The following argument, despite an impressive array of quotes, is
*badly flawed* from the logical point of view, though very clever in
how it manages the spin; I told my source so... :) Even though it
argues on my side of the fence, I've had enough of hokum argument back
in Poland to last me a lifetime; now, I'm perfectly happy just
"spotting the spin" and rejecting it. So I - almost - did not forward
the message. But then I thought "why not"? Why not turn it into a "spot
the fallacy" game?
Enjoy...
From: R.B.
Biblical marriage: a bad source for debate
By Vaughn Roste
The son of two Lutheran pastors, Vaughn Roste has since worshipped
and worked in Episcopalian and Presbyterian Churches, but his
current employment is in a United Church. Holding degrees in
theology and music from two different church institutions, he
currently freelances as a writer and musician in Edmonton.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
We've heard a lot about "biblical marriage" lately, largely as a
defensive reaction against same-sex marriage. I read one letter to
the editor written by a Lutheran pastor that claimed that "the
Bible clearly teaches that marriage is the God-ordained covenantal
union of one man to one woman." How very applicable to the
contemporary situation, I thought. If the Bible really teaches
that (and in such modern language too!), then we all should be
paying the Bible a lot more heed.
So I picked up my Bible and looked up all the passages that have
anything to do with marriage (I had help: I used a concordance). I
examined the scriptural use of all the words I could think of
related to marriage: marriage, marriages, marry, marries, married,
wedding, weddings, wed, husband, husbands, wife, and wives.
All told, I looked up over 800 references. Exempting the references
which are narrative (e.g. "Adam named his wife Eve" Gen 3:20) or
metaphorical (Christ's marriage to the church, Rev 21:9), I was
able to distil those 825 verse references into 12 general
principles: 12 Biblical "rules" or guidelines regarding marriage
which encompass the gamut of scripture. I hereby present the list,
with the applicable references.
12 Biblical Principles of Marriage
Marriage consists of one man and one or more women (Gen 4:19,
4:23, 26:34, 28:9, 29:26-30, 30:26, 31:17, 32:22, 36:2, 36:10,
37:2, Ex. 21:10, Judges 8:30, 1 Sam 1:2, 25:43, 27:3, 30:5, 30:18,
2 Sam 2:2, 3:2-5, 1 Chron 3:1-3, 4:5, 8:8, 14:3, 2 Chron 11:21,
13:21, 24:3).
Nothing prevents a man from taking on concubines in addition to
the wife or wives he may already have (Gen 25:6, Judges 8:31, 2
Sam 5:13, 1 Ki ngs 11:3, 1 Chron 3:9, 2 Chron 11:21, Dan 5:2-3).
A man might choose any woman he wants for his wife (Gen 6:2, Deut
21:11), provided only that she is not already another man's wife
(Lev 18:14-16, Deut. 22:30) or his [half-]sister (Lev 18:11,
20:17), nor the mother (Lev 20:14) or the sister (Lev 18:18) of a
woman who is already his wife. The concept of a woman giving her
consent to being married is foreign to the Biblical mindset.
If a woman cannot be proven to be a virgin at the time of
marriage, she shall be stoned (Deut 22:13-21).
A rapist must marry his victim (Ex. 22:16, Deut. 22:28-29) -
unless she was already a fiance, in which case he should be put to
death if he raped her in the country, but both of them killed if
he raped her in town (Deut. 22:23-27).
If a man dies childless, his brother must marry the widow (Gen
38:6-10, Deut 25:5-10, Mark12:19, Luke 20:28).
Women marry the man of their father's choosing (Gen. 24:4,
Josh.15:16-17, Judges 1:12-13, 12:9, 21:1, 1 Sam 17:25, 18:19, 1
Kings 2:21, 1 Chron 2:35, Jer 29:6, Dan 11:17).
Women are the property of their father until married and their
husband after that (Ex. 20:17, 22:17, Deut. 22:24, Mat 22:25).
The value of a woman might be approximately seven years' work (Gen
29:14-30).
Inter-faith marriages are prohibited (Gen 24:3, 28:1, 28:6, Num
25:1-9, Ezra 9:12, Neh 10:30, 2 Cor 6:14). Divorce is forbidden
(Deut 22:19, Matt 5:32, 19:9, Mark10:9-12, Luke 16:18, Rom 7:2, 1
Cor 7:10-11, 7:39).
Better to not get married at all - although marriage is not a sin
(Matt 19:10, I Cor 7:1, 7:27-28, 7:32-34, 7:38).
How many of these Biblical principles are followed by Christians
today? Not a single one [with the possible exception of number 3 -
some Christian women may still have no choice in their marital
partner! Nowhere in the Bible does it say that "marriage is the God-
ordained covenantal union of one man and one woman;" in fact, it
says explicitly to the contrary! The Bible lists at least 15
polygamists (not including Herod, who is known from the historical
- but not Biblical - record to have had 9 wives), and in not a
single place does polygamy carry with it any sense of opprobrium.
Unfortunately, the pastor mentioned above would have been far more
correct to say that "the Bible teaches that marriage is a
covenantal union of one man to as many women as he might want and
can afford."
So the next time your favorite politician or preacher claims to
use the Bible in support of traditional marriage, ask him or her
which of these 12 principles he or she is actually advocating.
Probably none. Anyone who claims to use the Bible in support of a
strictly monogamous union of one male and one female based on
love, mutuality, and commitment will be hard pressed to find 2,000
year-old Bible verses in support of that very modern position. In
fact, I daresay they cannot. The Biblical view of marriage is not
monogamous: it is not necessarily based on love, nor on any amount
of mutuality.
Most Christians would consider these Biblical principles of
marriage to be misogynistic and repulsive - and judging by today's
standards, they'd be right. Views have changed since Biblical
times, as has our concept of marriage. Some would claim that this
is the result of the Holy Spirit working in our world; most agree
that just about all of the changes are a good thing. But if we
concede that our concept of marriage has evolved, is it not
potentially arrogant to summarily discount the possibility that
marriage should continue evolving, or even that it might be God's
will that it do so?
From the looks of the above list, it's a good thing our
perspectives have changed from the Biblical model. Thus as we
continue to dialog and prayerfully discern God's will in the area
of same-sex marriages, we obviously cannot consider 2,000-year-old
statements made in other cultures and contexts to be all that is
important. Please do not misinterpret that I am claiming that the Bible
is
not important - of course it is. It is central to my faith, as it
should be for any Christian. But to rely on solely the Bible is to
dangerously ignore two millennia of progress in the areas of
science, technology, and human rights, a sin which we dare not let
ourselves commit if the church is to remain relevant to
contemporary society at all.
To rely solely on Scripture for church policy is to ignore the
possibility that the Holy Spirit has been active at all in the
sixteen centuries since the canon was closed in 405 CE. Indeed, we
need to consider that the Holy Spirit may be actively encouraging
us today to move beyond a literal reading of the Bible and to
refuse to become modern Pharisees.
--
Tamara P Duvall http://t-n-lace.net/
Lexington, Virginia, USA (Formerly of Warsaw, Poland)
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
