Real Biblical Marraige

Subject: In defense of Biblical marriage

The Presidential Prayer Team is currently urging us to: “Pray for
the President as he seeks wisdom on how to legally codify the
definition of marriage. Pray that it will be according to Biblical
principles. With any forces insisting on variant definitions of
marriage, pray that God’s Word and His standards will be honored by
our government.” This is true.

Any good religious person believes prayer should be balanced by
action. So here, in support of the Prayer Team’s admirable goals,
is a proposed Constitutional Amendment codifying marriage entirely
on biblical principles:

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between
one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man’s right to take concubines in
addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a
virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be
forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the
constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be
construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry
the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother’s widow or
deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one
shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law.
(Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your
town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with
him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men
young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of
course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

((Warning this is satire. Some folks didn’t get the joke at first according to a report at Salon)).

This is awesome, I wish I had more things like this at my disposal when someone says that things should be done as it says in the Bible.

I know people who believe we should follow the Bible word for word, but I know they don’t realize all the little things that are written in there.

This also shows another way how historical marriage is a world apart from our own. Marriage was the formal arrangement of a man taking a wife.
Gay marriage, if gay sex would be socially acceptable, could never appear in this situation, since women weren’t allowed to take partners and men couldn’t be taken as partners.

Pretty much sums up every insanity the Bible has to offer.

Here are some pertaining to marriage:

Here are some nice quotes:


If a man marries, then decides that he hates his wife, he can claim she wasn’t a virgin when they were married. If her father can’t produce the “tokens of her virginity” (bloody sheets), then the woman is to be stoned to death at her father’s doorstep. 22:13-21

If you see a pretty woman among the captives and would like her for a wife, then just bring her home and “go in unto her.” Later, if you decide you don’t like her, you can “let her go.” 21:11-14

Rules for those who have two wives: “one beloved, and another hated.” 21:15

Women are not to wear men’s clothing – it’s an “abomination unto the Lord.” 22:5

If a betrothed virgin is raped in the city and doesn’t cry out loud enough, then “the men of the city shall stone her to death.”

Man, society would kick so much ass if we just did as the Bible says!

And just in case someone wants to argue OT doesn’t apply anymore:


Jesus says that divorce is permissible when the wife is guilty of fornication. But what if the husband is unfaithful? Jesus doesn’t seem to care about that. 5:32

Abandon your wife and children for Jesus and he’ll give you a big reward. 19:29

Jesus apparently approves of polygamy since he tells, without comment, a parable involving ten virgins and one bridegroom. 25:1

Ah Jesus - how ever does the world function without your Holy mercy?


Paul explains that “the natural use” of women is to act as sexual objects for the pleasure of men. 1:27

This Bible stuff is looking up!

That’s even better when you look up the Biblical passages referenced. Take the one about getting your father drunk and sleeping with him, for instance. Here’s what the Bible says:

Genesis 19
31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Let’s get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our father.”
33 That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and lay with him. He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
34 The next day the older daughter said to the younger, “Last night I lay with my father. Let’s get him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and lie with him so we can preserve our family line through our father.” 35 So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went and lay with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
36 So both of Lot’s daughters became pregnant by their father.

There’s also that email that went around a few years ago to Dr. Laura after she used the Book of Leviticus to condemn homosexuality. The author posted all kinds of other ridiculous passages from Leviticus.

Hello, people? Don’t you know that Jesus got rid of all the embarassing parts from the OT, but kept the ones we like?

Yeah, it’s just too bad that Paul managed to define most of Christianity the way he did.

Jason - Jesus says that we should abandon our families to get a big reward. He also says divorce is okay for men - if the woman has been unfaithful - keeping the nice mysoginistic theme of the Bible going. The big J can make the NT lousy all without Paul’s help.

This is the problem with a lot of skeptical looks at the bible (like the aforementioned skeptic’s annotated bible)–they’re so desperate to prove that there’s not a sane verse in the bible that they way over-reach.

For example, there’s nothing in Genesis that suggests that Lot’s daughters’ behavior is good, and in fact they’re the progenitors of two of the “bad” tribes from later on, an implicit condemnation. Or, to grab Brian’s use of Kings 11:3, that very same verse condemns the behavior.

So a person who knows anything about the bible reads something like this, and they think, “Well, if that’s the caliber of your textual analysis, why should I listen to anything you have to say on the topic?” Whereas if you’d decided to stick with, say, not mixing flax and wool, or the laws of halitzah (a married man dying without offspring), you’d have a much better shot of convincing people to take a second look at their bibles.


I wonder if the Vatican has considered submitting this stuff to erotica sites.

sigh Why do I let myself get baited into these things.

Even pulling that one verse out of the corresponding passage with no context, only an utter fuckwit, or possibly the sexually frusterated would take such an interpretation. The relevant section in context:

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips,
30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;
32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

And where does it say such a thing was a good idea or okay? There aren’t a whole lot of whitewashed characters in the bible.

Jesus says that divorce is permissible when the wife is guilty of fornication. But what if the husband is unfaithful? Jesus doesn’t seem to care about that. 5:32

Of course, there is no cultural context provided here. Matthew is the gospel written to a jewish audience. In Jesus day, jewish law had evolved to the point where a man could divorce his wife for pretty much any reason whatsoever. Needless to say, women were pretty much screwed back then. In light of that, and given the audience of Matthew, this is a for-the-time big smackdown coming from the j-man.

Abandon your wife and children for Jesus and he’ll give you a big reward. 19:29

Here’s a quarter for your word of the day, hermeneutics. Go learn what it means and what it is.

Jesus apparently approves of polygamy since he tells, without comment, a parable involving ten virgins and one bridegroom. 25:1

Your ignorance of jewish culture and marriage ceremonies at the time and sexual fantasies about the swedish bikini team are getting in the way here.

I’d strongly suggest reading this and gaining at least a level 3 cleric understanding of biblical interpretation before coming back with snippy replies.

Here’s a quarter for your word of the day, hermeneutics. Go learn what it means and what it is.

Hey thanks. Here’s your word of the day, quote. Go learn what it means and what it is.

Oh and before you say anything else please realise I do get that there are numerous interpretations - I just presented ones from the skeptic’s side (which isn’t MINE, just the comments are).

The big point here is that the Bible is rather useless as a tool of law unless you’re a religious state - because it is open to contradictory interpretations.

Cyborg, again, I’ve got to point out that if you can find someone who’ll write an apologetic about how that line from Jesus doesn’t apply in the modern age, you’re totally in the clear.

Wow! This selective quoting from the Bible is better than movie review snippets.

Pehaps you refer to Matthew 5:17-18?

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

It’s fairly vauge as to when the law will change and how so.

Has all been fulfillied? Has heaven and earth passed?

I can’t say I can see anything that says anything about the old law being embarassing.

There’s a bunch of hot stuff in the OT about Hebrew temple prostitutes, and about not laying down with Canaanite women.

I lay down with a Canaanite/Puerto Rican chick once. When she did this thing with her loaves — man, talk about Aaron’s Rod. I totally coveted her.

man, talk about Aaron’s Rod.

He plays 3rd base for the Yankees!