Fornication

[wmfinck]

She begged Neoptolemus that this dead child, who was hurled from the walls and breathed his last, the son of your Hector, be buried. She begged him also not to bring this bronze-backed shield, the Achaeans' terror, which this boy's father used to hold against his side, to the home of Peleus or to take it into the same chamber where she will become his bride [the mother of this dead boy, Andromache, so as to see grief], but to bury the boy in it instead of a cedar coffin and a stone tomb. She asked him to put it into your hands so that with funeral clothes and garlands you may deck out the corpse as well as you can in your present circumstances. For she is gone, and her master's haste has prevented her from burying the boy.

[MikeTheAdamite]

I guess that backs up the Jacob/Leah event!
But were not the Trojans pagan?(im not atall clued up on their history Bill!)

[Kentucky]

And what about these verses?

I was speaking from a purely moral point of view. I can isolate verses and they may sound like whatever idea I want to convey, but Scripture must always be taken as a whole and it cannot contradict itself. If you think sex is marriage, then you're opening a Pandora's Box for a multitude of temptations. I'm not saying there may be some who do the right thing and live happily ever after, but that is not the nature of man; you're assuming they have a spiritual nature rather than a carnal nature, but that is not the context of the Law.

Steps 1 to 3 are not marriage, but I agree that its the right order.

I didn't say it was, but there's a whole lot of things going on before the proverbial knot is tied. The context of Gen. 24:67 addresses those things leading up to a godly marriage in contradistinction to a shotgun marriage.

But I think that 4 should be after 5, as we marry first and celebrate later. I don't think any celebretion would be a step of the marriage, its more of a social thing.

Look up the word 'consummation.' Are you going to make up your vows in a covenantal relationship after sexual intercourse? Are you going to bypass the Law without 2 or more witnesses to establish the matter?

About sexual intercourse, I still think its the marriage. If someone do this to a woman, it should be the ultimate act of love and they should be sure that they are going to live their lives together. If they are not sure of it, they should not have sex. The one-night stand thing is a perversion of the marriage, and the ones who practice it become adulterers.

I would consider the impact that has upon an ecclesia. That's why the ceremony (heck, let's just call it a unordained party!!!!; we don't need anybody's permission) with witnesses is a public proclamation and a matter of cultural security; it defines the community. There has to be some kind of announcement or declaration, not a ritual per se as Bill rightly mentioned (we can see how far gone that is). One can go the Common Law route and certainly be blameless. What I'm advocating however, is the beauty of bringing the love two people have for each other to the light of day and a time for godly celebration. Kinda like christening a ship for it's maiden voyage. Is there something wrong with blessing people in the name of Christ? Are we not dependent upon our Savior for all things?

So did he marry Leah at an altar, or in a bed?

What we do doesn't necessarily prove the will of God. Perhaps a better question would be, which would be more pleasing to God? Considering that an altar was a place of sacrifice, where the presence of God could be made. The altar was (past tense) the venue where God met His people and discerned their hearts. Now the temple is our body and our hearts are the altar where we commune with Him. Whereby, 'We should approach with a true heart, in certainty of faith having purified hearts... And we should consider one another, in regard to stimulation of love and of good deeds, not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as is a habit with some."

In the ancient world, the woman had little, or NO, say in who she was going to marry. There was no courtship/permission from daddy stage, and a virgin man did not "meet" a virgin woman unless daddy introduced him and supervised it all. Instead, marriage was an agreement between a father (or brother, for want of a father) and a suitor.

Very true. But the contemporary traditions of our race are completely different today. We should look at it from a historical perspective and discern which mode of engagement (for lack of a better word) preceded marriage (regardless of sex), because there's always going to be a moral turpitude that has social repercussions. Yes, the Bible states things that would appear to be a 'sex is marriage' kind of thing, but is it an ordained priority? That's the question in my mind. I just think it would be reckless for me to tell somebody that if they wanted to get married to just have sex and that's it. But, that's just me. LOL


Mark

[Lang]

Is there something wrong with blessing people in the name of Christ?

Definetly not. My criticism was on people depending on ceremonies to get married.

What we do doesn't necessarily prove the will of God. Perhaps a better question would be, which would be more pleasing to God?

Perhaps marrying Rachel in the first time would be more pleasing, but we cannot know... However, the marriage is God's creation, and he defines what it is, and what it is not. Regardless of if it was pleasing or not, Leah got married. I bet God didn't like at all getting divorced from Israel, but our abominations automatically divorced us.

Yes, the Bible states things that would appear to be a 'sex is marriage' kind of thing, but is it an ordained priority? That's the question in my mind. I just think it would be reckless for me to tell somebody that if they wanted to get married to just have sex and that's it. But, that's just me. LOL

Of course such things cant happen... Neither will we force a guy to marry a prostitute because he took her a long time ago. But .. If you have a ceremony and never consumate, then what use is the ceremony? Or you consumate and never have a ceremony... you are still married. This principle applies to Godly people wanting to live together. Of course that two liberals engaing in sex won't be truly married. But we can't let adulterers and concubines destroy the meaning of marriage. They perverted what God created. And of course, having a ceremony to ask for Gods blessing won't hurt.

[Kentucky]

My criticism was on people depending on ceremonies to get married.

If you have a ceremony and never consumate, then what use is the ceremony?

The age of the man and woman may be such that they are no longer able, but still love each other and desire each others companionship. In addition to that it may be a matter of economics.

Or you consumate and never have a ceremony... you are still married. This principle applies to Godly people wanting to live together.

