Weddings

[Churchwork]

I read what Watchman Nee wrote on 227-229 of KKH regarding Matt. 19. What joy! What accuracy in reading of the Scriptures.

The Lord Gives His Final Decison (v.6) - "One Flesh"
- these are my findings of significance (Troy)

v. 4, three points deduced:
- marriage is instituted by God since He made both male and female.
- monogamy is God's will for He made only one Adam and one Eve.
- God dislikes divorce because the Lord in answering implies that it is not a question of the law, but a matter of origin.

Note these points:
- (A) marriage already commences when you have sex (see 228-229).
- (B) if an unsaved person has sex with one who had sex before then nonetheless, they are both under the blood of Christ and there should be no putting away. This means that indeed the law has passed, and there is no right to divorce for any cause as was the case under the law which was permitted during the dispensation of the law. Moses did not command this but permitted it ("suffered").
- (C) if you have sex with someone who was put away (divorced or separated because of cheating), then you commit yourself adultery. Seriously!
- bottom line: the Bible gives very little significance to ceremonial weddings since marriage takes place when two people have sex and are made one flesh. As a Christian you would not go to non-Christian weddings, not because they should not be married but because they reject Christ. People will blame you for not going to their ceremonial weddings and blame you for all kinds of speculative reasons, but the reason you don't go is because they still refuse Christ, which is making a mockery of the matter of origin.

I for one have peace in knowing why I don't go to non-Christian weddings, but would go to the wedding if there was only one Christian in the marriage.

[SealedEternal]

BIBLICAL MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE
OLD TESTAMENT AND NEW TESTAMENT
BASIC PRINCIPLES


"What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate"

Malachi 2:13"This is another thing you do: you cover the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping and with groaning, because He no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. 14"Yet you say, 'For what reason?' Because the LORD has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15"But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16"For I hate divorce," says the LORD, the God of Israel, "and him who covers his garment with wrong," says the LORD of hosts. "So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously." 17You have wearied the LORD with your words Yet you say, "How have we wearied Him?" In that you say, "Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and He delights in them," or, "Where is the God of justice?"

God makes it clear that He does not approve of divorce. In fact, He says He hates it. If God hates something, shouldn’t we avoid doing it at all costs?

It also says that the wife of his youth that he supposedly “divorced” is still his wife by covenant. That’s because you cannot end this covenant that you have made before God, but you can only violate it repeatedly. God says that we are required to fulfill our vows to Him, and therefore since He is the one who joins us together, then He is the one we are vowing before.

Matthew 5:31 "It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; 32but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. 33"Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.'34"But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 35or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. 36"Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. 37"But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil.

Genesis 2:22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

Matthew 19:6"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

God’s plan from the beginning was for one man, to be joined to one woman for a lifetime. Once you’re joined and make a covenant before God, you’re joined together and no man can separate you for any reason. You will find that virtually any civil court will offer to divorce you for virtually any reason and claim that you’re free to remarry, but God says if you do you’re committing adultery.

Romans 7:2-3 For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man. 4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

It clearly says here that we are bound until death, with no exceptions, and to divorce and remarry for any reason is adultery. It then compares the importance of the law of marriage being unbreakable except by death, to Christ's death on the cross being necessary for us to be freed from the law, and joined to Him.

Throughout the bible the marriage between a man and woman is compared to the marriage between Christ and the regenerated believer. The word “baptized” is actually a transliteration of the Greek word “baptizo” which means “to be immersed into” something else. The regenerate believer is actually immersed together with Christ, and become one with Him in order to receive the substitutive payment for our transgressions, just as God says a husband and wife are joined together to become one flesh.

Romans 6:3-11 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

We are literally immersed into Christ’s death and resurrection who is perfect, so that He could pay our sin debt, and we receive the benefit by being baptized (immersed) into Him. It is only by His death that we are released from the penalty of the law, just as we are only free of the law of marriage by the death of a spouse.

If death is not required to break the marriage bond, then Christ's death was not necessary to free us from the law. If that were the case, then Christ died needlessly. If there is no other way by which mankind can be saved, other that Christ's death and resurrection, then there is no way to break the marriage bond except through death.

I Corinthians 7:39A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

God’s word says that we are joined together until one spouse dies, and that remarriage is only an option after the death of a spouse. Therefore, If anyone remarries while their spouse is still alive, God says it’s not a legitimate marriage in His eyes, but actually an adulterous relationship, and you will be judged as an adulterer if continue in your sin. Jesus Christ Himself made it very clear that marriage lasts a lifetime, and divorce and remarriage is adultery.

Matthew 5:32but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19:3Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" 4And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? 6"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." 7They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?"8He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9"And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." 10The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." 11But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. 12"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

These two sections of scripture, make it clear that marriage and divorce are adultery, with one exception which is immorality or unchastity. Many people misunderstand the exception clause that Jesus gives here, and try to use these verses to suggest that Jesus is allowing divorce if someone commits adultery. This cannot be true for many reasons.

First of all the word for “immorality” or “unchastity” is (Greek "porneia") and "adultery" is (Greek "moicheia"). Both words are used in the same verses and each have a distinct meaning (Matthew 5:32; 15:19; 19:19; Mark 7:21, 1 Cor.6:9, Gal.5:19, Heb.13:4). These two different words with two different meanings clearly describe two different acts. If Jesus meant adultery, He surely would have used the term for adultery -- “moichao.” He was certainly not using terms carelessly, especially in disputing with legal experts.If he wanted to say that adultery is the exception, he would have used the proper word for adultery, rather than “immorality” which is a broad term that could mean different things in different contexts, which leads us to the second reason it isn’t adultery.

