The Bible on Sex, Love, and Marriage

quote:

---

Take a good look at Evangelical & Christian Married couples such as: Billy Graham, Chuck Missler, John Mann, Steve Carr, and Dr. James Dobson (Focus on the Family), to name a few.

---

Interesting links, but doesn't really show that their marriages are less chaotic.The Missler article was very interesting. What I see is a woman who looks to others to meet her needs instead of herself. Once she became less "needy" and started reacting to her husband in a mature manner, her husband started coming home more often.I don't feel there is enough true marital information in the Bible to prepare couples for the reality of marriage. Especially since Hebrew/Jewish marriages were arranged. Most men I know would protect their families. So how did Jesus love the church that would equate to daily living between a husband and wife? He supposedly wasn't married, so didn't give an example there, plus he recruited men away from their families for his mission.How does Jesus loving a group of people equate to an example for marriage?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

Keep in mind, God's original intent before the "Fall" was for the two in marriage to become one, and never to seperate until death.

---

The only plan I see before the fall is procreation. Man and woman mate to reproduce just like the rest of the creatures on the planet.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

I refute that idea...lets look at the actual translation(s) used.
"Therefore a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." (Gen 2:24; Matt 19:5; Mark 10:7-8; Eph 5:31). The Hebrew word dabaq translated "cleave" in this verse means to adhere, stick or be joined together. The Greek word translated "cleave or join" in the New Testament is proskolloa, which also means to glue, stick or join together, where marriage is bringing two people together with the expectation of never being separated. Also, if you'd like to take it a step further. The Hebrew word "basar" is flesh, much like Adam's term of "flesh of my flesh" when describing Eve. The Hebrew word "echadh" is used for being numerically "one." So here we have two people cleaving/joining together as one flesh (Basar' echadh). Yes, they were also commanded to multiply & fill the earth, but in their marriage specifically (Gen 2:24) they were to have complete unity.

---

1. Dabaq: They join together physically for reproduction. They can't literally become one flesh.

quote:

---

So here we have two people cleaving/joining together as one flesh

---

They become one flesh not come together as one flesh, which would be a baby.Same word is used in Ruth, but it doesn't make Ruth married to her mother-in-law, make them one flesh, or constitute sex. It does show that "dabaq" describes physical proximity which is not necessarily permanent. IMO the phrase "becoming one flesh" is what adds the sexual inference.The command to multiply or fill the earth came in Genesis 1. So the job God gave them was to subdue and reproduce. Genesis 2 needed to have its reproduction plan also. Doesn't sound like a ruling, but a statement of fact. Sex is a natural inclination, marriage is not.When you consider that Genesis was written during a time when marriages were arranged and men had multiple wives, it makes one wonder how one man can become one flesh with several women. He can contribute to a lot of babies though.

quote:

---

but in their marriage specifically (Gen 2:24) they were to have complete unity.

---

Genesis 2:24 is interpreted now as unity in a marriage, but during the age of arranged marriages, were all women agreeable to the marriages arranged for them? Some got a good deal and some didn't.So in the Genesis verse I see mating created by God before the fall and marriage created by man after the fall.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Yes, giving man and woman the duty to reproduce and fill the earth would definitely cause an overload if nothing is supposed to die. I assume since it was paradise there weren't any natural disasters either. But yes that would be another thread.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

Notice that this is the direct command of scripture.

---

That verse in 1 Corinthians, is spoken by Paul not God. In the Talmud, according to the school of Hillel, which was accepted into Jewish law, a man who forbids himself from having intercourse due to taking a vow can only expect his wife to accept sexual deprivation for a week. The opposing school said two weeks.So is this truly a command from God or is it Paul adjusting basic Jewish morals for the Gentiles?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

What can I say, its Scripture...God breathed!

---

God breathed it to whom? The Jews or Paul?Obviously the Jews had the do-not-separate-for-a-period-of-time-without-consent plan before Paul wrote his letters. Since it wasn't something that was written in the Laws of Moses, which is supposedly God breathed, then it apparently wasn't God breathed to the Jews and yet what you're showing me is that God modified a Jewish law and supposedly had Paul pass it on to the Gentiles.

quote:

---

In short, if the spouse gets deprived for a week or two its because that is the arrangement they (husband/wife) decided upon.

---

Exactly!But my problem is with attributing this philosophy to God as part of his master plan as opposed to mankind's ability to learn and improve.Paul didn't present this as something from God.
IMO Paul merely adapted the Jewish tradition to the Gentiles.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

Afterward Jesus came on the scene and called man back to God's Original Plan.

---

Paul was speaking, not Jesus.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.