Yes. Perhaps the words ceremony or ritual or other stereotypes do not convey what I'm trying to convey. The biblical concept of family has never been kept in the dark or secretive. It is to the benefit of a White Christian community to know who is married and who is not. One tradition of our race has been the family Bible that records the day they were married i.e. the day there were at least two witnesses to acknowledge their union in the eyes of God. It could be as simple as a 5 minute formality in writing on paper or as complex as hundreds of friends and relatives, prayers and blessings, food and drinks, music and fun.

Of course that two liberals engaing in sex won't be truly married.

What do liberals or conservatives or any other political persuasion have to do with it?

But we can't let adulterers and concubines destroy the meaning of marriage. They perverted what God created. And of course, having a ceremony to ask for Gods blessing won't hurt.

Marriage is a racial institution that keeps our society together. It is attacked from all quarters to destroy the nuclear family, which constitutes our Israelite nations. Everything we do or don't do has a ripple effect on the culture, on our very identity as a people. "In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Our families!

Mark

[Lang]

The age of the man and woman may be such that they are no longer able, but still love each other and desire each others companionship. In addition to that it may be a matter of economics.

I'm not saying we don't have an emotional and spiritual bond besides the "consumation"... A couple of old people is an exception to the rule, we won't be crazy about people "needing" to have sex.

Yes. Perhaps the words ceremony or ritual or other stereotypes do not convey what I'm trying to convey. The biblical concept of family has never been kept in the dark or secretive. It is to the benefit of a White Christian community to know who is married and who is not. One tradition of our race has been the family Bible that records the day they were married i.e. the day there were at least two witnesses to acknowledge their union in the eyes of God. It could be as simple as a 5 minute formality in writing on paper or as complex as hundreds of friends and relatives, prayers and blessings, food and drinks, music and fun.

I agree with this. Of course the community must know, we can't be a "secret" family. But, in general rule, a couple will tell everyone they are married and now a family because they have become a family in bed (not one night stand, but a consumation for their loving relationship). Perhaps we are not debating the same thing, lol.

What do liberals or conservatives or any other political persuasion have to do with it?

What I tried to say is that a liberal guy who meets a liberal girl in the club, have quick sex in the parking lot and then never more meets each other are not actually married.

Marriage is a racial institution that keeps our society together. It is attacked from all quarters to destroy the nuclear family, which constitutes our Israelite nations. Everything we do or don't do has a ripple effect on the culture, on our very identity as a people. "In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Our families!

Judging by the point we have reached, in no time we will have men staying at home, washing dishes and raising the children while women go out to work and also cheats on the guy. Actually such cases are already happening. Also gay couples being married in the "church" will give people a feeling of legality.

The people from my generation will be in big trouble if they want a traditional marriage. We are the most messed up generation ever.

I believe that or Yahweh will return to rescue the family or if its not time yet, another leader like a Hitler II will have to arise in order to revert this situation.

[Filidh]

isn't the ceremony a ritualization, good-intended or not, of marriage, which has been independently-proven to be the bedding of a man and a woman and not the ceremony itself?

in which case, why would we want to uphold a ritual of the law of marriage, when it's written that the rituals of the law are done away with as the law itself is upheld?

and if the only reason to be found to uphold the ceremony is ritualistic tradition, and cuz it's written that it's evil to teach as yahweh's law the commands and traditions of men, wouldn't upholding the ceremony as necessary rather than needless ritual be from of the evil one?

[Kentucky]

isn't the ceremony a ritualization, good-intended or not, of marriage, which has been independently-proven to be the bedding of a man and a woman and not the ceremony itself?

I haven't seen anything proven yet. If the ceremony was not sanctioned by God's Law, then why was Christ performing a miracle at the wedding of Cana?

in which case, why would we want to uphold a ritual of the law of marriage, when it's written that the rituals of the law are done away with as the law itself is upheld?

The temple ordinances were nailed to the Cross, not the moral and social Laws that governed Israel. Anybody can take something sacred and make it profane. That doesn't mean that which has been profaned is wrong. The jews have profaned the name of Israel; does that mean Israel should be done away with?

and if the only reason to be found to uphold the ceremony is ritualistic tradition, and cuz it's written that it's evil to teach as yahweh's law the commands and traditions of men, wouldn't upholding the ceremony as necessary rather than needless ritual be from of the evil one?

The evil ones are those who call good evil and evil good.

Mark

[Lang]

Imagine two people, a man and a woman, stuck in a lost island. How they get married?

The legalities are made after other people arrive in the island and they start living in society. Because they can't be married in secret, they want to be known as a family from now on, and in a community we need to get these things organized in order to establish inheritance laws, to avoid people marrying one person here and other there, etc. Thats why we say its a fake marriage if the couple (young and healthy) never engaged in sex and only lives of appearances, or someone who marries to hide his homossexuality, even though they had all the ceremonies, and even though the priest said: "I now pronounce you man and wife. You may kiss the bride".

[Filidh]

mark, i was saying that if, and only if, the only reason for upholding the wedding ceremony is tradition, then it's evil. i believe that making it a necessity rather than something good that helps define the assembly but isn't necessary is evil, the difference being that if there were an assembly that didn't have wedding ceremonies that assembly would be no worse morally than one that did.

wedding ceremonies themselves are able to be good. if they weren't, then yahweh christ wouldn't have used the wedding feast as part of a parable of the end of the age. and celebrating the joiningtogether-in-marriage of two israelites is beautiful indeed. if you're engaging in wedding celebration, that's obviously perfectly fine.

i was saying that making it a necessity rather than a good-but-optional thing is wrong.