The context of these verses are of the Pharisees (Jewish law experts) asking “why did Moses command….” referring to the Jewish Moseic Law, and Matthew himself being a Levite was writing this gospel primarily to the Jews. In that context it is clear that we need to refer back to the moseic Law in order to understand what is being taught here, yet many Christian teachers tear these verses out of context in order to create a loophole for divorce and remarriage.

In Jewish marriage there was a betrothal period which was similar to an engagement, except that it was far more binding than what we are familiar with. They were considered husband and wife at the time of betrothal, even though the marriage hadn’t been consummated yet. The man could give her a writ of divorce during the betrothal, if he found her not to be a virgin, but could not divorce her for any other reason. This was because a clause of the marriage contract had not been fulfilled, in that the girl was not a virgin, as the man was led to believe when the contract was drawn up. The husband is the one who is being wronged in this case, because he has fulfilled his obligations. The girl and her father are the ones acting unjustly here by asserting that she was a virgin when she wasn't.

This law is covered in:

Deut. 22:13-21"If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and {then} turns against her, and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, 'I took this woman, {but} when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,' then the girl's father and her mother shall take and bring out the {evidence} of the girl's virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. "The girl's father shall say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter's virginity.' And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, and they shall fine him a hundred {shekels} of silver and give it to the girl's father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. "But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you.

This is the only “divorce” that is allowed anywhere in the Bible, and you’ll notice that it is before the consummation of the marriage, or immediately after. Many people try to use the immorality clause to suggest that God tolerates divorce, but this was specific to the Jews, and only before the consummation or immediately after. Once a couple was betrothed, they were considered husband and wife, and they needed a bill of divorcement in order to depart from one another. One example of this is regarding Mary and Joseph. Scripture says Mary was Joseph's wife (Matthew 1:20,24, Luke 2:5). But at the same time, she was betrothed to him:

Matthew 1:18-19, "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is another passage that defines a "betrothed virgin" as a "neighbor's wife" :

Deuteronomy 22:23-24, "If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and {another} man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor's wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.

Many false teachers will claim that Jesus can’t be talking about the betrothal period because He refers to them as husband and wife, and the betrothal is only an engagement and therefore Jesus wasn’t referring to it. As you can see they were husband and wife from the moment they were betrothed, and couldn’t divorce for any other reason except if unchastity was found. Deuteronomy 22:19 says that if she was innocent of his claims, “she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.” The law of no divorce until death do you part was in effect, except for this one very limited exception.

Interestingly, it is this exception that God uses to divorce Israel during their betrothal. The Jewish people would reap what they had sown, by being hard hearted and dealing treacherously with their wives, they would be divorced from God for their harlotry.

Hosea 2:19"I will betroth you to Me forever;
Yes, I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and in justice,
In lovingkindness and in compassion, 20 And I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness. Then you will know the LORD.

Jeremiah 3:8"And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.

The third reason that the exception clause cannot be for adultery is that it would defy common sense. Adultery cannot be both the sin and the justification for not being in sin at the same time. In other words, if divorce and remarriage is adultery, and adultery is the justification for divorce and remarriage, then any divorce and remarriage automatically becomes legal. It is obvious that Jesus Christ would not make such an error in reasoning.

The fourth reason that this cannot be referring to adultery in the consummated marriage, is that Jesus specifically says in verse 8 that this was never God’s plan, and that’s why the two Gospels that were written primarily to the Gentiles do not offer any exception. The Gospel of Luke was written primarily to the Greeks, and Mark was written primarily to the Romans. It is absurd to suggest that Mark and Luke would be so careless as to miss such important information as whether or not Jesus taught that "adultery" is grounds for divorce in their gospels, knowing that the audience of their day didn't necessarily have the ability to read Matthew's gospel along with theirs as we do today. The reason Mark and Luke do not mention the exceptive clause is they were addressing a predominately Gentile audience while Matthew was addressing a Jewish one. Then why do so many Gentile Pastors refer only to Matthew, and totally ignore Mark and Luke when teaching on marriage?

Mark 10:11And He said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; 12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."

Notice that if divorce itself nullified the marriage, then if "single" or "unmarried" status was obtained through divorce, it certainly would not have been adultery for such people to then go on to marry someone else. But Jesus teaches otherwise. Since remarriage after divorce is adulterous, therefore divorce does not nullify a marriage.

Luke 16:15And He said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God. 16"The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17"But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail. 18"Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.

The second half of verse 18 speaks of a woman who did not take the active part in divorcing her husband, but rather was the one divorced by her husband, just like in Matthew 5:32, which says that he “makes her commit adultery” by divorcing her. There is no distinction between who left who, as far as adultery is concerned. Some teach that the “innocent” party can remarry, but they are contradicting our Lord and Savior, and causing others to commit adultery. There is no provision anywhere in the Bible for either party to remarry without committing adultery.

Jesus also teaches in Luke 16:18 that a man that marries a divorced woman is living in adultery. Even if he had never been married himself, because he’s guilty of marrying another mans wife, even if the other man divorced her.

Some people claim that Deut. 24 shows that God tolerates divorce, but it is in fact regulating the practice that had been instituted in Deuteronomy 22:13-21.

