What is marriage?

[freelance lover]

Monergism

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?" Jesus answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." ~ Matthew 19:3-6

Marriage is a intimate and complementing union between a man and a woman in which the two become one physically, in the whole of life. God brings a man and a woman together in marriage (Matt 19:6). It is not humankind's preragative to separate what God has chosen to put together (Matt 19:6). "One flesh" (Gen 2:24) involves the unity of the whole person: purpose, physical, and life-a unity whereby the two become a new, God-designed, balanced life. They counterbalance each others strengths and weaknesses. Sexually the two become "one flesh" physically as reflected in their offspring. Becoming "one flesh" is used in Scripture for the consummating sexual act of marriage. God's ideal exclusiveness of the "one flesh" relationship disallows any other relationship: homosexuality, polygamy, adultery, premarital sex, concubinage, incest, bestiality, cultic prostitution. These and other sexual perversions violate the "oneness" of the marriage relationship and were often punishable by death (Lev 20:1-19; Deut 22:13-27; Rom 1:26-32).

The purpose of marriage is to reflect the relationship of the Godhead and to serve him. The relational aspect of God's image is reflected in the bringing together of male and female in "one flesh" (Gen 1:27; 2:21-24). This oneness with sexual differences portrays various aspects of God's image: same nature and essence, equal members, intimate relationship, common purpose, and distinct personalities with different roles, including authority and submission. In the Trinity the Father leads, the Son submits to the Father, and the Holy Spirit submits to both the Father and the Son. However, all three are fully and equally deity. Likewise, male and female in the marriage relationship are of the same nature and essence, equal as persons (Gal 3:28 ), intimate in relationship, common in purpose, but distinct personalities with different roles: the husband leads and the wife submits to his leadership (Eph 5:31). The covenant analogy attests the commitment between two married partners (Prov 2:17; Mal 2:14). Emphasis is upon an agreement, a commitment, not upon an analogy of conditionality and unconditionality of some biblical covenants that would extend the marriage covenant analogy beyond its expected scope. This marriage commitment, and faithfulness to it, preclude sexual relations with anyone except one's spouse (Exod 20:14; Lev. 18,20; Rom 1:24-27).

Without the fall, probably no one would have ever been single. Perfect people would have yielded perfect marriages. Sin brought flaws in humans that sometimes make it difficult to find or sustain a suitable marriage relationship. Being single for life is an exception and, therefore, is declared to be a gift from God (1 Cor 7:7). The fall made human hearts hard toward God and toward each other. The relational aspect of God's image became marred. Rebellion against submission to male leadership was Satan's initial temptation (Gen 3:1-6, 17; Eph 5:33; 1 Peter 3:1). Male domination and harshness crept into leadership (Col 3:19; 1 Peter 3:7). Sin caused polygamy, concubinage, incest, adultery, rape, prostitution, and all kinds of immorality (Lev. 18, 20; Rom 1:26-32) to damage or destroy the marriage relationship. Marriage commitments are violated. Divorce, premarital sex, and couples living together out of wedlock would never have occurred had not sin entered the world. The fall severely damaged the marriage relationship.

So, from what I gather, you would view the actual marriage ceremony as what constitutes marriage in God's eyes? It's absolutely necessary to have a ceremony in a church with a member of the clergy presiding to be married? Why exactly do you believe this? The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

@Priestly: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.  

[Priestley]

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.  

[freelance lover]

Priestley

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.

Well, I know it's symbolic, that kind of goes without saying. I just always interpreted it that sex is what makes them of one flesh, though it certainly could pertain to more than just sex, depending on how one reads the Bible.  

[Priestley]

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.

Well, I know it's symbolic, that kind of goes without saying. I just always interpreted it that sex is what makes them of one flesh, though it certainly could pertain to more than just sex, depending on how one reads the Bible.

Jesus doesn't refer to sex when he mentions "one flesh" (Matthew 19:5-6, Mark 10:7-8 ). In fact, the context around which Jesus talks about the subject makes honouring the commitment between a husband and wife (in response to the Phariseical questioning about certificates of marriage and divorce) more important rather than being tied by sex. After all, this is the same Jesus who said that a lustful look counts as adultery.

It is far more likely that "one flesh" in this context is used to show the degree of unity between a man and a wife, that they are so tightly bound together that there is no seperation between them. They are effectively one person: a unit. Knowing Jesus' capacity to use a situation like above to hint towards something greater, it's no stretch of the imagination to suggest that Jesus is referring to the relationship between himself and his church.  

[freelance lover]

Priestley

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.

Well, I know it's symbolic, that kind of goes without saying. I just always interpreted it that sex is what makes them of one flesh, though it certainly could pertain to more than just sex, depending on how one reads the Bible.

Jesus doesn't refer to sex when he mentions "one flesh" (Matthew 19:5-6, Mark 10:7-8 ). In fact, the context around which Jesus talks about the subject makes honouring the commitment between a husband and wife (in response to the Phariseical questioning about certificates of marriage and divorce) more important rather than being tied by sex. After all, this is the same Jesus who said that a lustful look counts as adultery.

