> General Discussions

The Marriage Vow

<< < (8/22) > >>

lurquer:
Kat,

Per your last post to me, you seem to be hung up on the idea that sex=marriage because it means those who have fornicated with a harlot are married to them. And, also, by extension, that any male/female sexual relationship is therefore marriage in God's eyes.  This is a big pill to swallow, I know.  But, "marriage" is just a word.  Once properly defined, you stop worrying about it. (I did).  But then, it does tend to bring up other personal issues for some...Perhaps this is the stumbling stone, and the reason it appears so many here don't want to go there... I get that.

But let us go back to what Ocoberose initally posted:
“I think the thread  is something we should talk about.  Being a typical female myself,  love and marriage go together, however we know Jacob did not love Leah as he loved Rachel and never intended to marry her.  He was tricked into the marriage but still expected to hold up his end of the vow. And how does Genesis say Jacob and Rachel  married? "Jacob went into her" after Laban gave her to him.  However, when sex is impossible, are the couple still not married?”

These are important questions. They are the keys to this riddle.

Let’s just start with the obvious by reciting what actually is recorded:

The contract:

Gen29:18 And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.


Both parties agree:

19 And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me.

Contract fulfilled:

20 And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.
21 And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.
22 And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.


Here is where Ray would say the “vows” occurred.  I contend that the “vow” or oath, or contract or covenant occurred 7 years prior when Jacob “vowed” to wed Rachel…that was the espousal.  That was the PROMISE.  Not the THING.  Clearly, the marriage had not yet occurred. On that, we can all agree.  But what of the feast?  This was a traditional wedding feast, I am certain, but what it entailed, we cannot know.  But let us assume there was some re-statement of the vows, or perhaps, as Kat postulates, “When the couple exchanges wedding vows they are making a moral, legal and spiritual commitment to each other. It's a promise to be faithful, reassurance that they will stick it out no matter what, "for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health." 
And again: “The ceremony and the vows is what God instituted to come first, it is a commitment to each other before God and brings a blessing from God, then the marriage begins, sex included.”

And lets not forget what Dennis posits:

“You can be legally married and never have sex. Sex does not make a marriage legal. The vow to God makes it legal to have sex. It's a contract.”

Well, here we have an insurmountable problem with this theory:



23 And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
24 And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for an handmaid.
25 And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me?


If the feast/ceremony/vows/oaths had already occurred with Rachel the night before, then Jacob was already married to Rachel.  ALL OBLIGATIONS HAD BEEN MET.

How is it, then, that it turns out he had “legally married” Leah? (And he certainly did, as the text says Leah was his “wife”, during the next 7 years, for which he labored again to take his rightful wife, Rachel.)  Jacob had said no vows, and made no contracts with Leah. But one physical act, done ignorantly by him—he was deceived!—voided the agreement with Rachel, nullified the “marriage” and instead made Leah his wife.

There it is, right there in scripture.  Looks like Dennis is completely wrong, in that sex does make a marriage legal.  Because that unity, that bond is what a marriage is. 

We have a companion scripture immediately following these passages; in the next chapter we see that Rachel was barren, and she requests of Jacob to “go in unto her handmaid, and bare children”…

Gen 30:4 And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife: and Jacob went in unto her.

We see again the method in which Jacob is given, and takes a wife.  Here, no vows, no ceremony.  Just clear scripture on what occurs naturally (which was obvious to most all peoples throughout ancient times, needing no further explanation—until we get to our modern church/state society where confusion now abounds).

For this precedent was set well before with Jacob’s father, Isaac, when he took to wife, Rebekah.  It would behoove anyone reading, to go back now and re-familiarize yourself with this story in Genesis 24.

Long story short, Rebekah is sought out from another country by Abraham’s servant, she is “given” to him as a wife for Issac (which she explicitly agrees to), she then journeys  back with the servant; she arrives, dismounts the camel, beholds Isaac in a field,

“And the servant told Isaac all things that he had done. 67 And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife;..” (Gen 24:66,67)


Finally, Dennis said, “Some people cannot have sex for physical reasons but are legally married just the same.”

Octoberose asked the same question in her initial post: “However, when sex is impossible, are the couple still not married?”

To that, as is plainly shown above, if they had a sexual union, then they are already married (whether they ever do again or not).  If they never did, they were never married in the first place.  Later I’ll explain how obvious this is (and how important!).



--- Quote from: Dennis Vogel on February 13, 2015, 09:24:13 AM ---

--- Quote ---the vow was to consummate the marriage
--- End quote ---

Show me a verse that says this. Not conjecture, but a verse.

--- End quote ---


Well, Dennis, with all due respect, show me a verse that says it doesn't. 

Dennis Vogel:

--- Quote ---Quote
the vow was to consummate the marriage

Show me a verse that says this. Not conjecture, but a verse.


Well, Dennis, with all due respect, show me a verse that says it doesn't.
--- End quote ---

You cannot prove a negative: "appeals to ignorance ... sometimes used to shift the burden of proof"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

It's like saying "prove to me in the bible that little green men do not live on the moon." Nonsense.

If your position is true then there must be at least two verses saying sex consummated a marriage and made it legal and binding.