Deuteronomy 24: 1-4"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts {it} in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man's {wife,} and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts {it} in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, {then} her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.

The wording here is almost identical to Deuteronomy 22. The man found indecency (immorality) in her during the betrothal period. It has to be during the betrothal period because that's the only time he would be allowed under the law to give a writ of divorce. There is no new grounds for divorce offered here, but these verses are simply regulating an existing practice. He was therefore allowed to divorce her, since that was just grounds. She then became betrothed to another man. If that man gave her a writ, or died, the first man can't remarry her.

This new regulation states that a man is not required to have the woman stoned to death as Deut. 22 commanded, but could give her a writ of divorce instead. It also says that if he does divorce her legally, and she becomes another man’s wife, he cannot change his mind and take her back later. He had the right to give her a writ under Jewish law, because he assumed she was a virgin, but found indecency in her. He still could have married her when he found out she was indecent, but chose to reject her. The principle being taught here is that if he rejected her then when he found her to be indecent, then he has no right to accept her later on, after she was with another man. The real meaning is prophetic, and reveals that God is not going to take Israel back for her immorality.

God uses this type in the New Testament as well. Now that He is no longer bound to Israel, His elect is called the bride of Christ. He can justly be joined to us, because of Israel’s immorality. Jesus Christ’s marriage to the Church is explained in Ephesians 5:22-33, among other places.

Ephesians 5:22Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,

Ephesians 5:32This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.

God uses the institution of marriage to teach principles about our relationship to Him throughout the Bible. He rightly divorced Israel during the betrothal period for immorality, and is now preparing a marriage with the Church. It’s amazing that some people who believe once saved always saved, don’t believe in once married always married.

As gentiles, we don't have a betrothal period, and therefore we have no provision for giving a writ of divorce. The good news is that Christ can't give us one either. Think about what kind of a bride He's getting. A bunch of wretched, lowlife, sinners like us. Yet, he is totally committed, and will be absolutely faithful to His rather unattractive bride. He expects us to do the same, even though that may be difficult in some cases.

It seems absolutely clear. No divorce and definitely no remarriage, but some people claim that I Corinthians 7 offers some exceptions to God’s absolute command. We’ll look at the verses that are most often twisted to suggest that Paul changed the law regarding marriage and divorce from what Jesus had said earlier. This table shows how Paul covers all four possible scenarios in both genders so that there is no situation left out.


Category
Men
Women

Vs. 8-9
Spouses died
"Unmarried"
(Widowers)
Widows
Vs. 10-11
Married considering divorce
Wife
Husband
Vs. 12
Married with non-Christian spouse
any brother
has a wife that is an unbeliever
And the woman
who has an unbelieving husband
Vs. 25-38
Virgins
if you (masculine) marry, you have not sinned;
if a virgin (feminine) marrys,
she has not sinned.

As you can see, this is an organized, and all inclusive message. How then can people use these verses to show that Paul was undoing the teachings of Jesus Christ, and the teachings of himself as well? It is partly because of the misunderstanding of terms. One of these terms that Paul often uses is a Greek word which is translated as “unmarried” and people assign whatever meaning to this word, that fits their doctrine. We’ll look at these controversial verses now.

I Corinthians 7:6But this I say by way of concession, not of command. 7Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that. 8But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. 9But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

This teaching is directed at the widowers and widows. The word “unmarried” or (Greek “agamas”) here is the proper word of that day for widower. It’s a broad term that means unmarried, or “one who is in a negative state of marriage”, but those who try to pervert God’s word assign specific meanings to this word in order to make the verses fit their doctrine. In this verse, the word is in the male sense, and in the context of being with widows, it would be understood to mean widowers.

There are some who try to claim that this word always means divorced people, which cannot be true for several reasons. First, there is a word for divorced in Greek, but Paul never uses it in this chapter, because God doesn’t recognize divorce other than the Jews in the betrothal period. The word “unmarried” can be confusing because it’s so broad, and refers to different groups of people in different contexts. This is primarily a translation problem since English people see “unmarried” in these different verses and assume they’re all referring to one specific group.

Secondly, If these verses were all referring to divorced people, then there is an obvious contradiction. Verse 8 is telling the unmarried to feel free to marry, and verse 10 is telling them to remain unmarried. Thirdly, if these are all divorced people then Paul forgot the widowers. He covered every other group in both genders, but missed widowers, and taught about the divorced twice, and contradicted himself in the process.

I Corinthians 7:10-11But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

Here Paul is giving his teaching in regard to the married. This says that we should not separate for any reason, but if we do, we must seek to reconcile with our spouse, and if we are unable, we are still forbidden to remarry. It is clear, and offers no provision for divorce and remarriage.

The “unmarried” here is in the female sense, and is saying that the woman who left her husband can’t remarry. Those who try to twist the Word of God, try to say that the unmarried person is no longer bound to her husband, and therefore is free to remarry, but this contradicts the clear wording that says she is forbidden to remarry.

1 Corinthians 7:12But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.

I Corinthians 7:15Yet if the unbelieving oneleaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not underbondagein such cases, but God has called us to peace.

These verses specifically state that the Christian can never leave their spouse even if he or she is an unbeliever. Verse 12 is translated divorce, but is actually “aphiemi” in the Greek which means “send away”. If the unbeliever consents to live with you, you must stay together no matter what, but if the unbeliever leaves, you are not bound to live together. Paul offers this provision with the understanding that we cannot force unbelievers to respect God’s laws. In other words, if an unbeliever insists on leaving, you can’t chain them to the wall in order to keep God’s command, but for the sake of peace, you must allow them to leave.

