Post by von on Dec 7, 2009 11:32:23 GMT -5
Speculative fiction often including historical type issues (fantasy, for example, is often written from a medieval perspective) perhaps people would be interested in reacting to this list, which I have recently drawn up for some discussions in my church. I would be interested in which points people believe are definitely unBiblical:
Over the course of my study I have come to believe the following things. I would love it if you all would respond to this list with: I agree, I disagree, I can neither agree nor disagree and then, (extra for experts) if you would, if you disagree or neither, put why. I think this would greatly move the discussion forward.
Please note that, except where otherwise indicated or obviously more broad , most of the statements below are meant to refer most directly to the issue of a virgin son of a Godly father and the virgin daughter of a Godly father; not widows, widowers, adulterers, fornicators, etc. Nor is it meant to refer to issues of legality: levirate law, kings taking virgins, etc.
On the nature of the covenant:
1) I believe that God intends for covenants, whenever possible, to be fixed and firm, and not vacillating. Thus ‘engagement’ and ‘courtship’ as currently practiced are unBiblical.
2) I believe that others, especially authorities, are often called in Scripture to make covenants which bind those under them or in whose authority they act.
3) I believe that it lies principally with the fathers, most particularly the father of the bride, to make the covenant of betrothal.
4) I believe that the father, in wisdom, should not make a covenant for a son or daughter except where he is already assured of their obedience and integrity, to avoid defrauding the other party in the covenant.
On the nature of the readiness/timing for marriage.
5) I believe that betrothal and marriage are seen in Scripture as meeting a need, and that a wife is a blessing to a young man, she is not a ‘luxury’, an ‘extra’ or a ‘liability’.
6) I believe that, in general, Scripture speaks of marriage as happening ‘in youth’, and not ‘when mature’ or ‘when ready’ in the senses of financial stability, education finished, etc.
7) I believe that Scripture says, ‘to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife’.
On the nature of marriage
8) I believe that marriage consists of two acts/events: a binding covenant and a physical joining: the first called ‘betrothal’ and the second ‘taking a wife’. In Scripture the binding covenant is often implied and not stated, but the law, the gospel, and the patterns make it clear that that covenant exists.
9) I believe that both in betrothal and after the wife is taken the proper term for the two are ‘husband’ and ‘wife’.
10) I believe that only a virgin girl’s father can authorize a betrothal (outside of special circumstances such as a captured or slave girl, where the master acts in the place of the father, or where the father is dead and some other authority so acts, etc.).
11) I believe that the best Scriptural examples show the father of the virgin groom as the one who takes the initiative and chooses/provides the bride.
12) I do not believe that the *taking of a wife* should ever be forced on either the bride or the groom… that while a binding covenant does exist on the agreement of the fathers, the actual *taking* should not be forced. I believe that a breach or repudiation of the covenant by either party is grounds for Scriptural divorce by the other, and that a failure in this area would be a form of disobedience on the part of the son/daughter involved.
13) I believe that Scripture teaches that, in general, there should be no intervening time period between ‘sister and brother’ and ‘husband and wife’ (ie asleep to betrothed). (One notable exception would be an unpaid bride price, see Caleb’s daughter for example)
On the nature of the authority relationships
14) I believe that a fathers authority over his daughter continues until her marriage, at which point the new husband gains all of her father’s authority. I believe that the fathers authority would re-exist if her husband dies and she returns to her father’s household.
15) I believe that, while the nature of their relationship can and indeed must change over the years and through various circumstances, the fathers authority over his son is permanent.
16) I believe that all human authority relationships (husband, father, king, elder) can operate only within their allowed jurisdiction. Thus all human authorities have their limits, and times when they are not to be *obeyed*. And that there are times when, on God’s direct order, these relationships are changed outside of their normal boundaries. But these are exceptional and not normative.
17) I believe that, generally, the son is to remain a part of his father’s household, and that his economy is to be part of that economy in general.
On the nature of the sufficiency of scripture
18) I believe that, as for all other areas of life and Godliness, Scripture is sufficient and clear in this area.
19) I believe that, while different circumstances dictate different paths to marriage, this does not mean that Scripture is insufficient or unclear in its dictation of each particular marriage path; each path should follow the clear and sufficient Scriptural principles that lead down that path.
20) I believe that, for a virgin son of a Godly father marrying the virgin daughter of a Godly father; outside of such exceptional circumstances as slavery, the levirate law, etc., the principles involved are such as I have outlined above: in general that the son and daughter should both remain asleep until they are already bound in covenant by their fathers, at an early age, etc..
21) I believe that, as with the regulative principle, we are to look at both pattern and precept in our actions in this area; and that, as there, we are neither to add to nor subtract from God’s Word in our actions.
On the nature of the discussion
22) I believe that we all need to come to the table ‘semper reformada’, and understand that God’s Word, in this area like so many others, will challenge and confront many of our understandings and throw us far out of our comfort zone.
23) I believe that we need to come to this discussion ‘tabla rasa’ or, as Doug Phillips likes to say, ‘on a desert island’; and that the ‘burden of proof’ needs to be neutral; seeking the preponderance of evidence and our best understanding from Scripture, and not taking our own culture as the ‘default’ position against which all else must answer at its peril.
