Here’s what I mean.
Biblical marriage.
Polygamous Marriage, one man with more than one wife which was accepted by God.
God chose Abraham to be the father of his chosen people. He would have children more numerous than the sands on the seashore, and Hagar was Abram’s second wife while Sarah was still alive and married to Abraham.
Genesis 16:3 “So after Abraham had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarah his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.”
Then there are
Lamech with two wives (Genesis 4:19), Esau with three (Genesis 26:34 & 28:9), Jacob with four (Genesis 29:28 & 30:4-9), Gideon with a bunch of them (Judges 8:30), and Abijah with 14 wives (II Chronicles 13:21).
Levirate Marriage where if a man died without having children, his brother was expected to marry his widow and produce children to continue the lineage of the deceased brother (Deuteronomy 25:5-10).
Slave marriage. Abraham and Sarah conspired to get their slave girl Hagar to marry Abraham and produce children because a slave girl had no option except compliance (Genesis 16:1ff), and a male slave had no right to keep his wife and children if his master sold him or them (Exodus 21:1-6).
Prisoner of war marriage. At God’s instruction, the Israelite Army killed all the men and boys of Midian and all the Midianite women who were not virgins, and then married the surviving virgins. (Numbers 31:18).
In modern times these types of marriage would have the “ick” factor that Gay marriages have for conservatives, but in rejecting them in favor of the one man/one woman model is to have redefined marriage to get out the ick.
Nowhere in the Bible did God ever say that He affirmed only the Adam and Eve style marriage.
This brings us to the partnership of Jonathan and David.
Saul acknowledged there was a relationship between Dave and Jon, and the Hebrew words used to describe Jonathan and David’s love indicate romantic, emotional attachment.
King Saul refers to their relationship with a vulgar Hebrew idiomatic expression when he yelled at Jonathan, “Thou son of a perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own shame, and unto the shame of thy mother’s nakedness?”(I Samuel 20:30).
This was after Jonathan’s father referred to David as his son in law. He offers his daughter to David saying, “Today you have a second chance to become my son-in-law!” (I Samuel 18:21).
The opposite is closer to the secretworldchronicle.com buy viagra truth because of the depressive effects alcohol has on your nervous system. The adult industry has been one of the most competitive rates. buy cialis This is very helpful tadalafil online to stimulate erection. The reason of this kind of infertility often caused by pelvic cost of prescription viagra mass, adhesion, tubal blockage of follicular bad or ovulation disorder and other factors.
The only way David could have had a second chance was if there had been a first, and that as Jonathan.
And as mad as Saul might have been, look how well David fared in the eyes of God.
And for those who will chime in that Saul had another daughter that Davis did not want to marry, this can only be explained by arranged marriages based on political advantage, which would be frowned on today as a false marriage joined by man not God.
Thrown in exchanging your daughter for goats and cows, and it’s plain that the definition of marriage has changed, and was changed by the very people who now say it should not be done.
In spite of objections to the redefinition of marriage, Mormons had Biblically based polygamy until on July 8, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act into law, which forbade the practice of polygamy in U.S. territories, and polygamy became an impediment to Utah being admitted as a state with Congress amending the Morrill Act in 1882 making polygamy a felony punishable by a $500 fine and five years in prison.
So, what is now called “biblical marriage” is based on ignoring the Bible for, perhaps, political reasons.
As far as the political ploy that personhood is bestowed upon conception, the Bible h thing to say about that.
In Genesis 2:7, even though Adam was a fully formed human body, it was only when God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”.
In Ezekiel 37:5-6 we have, “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.”
According to Exodus 21:22, “If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.”
But in Exodus 21:23, if any harm comes to the woman, then the man who did injury must be put to death.
If the fetus is killed, there is a fine. If the woman is killed, there is the death penalty. The man has killed a person in the latter case but not in the former. If the fetus has been a person according to the Bible as the woman was, its death should merit the death penalty.
It’s amazing how flexible the Bible becomes when it helps person politically.