Those who try to legitimize adultery claim that “bound” means the marriage bond. That’s another example of twisting a broad term to fit a pre-conceived doctrine. The Greek word here is “douloo” which means “enslaved” and the context here is “consents to live with”, so the proper understanding here is that the believer is not enslaved to live with the unbeliever, if the unbeliever chooses to leave. There is no mention of the marriage bond anywhere in this verse or Chapter for that matter, except vs. 39 which says you can’t break it. The word for bound in verse 39 is the Greek word “deo” which has a much different meaning, and refers to the bondage of the law. It is definitely adding to the text to suggest that there is any provision for divorce and remarriage here, and you would of course be in contradiction to the numerous other verses already covered.

I Corinthians 7:25Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy. 26I think then that this is good in view of the present distress, that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.

The last group Paul’s covering here is virgins. He establishes in verse 26 that the virgins he’s speaking to are men. He tells them that it is good to remain as they are because of distress, but if they marry they have not sinned. He then covers the female virgins, and says the same applies to them. This is a parenthetical statement, where the references to the male and female virgins is broken up by verses 26 and 27 which are a reference to the virgins as well as anyone else, that staying in whatever state of marriage they are in, is wise in his opinion because of the distressful situation of that day.

Some false teachers claim that those released from a wife are the divorced, and that Paul is saying that they are free to remarry, which cannot be true for a couple of reasons. First of all, that would be an obvious contradiction to the many verses that say this would be adultery. Those who have been released from a wife must be widowers, because the Bible clearly teaches elsewhere that the only way to be released from a wife is by her death.

Secondly, they are misapplying the structure of Paul’s statement, which is clearly referring to virgins, and saying that they are free to marry, even though Paul says it is his opinion that it is not wise to do so.

Last of all, verse 39 is absolutely clear, and those who try to twist the other verses have an obvious problem. You’re bound until death. The only provision anywhere in the Bible, is after your spouse dies. Anything else is adultery.

I Corinthians 7:39A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

This doctrine is perverted in so many different ways in so-called Christian Churches, because people don’t want to accept what the Lord has said. In our society of widespread divorce and adultery, no one wants to hear the truth, and pastors twist God’s word to attract congregations, because few people today are willing to accept sound doctrine. It is equally the fault of the congregations because they accumulate such teachers to avoid dealing with their sin. The Bible said that would be so.

I Timothy 4:1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron

II Timothy 4:3For the time will come when they (Christians) will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires;"4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

Jude 1:4For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

They’ve seared their own conscience to the point that they will contradict the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ, and yet call Him their Lord and Savior, while they promote licentiousness. They hypocritically rebuke others such as homosexuals, while they themselves live in adultery. What does God’s word say about those who contradict our Lord?

I Timothy 6:3-5If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.

Matthew 5:18-19“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

The sad part about it is that those who fall for these false teachers, will not inherit the kingdom as a result.

Hebrews 13:4Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

I Corinthians 6:9-10Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Proverbs 30:5Every word of God is tested;
He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
6Do not add to His words
Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar.
20This is the way of an adulterous woman:
She eats and wipes her mouth,
And says, "I have done no wrong."

[Churchwork]

As best as I can tell, I believe we agree. And yes, homosexuality is a sin.

[SealedEternal]

As best as I can tell, I believe we agree. And yes, homosexuality is a sin.
I'm Glad that you agree that any divorce and remarriage is adultery. Most people try to take one or two verses out of context to create a loophole, while avoiding the rest of scripture.

I disagree with your position that fornication is a marriage however. I assume you're basing that on these verses:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days."

What it says is that under Jewish Law if you were caught in fornication, you would be required to marry her. The fornication itself wasn't the "marriage" but it was legal grounds to force you to marry her.

The only other verse I can think of is this one:

1Corinthians 6:16 Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH."

In its proper context, it isn't saying that fornication = marriage. It is saying that when a Christian fornicates, they are bringing God with them which is unacceptable.

1Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. 12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body.14Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through His power. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! 16 Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH." 17 But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.18 Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.

Paul's point here is that Christians shouldn't be fornicators, because we have been washed, sanctified, and justified by Jesus Christ, and our body is the temple of His Spirit. A person who is regenerated and has been joined eternally to Christ, cannot also be joined with immorality. We are no longer the "gods" of ourselves, because we have been bought with a price, and are no longer the lord of our own bodies.

Fornication is a sin, and is condemned repeatedly in scripture, but it is not marriage. It is a perversion of God's plan for human sexuality and is just as abominable as homosexuality, but in order to have a marriage, there must be a covenant where both parties agree that they are one flesh for life. If the act of sexual immorality is committed without a covenant, it is simply fornication.

[Churchwork]

I disagree with your position that fornication is a marriage however. I assume you're basing that on these verses:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days."
This is a good verse that shows that when you sleep with someone you ought to have the intention of being with that person instead of using them.


What it says is that under Jewish Law if you were caught in fornication, you would be required to marry her. The fornication itself wasn't the "marriage" but it was legal grounds to force you to marry her.
Remember, we are not under the law, but Jesus came to fill up the law.

The only other verse I can think of is this one:

1Corinthians 6:16 Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH."