Over the course of my study I have come to believe the following things. I would love it if you all would respond to this list with: I agree, I disagree, I can neither agree nor disagree and then, (extra for experts) if you would, if you disagree or neither, put why. I think this would greatly move the discussion forward.
Please note that, except where otherwise indicated or obviously more broad , most of the statements below are meant to refer most directly to the issue of a virgin son of a Godly father and the virgin daughter of a Godly father; not widows, widowers, adulterers, fornicators, etc. Nor is it meant to refer to issues of legality: levirate law, kings taking virgins, etc.
On the nature of the covenant:
1) I believe that God intends for covenants, whenever possible, to be fixed and firm, and not vacillating. Thus ‘engagement’ and ‘courtship’ as currently practiced are unBiblical.
2) I believe that others, especially authorities, are often called in Scripture to make covenants which bind those under them or in whose authority they act.
3) I believe that it lies principally with the fathers, most particularly the father of the bride, to make the covenant of betrothal.
4) I believe that the father, in wisdom, should not make a covenant for a son or daughter except where he is already assured of their obedience and integrity, to avoid defrauding the other party in the covenant.
On the nature of the readiness/timing for marriage.
5) I believe that betrothal and marriage are seen in Scripture as meeting a need, and that a wife is a blessing to a young man, she is not a ‘luxury’, an ‘extra’ or a ‘liability’.
6) I believe that, in general, Scripture speaks of marriage as happening ‘in youth’, and not ‘when mature’ or ‘when ready’ in the senses of financial stability, education finished, etc.
7) I believe that Scripture says, ‘to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife’.
On the nature of marriage
8) I believe that marriage consists of two acts/events: a binding covenant and a physical joining: the first called ‘betrothal’ and the second ‘taking a wife’. In Scripture the binding covenant is often implied and not stated, but the law, the gospel, and the patterns make it clear that that covenant exists.
9) I believe that both in betrothal and after the wife is taken the proper term for the two are ‘husband’ and ‘wife’.
10) I believe that only a virgin girl’s father can authorize a betrothal (outside of special circumstances such as a captured or slave girl, where the master acts in the place of the father, or where the father is dead and some other authority so acts, etc.).
11) I believe that the best Scriptural examples show the father of the virgin groom as the one who takes the initiative and chooses/provides the bride.
12) I do not believe that the *taking of a wife* should ever be forced on either the bride or the groom… that while a binding covenant does exist on the agreement of the fathers, the actual *taking* should not be forced. I believe that a breach or repudiation of the covenant by either party is grounds for Scriptural divorce by the other, and that a failure in this area would be a form of disobedience on the part of the son/daughter involved.
13) I believe that Scripture teaches that, in general, there should be no intervening time period between ‘sister and brother’ and ‘husband and wife’ (ie asleep to betrothed). (One notable exception would be an unpaid bride price, see Caleb’s daughter for example)
On the nature of the authority relationships
14) I believe that a fathers authority over his daughter continues until her marriage, at which point the new husband gains all of her father’s authority. I believe that the fathers authority would re-exist if her husband dies and she returns to her father’s household.
15) I believe that, while the nature of their relationship can and indeed must change over the years and through various circumstances, the fathers authority over his son is permanent.
16) I believe that all human authority relationships (husband, father, king, elder) can operate only within their allowed jurisdiction. Thus all human authorities have their limits, and times when they are not to be *obeyed*. And that there are times when, on God’s direct order, these relationships are changed outside of their normal boundaries. But these are exceptional and not normative.
17) I believe that, generally, the son is to remain a part of his father’s household, and that his economy is to be part of that economy in general.
On the nature of the sufficiency of scripture
18) I believe that, as for all other areas of life and Godliness, Scripture is sufficient and clear in this area.
19) I believe that, while different circumstances dictate different paths to marriage, this does not mean that Scripture is insufficient or unclear in its dictation of each particular marriage path; each path should follow the clear and sufficient Scriptural principles that lead down that path.
20) I believe that, for a virgin son of a Godly father marrying the virgin daughter of a Godly father; outside of such exceptional circumstances as slavery, the levirate law, etc., the principles involved are such as I have outlined above: in general that the son and daughter should both remain asleep until they are already bound in covenant by their fathers, at an early age, etc..
21) I believe that, as with the regulative principle, we are to look at both pattern and precept in our actions in this area; and that, as there, we are neither to add to nor subtract from God’s Word in our actions.
On the nature of the discussion
22) I believe that we all need to come to the table ‘semper reformada’, and understand that God’s Word, in this area like so many others, will challenge and confront many of our understandings and throw us far out of our comfort zone.
23) I believe that we need to come to this discussion ‘tabla rasa’ or, as Doug Phillips likes to say, ‘on a desert island’; and that the ‘burden of proof’ needs to be neutral; seeking the preponderance of evidence and our best understanding from Scripture, and not taking our own culture as the ‘default’ position against which all else must answer at its peril.