It is far more likely that "one flesh" in this context is used to show the degree of unity between a man and a wife, that they are so tightly bound together that there is no seperation between them. They are effectively one person: a unit. Knowing Jesus' capacity to use a situation like above to hint towards something greater, it's no stretch of the imagination to suggest that Jesus is referring to the relationship between himself and his church.

I suppose I just associate "one flesh" with sex, because I grew hearing that a man and woman become of one flesh when they engaged in sex, which is why it should be reserved for you spouse. Because, as you said once the two are one they cannot be separated.

But I suppose this goes back to the question of are two seen as one in God's eyes through the commitment, the sex, or the marriage ceremony itself?  

[Priestley]

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.

Well, I know it's symbolic, that kind of goes without saying. I just always interpreted it that sex is what makes them of one flesh, though it certainly could pertain to more than just sex, depending on how one reads the Bible.

Jesus doesn't refer to sex when he mentions "one flesh" (Matthew 19:5-6, Mark 10:7-8 ). In fact, the context around which Jesus talks about the subject makes honouring the commitment between a husband and wife (in response to the Phariseical questioning about certificates of marriage and divorce) more important rather than being tied by sex. After all, this is the same Jesus who said that a lustful look counts as adultery.

It is far more likely that "one flesh" in this context is used to show the degree of unity between a man and a wife, that they are so tightly bound together that there is no seperation between them. They are effectively one person: a unit. Knowing Jesus' capacity to use a situation like above to hint towards something greater, it's no stretch of the imagination to suggest that Jesus is referring to the relationship between himself and his church.

I suppose I just associate "one flesh" with sex, because I grew hearing that a man and woman become of one flesh when they engaged in sex, which is why it should be reserved for you spouse. Because, as you said once the two are one they cannot be separated.

But I suppose this goes back to the question of are two seen as one in God's eyes through the commitment, the sex, or the marriage ceremony itself?

Personally, I think the commitment is the most important. Our word is supposed to be our bond.  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

Monergism

"One flesh" (Gen 2:24) involves the unity of the whole person: purpose, physical, and life-a unity whereby the two become a new, God-designed, balanced life. They counterbalance each others strengths and weaknesses. Sexually the two become "one flesh" physically as reflected in their offspring. Becoming "one flesh" is used in Scripture for the consummating sexual act of marriage. God's ideal exclusiveness of the "one flesh" relationship disallows any other relationship: homosexuality, polygamy, adultery, premarital sex, concubinage, incest, bestiality, cultic prostitution. These and other sexual perversions violate the "oneness" of the marriage relationship and were often punishable by death (Lev 20:1-19; Deut 22:13-27; Rom 1:26-32).

How so? If we're talking about becoming "one flesh" as an act of sex whereby one partner is penetrated and the other penetrates, I don't see how any of these sex acts go against what you're saying is God's purpose of "one flesh."  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

The whole "one flesh" bit implies that sex is what actually makes is marriage.

Two people cannot physically become one flesh. It is symbolic: a metaphor for the degree of unity between two people. Sex is clearly not the only thing covered by the metaphor.

freelance lover

@Priestley: I don't think we've actually had a thread on this topic. I certainly don't remember it anyway.

We have. It was deleted before we introduced the thread archive and directory.

Well, I know it's symbolic, that kind of goes without saying. I just always interpreted it that sex is what makes them of one flesh, though it certainly could pertain to more than just sex, depending on how one reads the Bible.

Jesus doesn't refer to sex when he mentions "one flesh" (Matthew 19:5-6, Mark 10:7-8 ). In fact, the context around which Jesus talks about the subject makes honouring the commitment between a husband and wife (in response to the Phariseical questioning about certificates of marriage and divorce) more important rather than being tied by sex. After all, this is the same Jesus who said that a lustful look counts as adultery.

It is far more likely that "one flesh" in this context is used to show the degree of unity between a man and a wife, that they are so tightly bound together that there is no seperation between them. They are effectively one person: a unit. Knowing Jesus' capacity to use a situation like above to hint towards something greater, it's no stretch of the imagination to suggest that Jesus is referring to the relationship between himself and his church.

I suppose I just associate "one flesh" with sex, because I grew hearing that a man and woman become of one flesh when they engaged in sex, which is why it should be reserved for you spouse. Because, as you said once the two are one they cannot be separated.

But I suppose this goes back to the question of are two seen as one in God's eyes through the commitment, the sex, or the marriage ceremony itself?

I really don't think the ceremony has anything to do with it. Ceremonies are such a societal and human need. God doesn't need ceremony. The only time I can think of where He command ritual is in the Old Testament, during which He asks for sacrifices and atonements, and in the New Testament where Jesus asks that His disciples carry out a communion meal in His memory (but He never specifies how often, or if anyone but His disciples need do so). God cares about the genuine relationship.