In its proper context, it isn't saying that fornication = marriage. It is saying that when a Christian fornicates, they are bringing God with them which is unacceptable.
It's saying sex is uniting bodies to be one so this should not be violated.

1Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. 12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body.14Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through His power. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! 16 Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH." 17 But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.18 Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.


Paul's point here is that Christians shouldn't be fornicators, because we have been washed, sanctified, and justified by Jesus Christ, and our body is the temple of His Spirit. A person who is regenerated and has been joined eternally to Christ, cannot also be joined with immorality. We are no longer the "gods" of ourselves, because we have been bought with a price, and are no longer the lord of our own bodies.
Fornication, using your words, is still marriage, that of uniting bodies. When you are using the word fornication that you use in reference to my words, "marriage already commences when you have sex" (or ought to), I don't mean fornicators sinning.

Fornication is a sin, and is condemned repeatedly in scripture, but it is not marriage. It is a perversion of God's plan for human sexuality and is just as abominable as homosexuality, but in order to have a marriage, there must be a covenant where both parties agree that they are one flesh for life. If the act of sexual immorality is committed without a covenant, it is simply fornication.
Sex, the act of fornicating, not fornication the sin, is in view here about marriage. The marriage ceremony that follows should not be the uniting. Before someone gets married they ought to be agreed together just as they ought to be agreed together when having sex; thus, marriage begins at sex, or even before.

Be careful not to be sly or cunning between the slipping in your words of fornicating, fornication as though they are my words, "marriage already commences when you have sex". Now, if you disagree with me about this, then you would justify having sex for recreation as being acceptable without and outside marriage. This would be the negative consequence of your belief, but I don't find this belief in the Scriptures, do you?

[SealedEternal]

Be careful not to be sly or cunning between the slipping in your words of fornicating, fornication as though they are my words, "marriage already commences when you have sex". Now, if you disagree with me about this, then you would justify having sex for recreation as being acceptable without and outside marriage. This would be the negative consequence of your belief, but I don't find this belief in the Scriptures, do you?
If sex is immediately marriage, then fornication cannot exist. Anyone who has ever "fornicated" and later married is living in adultery because they are living with someone other than their wife.

Disagreeing with your position, does not require me to accept "sex for recreation" because that is still a sin which is called fornication in the Bible, and God says "fornicators will not inherit His kingdom."Again, If you're correct, there could be no such thing as fornication, because every act of unmarried sex would result in an instant marriage.

[Churchwork]

If sex is immediately marriage, then fornication cannot exist. Anyone who has ever "fornicated" and later married is living in adultery because they are living with someone other than their wife.
Not so. Fornication exists because what is to be marriage uniting bodies by sex is not treated accordingly. Living in sin is sin because of not accepting together that the having sex was in fact marriage. Your rejecting of this makes fornication acceptable to live in sin before marriage or after marriage because you do not realize marriage was to be established as a matter of origin when bodies are united.

Now, I have shown you fornication can exist if sex is immediate marriage, because of not accepting sex is marriage. You should accept this truth.

Disagreeing with your position, does not require me to accept "sex for recreation" because that is still a sin which is called fornication in the Bible, and God says "fornicators will not inherit His kingdom."Again, If you're correct, there could be no such thing as fornication, because every act of unmarried sex would result in an instant marriage.
If you accept this is a sin, then you must accept that the sex is marriage in God's eyes and when not treated as such by the partners, they are sinning. Again, fornicating is because they do not accept the marriage in sex so by waiting even one day after having sex to be married is one day of fornicating.

There is no such thing as unmarried sex. All sex is married sex. Do you see how you mistakenly assumed there can be some sex which is unmarried? It is no the case at all. You would be going against God's Word which says when two bodies are united they are one; this is marriage.

By not accepting this you unwittingly accept such a thing as unmarried sex, as you say.

[SealedEternal]

Your entire position is unscriptural and illogical.

Fornication is a perversion of God's plan for one man and one woman to be joined for life. I do not have to accept fornication as marriage in order to call it a sin. It's a sin because it's rebellion against God. If you don't turn from it and repent you will be in eternal flames, but it is not a marriage.

Marriage is a covenant in which God joins you together. Fornication is a sin that is a perversion of God's law. They are totally opposite. It is a sin because it is perverting God's will which is abominable to Him, but it is not the covenant of marriage. That is not acceptable to God or me, and I have never said that it was.

I don't have to accept fornication as a marriage because you say it is so. God calls it a sin, so it cannot be a marriage. If it were a marriage, it would be legal. It would be your actual marriage later that would be a sin, because you would be committing adultery against your "wife" who you fornicated with originally. That's absolutely absurd.

[Churchwork]

Your entire position is unscriptural and illogical.

Fornication is a perversion of God's plan for one man and one woman to be joined for life. I do not have to accept fornication as marriage in order to call it a sin. It's a sin because it's rebellion against God. If you don't turn from it and repent you will be in eternal flames, but it is not a marriage.
One man and one woman to be joined for life is not a fornication. How evil to say so. I did not ask you to accept fornication as marriage in order to call it a sin, for marriage is not fornication. How strange. Fornication is a rebellion against God, not marriage. When two people have sex it is marriage and if not treated as such it is fornication in what is suppose to be marriage for not treating it as marriage. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It is a sin to bear false witness or to try to be cunning and couth, subject to eternal flames.

