, attaining moral significance, the actual wedding became more important than the betrothal.
Until late in the Middle Ages, marriage consisted of two ceremonies that were marked by celebrations at two separate times, with an interval between. First came the betrothal [erusin]; and later, the wedding [nissuin]. At the betrothal the woman was legally married, although she still remained in her father’s house. She could not belong to another man unless she was divorced from her betrothed. The wedding meant only that the betrothed woman, accompanied by a colorful procession, was brought from her father’s house to the house of her groom, and the legal tie with him was consummated.
This division of marriage into two separate events originated in very ancient times when marriage was a purchase, both in its outward form and in its inner meaning. Woman was not recognized as a person but was bought in marriage, like chattel.
Marriage, as with any type of purchase, consisted of two acts. First the price was paid and an agreement reached on the conditions of sale. Sometime later the purchaser took possession of the object. In marriage, the mohar was paid and a detailed agreement reached between the families of the bride and groom. This betrothal was followed by the wedding, when the bride was brought into the home of the groom, who took actual possession of her.
In those days the betrothal was the more important of these two events and maintained its importance as long as marriage was actually based upon a purchase. But as women assumed more importance as individuals, and marriage ceased to be a purchase, attaining moral significance, the actual wedding became more important than the betrothal.
-
1
-
1
- Show all