What Constitutues a Biblical Marriage?

[Aquila]

In the United States we have a legal institution officially known as marriage. In various states we also have Civil Unions. In some states we have Common Law Marriage. In Ohio, and other states, those wishing to cohabitate without becoming entangled in the laws regarding what is officially known as "marriage" or "civil union" can file a "Cohabitation Agreement" that determines various responsibilities, roles, etc; nearly mirroring the stipulations of "marriage". These agreements also determine what is to happen should the cohabitating individuals terminate their relationship with regards to dividing property and assets. Alimony, child support, child custody, etc. might also be a part of the Cohabitation Agreement in some states. Most Cohabitation Agreements are settled in mediation without requiring court costs and the normal expense of a "divorce". Many local governments and corporations offer benefit packages for "Domestic Partners" who cohabitate just as they do "married couples".

Biblically speaking, do all of these classify as a form of "marriage"?

Should a straight couple who entered into a Civil Union be recognized as husband and wife?

Should couple who are legally married under Common Law be recognized as husband and wife?

Should a couple who have legally established a Cohabitation Agreement be recognized as husband and wife?

Thanks!

[NotforSale]

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Aquila

In the United States we have a legal institution officially known as marriage. In various states we also have Civil Unions. In some states we have Common Law Marriage. In Ohio, and other states, those wishing to cohabitate without becoming entangled in the laws regarding what is officially known as "marriage" or "civil union" can file a "Cohabitation Agreement" that determines various responsibilities, roles, etc; nearly mirroring the stipulations of "marriage". These agreements also determine what is to happen should the cohabitating individuals terminate their relationship with regards to dividing property and assets. Alimony, child support, child custody, etc. might also be a part of the Cohabitation Agreement in some states. Most Cohabitation Agreements are settled in mediation without requiring court costs and the normal expense of a "divorce". Many local governments and corporations offer benefit packages for "Domestic Partners" who cohabitate just as they do "married couples".

Biblically speaking, do all of these classify as a form of "marriage"?

Should a straight couple who entered into a Civil Union be recognized as husband and wife?

Should couple who are legally married under Common Law be recognized as husband and wife?

Should a couple who have legally established a Cohabitation Agreement be recognized as husband and wife?

Thanks!

I guess it depends who is looking at the couples to determine if their union is recognized.

Are Common Law and Cohabitors recognized by insurance companies and hospitals?

[AreYouReady?]

The earliest Biblical marriage is Abraham and Sarah. Then Isaac and Rebecca.

And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's death.
(Genesis 24:67)

Then we see marriage ceremonies. There was no law of Moses to go before governmental authorities to marry. But there was a requirement to write a bill of divorcement put it into the wife's hand if the man wanted to divorce her.

God made marriage between a man and a woman simple.

Government, insurance companies, corporate benefits etc. complicated marriage.

Question here for ya. Is it a stretch to say that when a man and woman make the decision to have sex, they have joined themselves together and become "married" in God's eyes?

[Sam]

there are several kinds of marriage in the Bible

[SiblingRevelry]

I wondered if someone was going to post that picture of marriages in the Bible.

I'd also note that until after the Civil War, slaves were not permitted to contract marriages recognized under law, because they were property. So the slaves came up with their own rituals (e.g., "jumping the broom") to mark their own relationships. It didn't matter to the slaveowners, if they wanted to break up families, for whatever reason, they did, and there was no law stopping them. I have to wonder about the long-term impacts of a couple hundred years of constantly looming familial destabilization. It's not something that changed overnight, either. Up until 1967, interracial marriages were illegal in many states.

(I still remember my shock when I found my family's surname on a list of names to be scrutinized by Virginia county clerks when issuing marriage licenses, in order to catch people who were trying to marry across the color line. I also know that some of my ancestors would move a few states away and then marry across the color line, in a place where they weren't known. It's a weird feeling to imagine your ancestors getting married in defiance of law.)

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I guess it depends who is looking at the couples to determine if their union is recognized.

Are Common Law and Cohabitors recognized by insurance companies and hospitals?

In states where Common Law marriage is recognized it's a "legal union". They even have to file for divorce upon termination of their relationships if they claimed common law marriage on any taxes or paperwork.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

The earliest Biblical marriage is Abraham and Sarah. Then Isaac and Rebecca.

And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's death.
(Genesis 24:67)

Then we see marriage ceremonies. There was no law of Moses to go before governmental authorities to marry. But there was a requirement to write a bill of divorcement put it into the wife's hand if the man wanted to divorce her.

God made marriage between a man and a woman simple.

Government, insurance companies, corporate benefits etc. complicated marriage.

Question here for ya. Is it a stretch to say that when a man and woman make the decision to have sex, they have joined themselves together and become "married" in God's eyes?

I think it is. Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well saying...

John 4:16-18 (KJV)
16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.
17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.

If simply having intercourse made a man and woman "married" in God's sight, Jesus wouldn't have said that the man that this woman was living with wasn't her husband.

It would appear that in the most ancient of times "marriage" was a covenant between two families. Typically the father (or mother) of the bride and groom had to be in agreement with the union. Then the union had to be recognized by the families. Therefore at the bare minimum the parents of two partners would have to bless and agree with the union in order to be married in God's sight.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Sam

there are several kinds of marriage in the Bible

Yep. And God appears to bless men and women who enter into each of these institutions. That would lead me to conclude that God doesn't focus so much on a specific "morality" regarding marriage... but rather social justice. Marriage under the Law of Moses was a legally recognized institution designed to protect women and children from abandonment and exploitation. The dowry and the writ of divorcement (which established grounds for terminating the marriage before the judges) were a safety net.

Essentially, God allowed for various expressions of human intimacy... as long as it was legal and ensured justice towards all involved.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by SiblingRevelry

I wondered if someone was going to post that picture of marriages in the Bible.

I'd also note that until after the Civil War, slaves were not permitted to contract marriages recognized under law, because they were property. So the slaves came up with their own rituals (e.g., "jumping the broom") to mark their own relationships. It didn't matter to the slaveowners, if they wanted to break up families, for whatever reason, they did, and there was no law stopping them. I have to wonder about the long-term impacts of a couple hundred years of constantly looming familial destabilization. It's not something that changed overnight, either. Up until 1967, interracial marriages were illegal in many states.

(I still remember my shock when I found my family's surname on a list of names to be scrutinized by Virginia county clerks when issuing marriage licenses, in order to catch people who were trying to marry across the color line. I also know that some of my ancestors would move a few states away and then marry across the color line, in a place where they weren't known. It's a weird feeling to imagine your ancestors getting married in defiance of law.)

So marriage laws are not always just. Many men today refuse to marry because of the legal implications. An article I read stated that never before in history has a man stood to loose so much (up to 40% of his income in some cases) by marrying a woman.