Marriage is a covenant in which God joins you together. Fornication is a sin that is a perversion of God's law. They are totally opposite. It is a sin because it is perverting God's will which is abominable to Him, but it is not the covenant of marriage. That is not acceptable to God or me, and I have never said that it was.
Then if you don't accept that it is, you will accept all sex is to be treated as marriage and any that is not is fornicating. You must accept this for it is true.

You're not going against me at the source, but God, for God considers marriage at sex, uniting bodies as one.

I don't have to accept fornication as a marriage because you say it is so. God calls it a sin, so it cannot be a marriage. If it were a marriage, it would be legal. It would be your actual marriage later that would be a sin, because you would be committing adultery against your "wife" who you fornicated with originally. That's absolutely absurd.
I never said to accept fornicating as marriage, so why sin bearing false witness? Do you see the trap you caught yourself in? The only way out is to repent and accept marriage begins at sex when uniting bodies. If you can't, it is because you let your flesh win or the evil spirits' thoughts in your head.

The world's ways is legal marriages, but it is not the same with God's marriages. This is a matter of origin as God made one man and one woman to be united as one body. The Bible places little significance on ceremonial weddings. Sexual partners are already married according to God's law; ceremonies are not the binding act for they are merely outward show after the fact.

Two people are together for life when they have sex; they are not fornicating, or rather, they would not be, if they accepted this act in God's eyes. Why accuse God by saying they are not one body united? Shame on you! Your conclusion you noted is absurd because your premise is false leading to your false conclusion, when you think a couple is fornicating when they are committed to each other for life, or are suppose to be in God's eyes.

I can see you will never repent of this false teaching of yours where you are focused on the outer ceremony and not God's Word that when two people have sex they are united as one body as a matter of origin.

This is your sin. You are not disagreeing with me, but with God. He is the one you are really against here.

[SealedEternal]

One man and one woman to be joined for life is not a fornication. How evil to say so. I did not ask you to accept fornication as marriage in order to call it a sin, for marriage is not fornication. How strange. Fornication is a rebellion against God, not marriage. When two people have sex it is marriage and if not treated as such it is fornication in what is suppose to be marriage for not treating it as marriage. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It is a sin to bear false witness or to try to be cunning and couth, subject to eternal flames.

Why do you have to lie to make your case? You know I didn't say that one woman and one man for life is fornication. You're a phony and a liar. Then you say "How evil to say so" when you know full well I never said so. You're a self righteous hypocrite who has no interest in truth, and lies and mischaracterizes others to puff yourself up.

I don't know why I wasted my time trying to reaon with you. You're not interested in finding the truth, but only in debating, and defending your false theology. You're unreasonable, intellectually dishonest, and arrogant. It's pointless to discuss anything with you any longer.

[Churchwork]

Why do you have to lie to make your case? You know I didn't say that one woman and one man for life is fornication. You're a phony and a liar. Then you say "How evil to say so" when you know full well I never said so. You're a self righteous hypocrite who has no interest in truth, and lies and mischaracterizes others to puff yourself up.
Why accuse me of lying? It is a sin to bear false witness. If for you one man and one woman for life is not a fornication then you should accept that marriage is at sex. This has been your whole issue that it is not which is rejecting being made one body. If you can't accept this, you are a phony and a liar. This was your first accusation on the matter and it shows something wrong about you. Indeed, "how evil to say so". I know full well this is what you are saying. You are a self-righteous hypocrite who has no care for the truth and who lies, accuses falsely and mischaracterizes others to self-exalt yourself. Remember, this began with your claim that marriage is not at sex, but after, thus allowing for fornication in your corrupted conscience before what you think to be marriage afterwards. Marriage is not built on fornicating but uniting bodies as one.

Again, here is your mischaracterization which is self-centered, when you wrote, "I disagree with your position that fornication is a marriage however".


I never said fornication is a marriage. I said sex is a marriage: "(A) marriage already commences when you have sex". Do you see how the devil has caused you to confuse sex as being the sin of fornication which causes you deceive, to act like that great false accuser. You are exposed. Only the devil could turn (A) into what you said in your accusation.

And you also had the gall to say, "You know I didn't say that one woman and one man for life is fornication". Then why accuse? You can't have it both ways. Be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

You are too self-righteous to retrace to the beginning your first mistake in your second post in this thread. See how you misrepresent in your flesh, and repent to God. If you can not, you know there is something very wrong with you and it would be due to the evil spirits who have a hold on you.


I don't know why I wasted my time trying to reaon with you. You're not interested in finding the truth, but only in debating, and defending your false theology. You're unreasonable, intellectually dishonest, and arrogant. It's pointless to discuss anything with you any longer.
You are not reasoning with me. You are being selfish. You refuse to see your first false accusation in this thread confusing fornication with sex commencing marriage of uniting bodies as one. This is not a sin to unite as one, for as a matter of origin God willed there was one man and one woman.

This is your false theology to accuse in your conniving and to attempt to deflect from this sinful accusatory behavior that misrepresents bearing false witness. You don't care for the truth, but are projecting your own spirit of dissension and defending your own false theology that marriage does not commence at sexually uniting bodies, but afterwards, making sex fornicating, which it is not. The Bible does not place emphasis on ceremonies, nor should you. You are unreasonable, intellectually dishonest and arrogant. You should not speak again unless it is words of repentance. But so often the false accuser can not repent because something is wrong for him to falsely accuse in the first place. Sin begets sin.

