• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Exodus 22:16-17: "pre-marital sex" = the beginning of marriage?

Mojo said:
The problem with viewing a wife as mere property gets sticky when viewed against stewardship.

A steward will view all under his care with respect and as needing preservation.

Mere property doesn’t necessarily give rise to expectations of tending and enriching.

When I purchased my home many years ago, I was given sage advise by someone I knew. He told me that my new home was a gift from God and, as such, should be respected and not allowed to go into disrepair. He emphasized routine maintenance and gradual improvements as money and time permitted. Gods gift was to be appreciated and stewarded.
Click to expand...
From a legal standpoint - a wife was considered a man’s property. That is a foundational truth found in the Scriptures. There’s a lot of confusion in the church, because this foundation has been twisted. “Cheating - divorce - adultery.”

The apostles saw themselves as property of Messiah. “Slave (bond-servant) to Messiah.

On earth as it is in heaven.

This foundational truth doesn’t nullify the other layers — Provision - love - compassion - grace - leader.
 
Last edited:
Otto said:
From a legal standpoint - a wife was considered a man’s property. That is a foundational truth found in the Scriptures. There’s a lot of confusion in the church, because this foundation has been twisted. “Cheating - divorce - adultery.”

The apostles saw themselves as property of Messiah. “Slave (bond-servant) to Messiah.

On earth as it is in heaven.

This foundational truth doesn’t nullify the other layers — Provision - love - compassion - grace - leader.
Click to expand...
You cannot properly protect that which you don’t own.
 
Maddog said:
It is a "transaction" but the terms and (bride)price are completely negotiable (seven years labor or commensurate amount in livestock or whatever dear old dad thinks of her worth). Sex simply seals the deal upon insemination. If it is a quiet insemination (unknown to others- horny people that we are) then the proof is the resultant pregnancy. Kinda hard in those days to hide a pregnancy after the first or second month when she is supposed to separate herself for that time of month. That's why scripture conflates "one flesh" with a baby.
Click to expand...
As per our usual arrangement, what is the Biblical support for this?
 
Maddog said:
Where was the prison in ancient Israel?
Click to expand...

It was found in the Talmud and in the synagogues and in the Temple where venal men made the Word of God into a cage for others.

A guy came along and called them out on this.
 
Mojo said:
Would that be the case for a pair of shoes?
Click to expand...
Exodus 20:17

“Do not desire another man's house; do not desire his wife, his slaves, his cattle, his donkeys, or anything else that he owns.”

The husband owns the wife as his property.

That’s the Word of Truth. A righteous man loves and takes care of his wife (or wives).

This point needs to be ingrained into the church - because then the other aspects - like adultery and polygyny - start making more sense.

If I own a mustang as a car - that car is my property. No one debates if a man is allowed to add an additional car as his possession. Why? Because the foundation is taught correctly. But when it comes to marriage - so many get offended by the flesh of Messiah - and run away from the Living Truth. That’s why the majority of “Christ Followers” don’t even understand “His” definition of adultery (Leviticus 20:10). He says - I do not change - I AM the same forever. That’s why he is the Rock, and not like the sand that changes with the seasons and culture.




IMG_0156.jpeg
 
Last edited:
In one of my past studies, i could fine no "jail" but rather servitude and restitution or physical correction and it was rather immediate, including death penalty.
 
Governors and state police long understood that incarceration was just another way to get free chain gang labor. Another example of dejure battling defacto.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top