Kat:

--- Quote from: Neo on February 14, 2015, 10:10:47 AM ---Kat,
Per your last post to me, you seem to be hung up on the idea that sex=marriage because it means those who have fornicated with a harlot are married to them. And, also, by extension, that any male/female sexual relationship is therefore marriage in God's eyes.  This is a big pill to swallow, I know.  But, "marriage" is just a word.  Once properly defined, you stop worrying about it. (I did).  But then, it does tend to bring up other personal issues for some...Perhaps this is the stumbling stone, and the reason it appears so many here don't want to go there... I get that.
--- End quote ---

 "sex=marriage" What? I certainly did Not intend to imply that, but the opposite, first marriage then sex. Anyway this is complicated and I do know what else to say.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

Dave in Tenn:
I'm not married.  I have neither plans nor wish to get married.  So maybe I'm not one who needs to "know" anything.  But I am perplexed why this issue is so "important" and why young people need to understand it.  So...could you just cut to the chase already and say why you think it is?  Otherwise, it's just 'strife over words'. 

wat:
The problem with Jacob and Leah is that very few details are given. Octoberose says "And how does Genesis say Jacob and Rachel  married? "Jacob went into her" after Laban gave her to him." I don't think Genesis is saying that's how Jacob married her, that happens after Jacob marries her.

Gen 29:21 And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.

Jacob calls Rachel his wife before he has sex with her. Laban has to give her to Jacob, not unlike God giving Eve to Adam. Adam and Eve had a marriage ceremony, however small and "informal" it was. The sex happens after the marriage ceremony. Traditionally, couples have sex on their wedding night. This is after they're married, not to become married.

So Laban gathers all the men together and makes a feast. Presumably this is a wedding feast. No details are given here. Neo, you state


--- Quote from: Neo on February 14, 2015, 10:10:47 AM ---If the feast/ceremony/vows/oaths had already occurred with Rachel the night before, then Jacob was already married to Rachel.  ALL OBLIGATIONS HAD BEEN MET.
--- End quote ---

Nowhere does it say these things occurred with Rachel. We're given no details. Did Laban give a speech about how Jacob is marrying Rachel? Or was he being vague and only saying how Jacob was marrying his daughter? Maybe Jacob assumed he meant Rachel, since that was what they agreed, but everybody else assumed he meant Leah, since Laban says "It is not so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn." Either way it doesn't say.

Were Leah and Rachel present at the feast? We don't know. In the evening Laban brings Leah to Jacob. Jacob doesn't know it's Leah. Maybe she's covered, or it's dark, or both. Only in the morning does Jacob find out it's Leah. Laban tells Jacob to complete the week of Leah, and then he will give him Rachel. This would be a week of festivities, similar to Samson in Judges 14:12-17.

Gen 29:28  Jacob did so, and completed her week. Then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife.

Rachel is now his wife and then he has sex with her. Not to make her his wife, she's already his wife because Laban gave her to him.

You mention Bilhah the handmaid and say that no ceremony is mentioned. No ceremonies are mentioned because the focus of these passages is on making babies, the sons of Israel. You bolded the key words yourself.


--- Quote from: Neo on February 14, 2015, 10:10:47 AM ---Gen 30:4 And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife: and Jacob went in unto her.
--- End quote ---

Bilhah becomes his wife first, then Jacob has sex with her. A ceremony would be understood, since the word wife is mentioned.

Moving on from Jacob, let's go to the Law of Moses.

Exo 22:16  "If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride-price for her and make her his wife.
Exo 22:17  If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride-price for virgins.

Here we have a man who sleeps with a woman who isn't his wife and doesn't become his wife until he pays the bride-price for her and her father accepts. If her father doesn't give her to him, she's not his wife, even though they had sex. A similar passage occurs in Deuteronomy.

Deu 22:28  "If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found,
Deu 22:29  then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.

This bride-price is mentioned a few times in scripture. Boaz pays for Naomi's possessions and for Ruth.

Rth 4:9  Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, "You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon.
Rth 4:10  Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon, I have bought to be my wife, to perpetuate the name of the dead in his inheritance, that the name of the dead may not be cut off from among his brothers and from the gate of his native place. You are witnesses this day."
Rth 4:11  Then all the people who were at the gate and the elders said, "We are witnesses. May the LORD make the woman, who is coming into your house, like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you act worthily in Ephrathah and be renowned in Bethlehem,
Rth 4:12  and may your house be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah, because of the offspring that the LORD will give you by this young woman."
Rth 4:13  So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her, and the LORD gave her conception, and she bore a son.

Notice there are witnesses. And that only after Boaz takes Ruth to be his wife does he go in to her.

And the other bride-price mention I found is between Saul and David.

1Sa 18:25  Then Saul said, "Thus shall you say to David, 'The king desires no bride-price except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged of the king's enemies.'" Now Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.
1Sa 18:26  And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king's son-in-law. Before the time had expired,
1Sa 18:27  David arose and went, along with his men, and killed two hundred of the Philistines. And David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king's son-in-law. And Saul gave him his daughter Michal for a wife.

Earlier Neo, you stated


--- Quote from: Neo on February 12, 2015, 10:34:14 AM ---But I'm not talking about that either.  If I claim to be married (per Ray's understanding), I must produce evidence of a vow.
--- End quote ---

More broadly, you must produce evidence of a ceremony performed in front of witnesses. Nowadays this would be a marriage certificate. In Ray's study, he says "They have found actual marriage contracts, Jewish marriage contracts that go back to the 5th century B.C.  So this idea of, ‘well they didn’t have ceremonies.’ Yes they did. In fact Malachi was written about 500 B.C."

Ray doesn't give a source, but I did a quick google search and sure enough, there are references to ancient marriage contracts. I'm not sure if there's any place in scripture that mentions them, but I did find 3 places where certificates of divorce are mentioned.

Deu 24:1  "When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house,

Isa 50:1  Thus says the LORD: "Where is your mother's certificate of divorce, with which I sent her away? Or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities you were sold, and for your transgressions your mother was sent away.

Jer 3:8  She saw that for all the adulteries of that faithless one, Israel, I had sent her away with a decree of divorce. Yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear, but she too went and played the whore.

If they had certificates (other translations bill, writing, scroll) for divorce, I'm guessing they had them for marriage too.

My post is getting long, so I'll end here.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page