Since you can't repent from your first false accusation which you are trying to cover up, I realize you won't repent, and your being so arrogant and belligerent you do not fit in well with this forum, so what else can be done but ban you! Your behavior pattern will not change.

[Simba]

I must apologise for my english (i will do this lots)I agree that man and woman should marry for love and that when married they must live with each others. And that divorce is not good in Gods view / ideasBut i am confused as why God is against gay people when he made them that way??(i am not gay i must say)

[Churchwork]

He did not make them that way. Understand that they are born into sin, so aberrations due to sin will no doubt manifest, and though some may have such tendency, they are perfectly capable of rejecting that sin.

[Simba]

Hi again :) im still online heheWhen you say born into sin, do you mean that the evil their parent did has been put into the child? I hate to think that the bad my parent did has been put within me when born :(I want to be good and follow God, but why do i get told off (sorry cant think of right word) by God if its my parent fault

[Churchwork]

Though it is not your fault that you were born into sin, it is your fault if you don't receive forgiveness of your sins. You will not be forgiven if you do not believe in Christ.

It is not your parents fault. It is Adam's fault.

[FoC]

Why accuse me of lying? It is a sin to bear false witness.
this is very typical behavior for david (sealedeternal)
We had to ban him from our forum recently as he insisted on breaking the one and only rule we have put into place there in his very first post. Then keeps harassing us by by passing the IP block and continuing to harass our members.
You may do well to simply report his behavior to moderation and ignore him.

[FoC]

Why do you have to lie to make your case? You know I didn't say that one woman and one man for life is fornication. You're a phony and a liar. Then you say "How evil to say so" when you know full well I never said so. You're a self righteous hypocrite who has no interest in truth, and lies and mischaracterizes others to puff yourself up.

I don't know why I wasted my time trying to reaon with you. You're not interested in finding the truth, but only in debating, and defending your false theology. You're unreasonable, intellectually dishonest, and arrogant. It's pointless to discuss anything with you any longer. THIS is the kind of behavior, david, that gets you into trouble.
I know because Ive done it enough myself.

Hopefully moderation here wont tolerate your calling their members names and behaving so rudely as you do everywhere else.

Just because folks see thru your errant views doesnt make them unreasonable or dishonest or arrogant.

Why dont you simply argue your case and walk away if this is so aggitating for you to deal with so that you end up calling people names.

Im new here, and Im giong to report this immediately to moderation myself.

[FoC]

Not so. Fornication exists because what is to be marriage uniting bodies by sex is not treated accordingly. Living in sin is sin because of not accepting together that the having sex was in fact marriage. Your rejecting of this makes fornication acceptable to live in sin before marriage or after marriage because you do not realize marriage was to be established as a matter of origin when bodies are united.

Now, I have shown you fornication can exist if sex is immediate marriage, because of not accepting sex is marriage. You should accept this truth.


If you accept this is a sin, then you must accept that the sex is marriage in God's eyes and when not treated as such by the partners, they are sinning. Again, fornicating is because they do not accept the marriage in sex so by waiting even one day after having sex to be married is one day of fornicating.

There is no such thing as unmarried sex. All sex is married sex. Do you see how you mistakenly assumed there can be some sex which is unmarried? It is no the case at all. You would be going against God's Word which says when two bodies are united they are one; this is marriage.

By not accepting this you unwittingly accept such a thing as unmarried sex, as you say.
Churchwork.
I will say that I disagree with your view wholeheartedly.

There is a such thing as unmarried sex....please see 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 where each man is told to avoid 'whoredom' to have his own wife.
By what you present, this would be a fairly pointless statement as the woman he was having sex with....ANY woman he was having sex with...would literally be his wife....thus the passage is entirely without meaning.

[FoC]

I read what Watchman Nee wrote on 227-229 of KKH regarding Matt. 19. What joy! What accuracy in reading of the Scriptures.

The Lord Gives His Final Decison (v.6) - "One Flesh"
- these are my findings of significance (Troy)

v. 4, three points deduced:
- marriage is instituted by God since He made both male and female.
- monogamy is God's will for He made only one Adam and one Eve.
- God dislikes divorce because the Lord in answering implies that it is not a question of the law, but a matter of origin.

Note these points:
- (A) marriage already commences when you have sex (see 228-229).
- (B) if an unsaved person has sex with one who had sex before then nonetheless, they are both under the blood of Christ and there should be no putting away. This means that indeed the law has passed, and there is no right to divorce for any cause as was the case under the law which was permitted during the dispensation of the law. Moses did not command this but permitted it ("suffered").
- (C) if you have sex with someone who was put away (divorced or separated because of cheating), then you commit yourself adultery. Seriously!
- bottom line: the Bible gives very little significance to ceremonial weddings since marriage takes place when two people have sex and are made one flesh. As a Christian you would not go to non-Christian weddings, not because they should not be married but because they reject Christ. People will blame you for not going to their ceremonial weddings and blame you for all kinds of speculative reasons, but the reason you don't go is because they still refuse Christ, which is making a mockery of the matter of origin.

I for one have peace in knowing why I don't go to non-Christian weddings, but would go to the wedding if there was only one Christian in the marriage.
Hi churchwork.
This is my page on 'one flesh'...my conclusions based on my own studies.
Feel free to comment where you wish, possibly we can discuss our differing views :)


What is ''one flesh'' and what is it that God joins together?

Firstly let us see and agree that ''one flesh'' is sexual relations between a man and a woman.
To prove this we see that a husband and wife will become ''one flesh''..

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

Eph 5:31 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."

We see that a husband and wife will be ''one flesh''.
to further understand what this ''one flesh'' is lets look to something outside the marriage union....

Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her?
For "the two," He says, "shall become one flesh."
(1Co 6:16-)

Paul shows that even having sex with a harlot, one to whom we arent married, obviously, is the same as ''one flesh'' in marriage.
Paul even quotes God/Jesus when he states..."For "the two," He says, "shall become one flesh".

A man is also 'one flesh' or 'one body' with a harlot he is with (1 Cor 6:16) showing that 'one flesh' is not exclusive to the marriage union.
So we see that ''one flesh'' is merely the sexual union between a man and a woman, married or not.
================================================== =============================
If anyone other than Jesus would understand what 'one flesh' was, it would be Moses.
The man wrote the law, we can rest assured that he understood Gods intent from the beginning.

That Moses were ever permitted to allow divorce/remarriage (as proven in Deut 24:1-4) shows absolutely that this perpetual 'one flesh' bond is nothing more than unscriptural nonsense.

Moses had permitted a man to put away a wife just because she found no 'favor in his eyes''.
She was permitted to REmarry.
*IF* 'one flesh' from the beginning were UNbreakable, then so it would be in Moses day, Moses would have KNOWN that if it were the case, and ongoing adultery would have been the crime of this woman put away and REmarried, as she most likely would have been.

Are we naive enough to think that Moses was sentencing an innocent woman to hell by permitting her to REmarry ?
All he had to have done *IF* one flesh were perpetual was tell the INNOCENT they couldnt remarry so as to not be in 'adultery' as some suppose today.

But he didnt.

Because Moses understood that this one flesh is not continued perpetually when a divorce has happened.
If the divorce is scriptural, then the bond is broken, ended....no adultery is committed when one REmarries.
Just as in Jesus exception. He narrowed the allowance to fornication alone, but He did not change the definition of divorce, nor did HE disallow remarriage in the case where fornication has happened.

Adultery is committed now when a spouse is put away for any reason short of fornication, and we then remarry.
================================================== =============================
Lets look at Joseph and Mary now.
Firstly we know that Jesus was not illegitimate. He was born to two lawfully married people. The Jews accepted this and called Joseph Jesus' father (many not knowing any different).

*IF* marriage was not valid without consummation....the two being ''one flesh'' as it were, then Joseph and Mary wouldnt be ''married'' and Jesus would have been illegitimate....without a lawful earthly father.

Joseph had not yet been with Mary before Jesus was born, yet WAS said to be her ''husband'' and she his ''wife'' or espoused (betrothed) wife. He was going to put Mary away when he found her with child, showing that she was indeed his ''lawful'' wife....if she werent his wife he could have just left her obviously.

What bound Joseph to Mary was not sex, as is blindingly apparent, since they had had no sexual union at that point, but what DID bind them was they were joined in matrimony, Gods holy marital covenant.

So when we look at ''one flesh'', we can clearly see that because of 1 Cor. 6:16 that ''one flesh'' is sexual relations between a man and a woman, married or not.
And since we know that we arent married to the harlot just because we make ourselves ''one flesh'' with her, that this ''one flesh'' is NOT any tie that is unbreakable.

There is no such thing as breaking the ''one flesh'' union, otherwise 1 Cor. 6:16 would show that every person who has had sex with someone they werent married to is permanently ''one flesh'' with them for life...and we know that isnt the case based on the context of 1 Cor. 6.

Conclusions:
-''one flesh'' is sex, plain and simple.... as proven by 1 Corinthians 6:16
-Sex is not the tie that binds, the covenant is...as proven by Joseph and Mary.
-What binds a man and woman for life is the marriage covenant..... which we know is a conditional covenant, for Jesus has said ''except''.

*IF* ‘’one flesh’’ is what makes a man and wife ‘’married’’ (as some see it), then Joseph and Mary were NOT married and our Lord was born illegitimate.
Proof that is not the case is in Luke 3:23, Luke 4:24, John 1:45, John 6:42. Jesus WAS Josephs ‘’son’’ as far as being born into a LAWFUL, binding marriage covenant.

To add...
When the union is 'dissolved' is defined in Deut 24:1-4.
Jesus never altered that definition, He merely reigned in the allowances FOR the divorce.
When a divorce is filed for the reasons Jesus (GOD) has excepted for, THAT is when the marriage is 'dissolved'.

http://divorceandremarriage.bravehost.com/whatisoneflesh.html

[FoC]

Additionally, churchwork, I believe, based on Gods word, that an intent to be 'married' and faithful must be present to be married.

Now, under the law, if a man had sex with a woman not betrothed, he had to marry her and could not put her away all his days.

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. (Deu 22:28-29)

Notice it doesnt say he WAS marrried to her, she wasnt already married to him, but it shows clearly that she 'shall be' his wife as tho this is determined after the fact, not during the sexual act.

Marriage requires, as far as scripture goes, an intent to be married.
Ceremonies arent required, nor are ceasars licensing, but an intent to be husband and wife is required...otherwise every person we had sex with would be our wife and 1 Cor 7:1-2 is pretty much meaningless (as well as some other passages I could probably remember and post).

I hope this has been helpful.

I apologize for sealedeternals rudeness, thats his nature and not at all representative of Christ.