How do protestants deal with the question of consanguinity and validity of marriage?

I attempted to research this topic, and found many confusing essays, but nothing that made understanding the topic easier.

First I'd direct you to New Advent's article on the topic. But a lot of its discussion is about other cultures and about "natural law." So I read NA's article on natural law, which left me very confused. It appears that if it's any more distant than a first-degree relative, if one obtains the proper permission, the Catholic Church can approve the marriage. Curiously, the NA gives short shrift to the biblical scriptures on the topic, such as found in Leviticus. They've already been listed in this thread, so I won't repeat them.

There are events in the bible where what we would consider incestuous relationships were consummated. One example is Lot's daughters with their father; another is Abraham and Sarai, who were half-brother & sister. There are others as well.

I know of only one brief mention of the topic in the NT, which is in 1 Corinthians 5. The person having sex with his stepmother was put out of the church. It's not clear whether this was a marital relationship or not. Clearly Paul said it's not allowed. (In 2 Cor. 2:5-8 Paul recommends that the church restore this person to fellowship).

Modern Protestants, by and large I believe, don't really "deal" with this question at all. I bet certain denominations have rules about whom they'll marry or not, but it would require research to figure out the specific rules. Some Protestants will refer to the Levitical scriptures already mentioned. And I am aware of at least one church that umpires consanguinity according to the secular laws of the jurisdiction where the marriage takes place, which is, practically speaking, how I imagine most evangelical churches handle this issue.

Binding and loosing--there's another huge question looming in your original question. But I'll leave it alone. Christ's blessings to you.

p.s. Here's an interesting article on how consanguinity affects current Iraqi politics: http://www.isteve.com/cousin_marriage_conundrum.ht...

To be perfectly honest with you, this question has never occurred to me. As truthsayes points out, Leviticus 18 is the key text in scripture dealing with this issue. I would go further, however, and maintain that Lev 18 is *all* about marriage. All of the sexual prohibitions listed are based on the notion of marriage resulting in a man and woman becoming "one flesh" through sexual union. The incest laws prohibit marrying (sex=marriage in the biblical world of Leviticus) because these people are too similar to become one flesh; they share their father and mother's flesh So this is the passage I would go to if I were exploring consanguinity and marriage.

It is interesting that this passage of scripture is one of the most influential parts of the entire bible. Almost all of the incest laws of the West come from this text. Yet no one questions their validity. But the prohibition against a "man lying with a man" has been declared unacceptable. Amazingly, we are now entering in on the adventure of same gender marriage. Many quote this passage in the debate, but almost no one does so from within it's context. The entire point of the condemnation is based on the fact that same gender sex cannot result in marriage. The partners are too similar. That's why it is included in this particular chapter. I can't help but shake my head in dismay at the rhetoric on both sides when it comes to the issue of gay marriage. It seems as if neither side has taken the time to really read this part of the bible.

To answer you question: I follow the laws of the land, and those laws are based on this passage of scripture.

peace

Edit:

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say that Western law followed the Catholic Church in this regard. If I find the time, I'll do some research. But that sounds like a plausible source. Where else could it come from?

>> I find no mention of consanguinity and its relationship to marriage validity

>> in the Bible.

        Then I see you're not really familiar with your Bible, or the Spirit of the Law. Personally, I find that God's Law in Leviticus 18 and 20 deal with both subjects quite well.

Lev. 18:6 (KJV) None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.

Lev. 18:6 (GNB) The LORD gave the following regulations. Do not have sexual intercourse with any of your relatives.

        Sure, if you read all the verses, you won't find an explicit mention of the children of your parent's siblings. But I don't see a problem in that. The verse I quoted above does it for me. I feel all the other verses were merely making mention of several examples of what God disapproves. I consider that any relation for which I can name the ties, would classify that relation as being "near of kin."

        As for the validity of marriage... I'm not sure if you were actually asking what constitutes a marriage. But I think the following Law from God covers that quite nicely.

Exodus 22:16 (KJV) And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.

Exodus 22:16 (GNB) "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, he must pay the bride price for her and marry her.

        Thus you can see that every time a man sleeps with a woman, they are married in God's Eyes. Thus, without a formal marriage ceremony, a man commits fornication with the first woman he sleeps with -- but he is then married to her in God's Eyes (but still in need of the formal ceremony). After that, each new woman he sleeps with, he commits fornication, adultery, and polygamy. Three sins in one act.

God bless.

catholics have a ban on relationships of the 4 degree or 1st cousins once removed.i agree with this law.most protestants will allow 2nd or third cousins to marry.i have never incountered this problem.but i would try to talk them out of it and if they are set in there ways make sure they understand the problems they will incounter.

When it mentions adultry, we know that is sex outside the marriage arrangement. So for that to be a sin there has to be a marriage contract, some way of knowing when you broke the commandment.

They recognize the government of the land as the authority.

Romans 13:1,2 Who ever takes a stand against the government is taking a stand against the arrangement of God. It is legal law of the land that persons be married.

definite the marriage is valid, you could no longer away that ordinary. Ha! i would not complication approximately it, it may in all probability be greater hardship that it is nicely worth to have it corrected. i would not complication approximately it

Haha...you actually believe the power your church wields is ordained by God? That in itself is why Daniel prophesied that there would be a usurper who would sit in high places and blaspheme the most high God. Changing God's Laws for Pagan traditions...seasons and times. Imagine if you understood the book that for centuries your church would not permit the general public to read. You too would understand where your church stands in relation to the Harlot, Babylon, the Beast, and the Anti-Christ.

If you are speaking of incest, the moral regulations against it are quite specific in Leviticus 18:

"None of you shall approach a close relative to have sexual intercourse with her. I am the LORD.

"You shall not disgrace your father by having intercourse with your mother. Besides, since she is your own mother, you shall not have intercourse with her.

"You shall not have intercourse with your father's wife, for that would be a disgrace to your father.

"You shall not have intercourse with your sister, your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in your own household or born elsewhere.

"You shall not have intercourse with your son's daughter or with your daughter's daughter, for that would be a disgrace to your own family.

"You shall not have intercourse with the daughter whom your father's wife bore to him, since she, too, is your sister.

"You shall not have intercourse with your father's sister, since she is your father's relative.

"You shall not have intercourse with your mother's sister, since she is your mother's relative.

"You shall not disgrace your father's brother by being intimate with his wife, since she, too, is your aunt.

"You shall not have intercourse with your daughter-in-law; she is your son's wife, and therefore you shall not disgrace her.

"You shall not have intercourse with your brother's wife, for that would be a disgrace to your brother.

"You shall not have intercourse with a woman and also with her daughter, nor shall you marry and have intercourse with her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; this would be shameful, because they are related to her.

"While your wife is still living you shall not marry her sister as her rival; for thus you would disgrace your first wife."

---

The Jews were God's original people; they understood God's plan for sexuality when the rest of the world thought religion was for orgiastic sex.

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/PragerHomo...

The Church adopted the wisdom of the ancient Jews, developing and expanding on the original teaching. Incidentally, Western law recognizes these groundbreaking Hebrew insights today.

Cheers

Bruce

You are aware that the scripture gives such a right to the church that Jesus started. The FACT that the Catholic church is NOT that church is shrouded by ignorance and history.

Firstly, it did not give His church the right to "bind or loose" anything contrary to His law.

The scripture the Catholic church uses to "claim" it is Christ's churchis:

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In this verse the Greek word translated "Peter" is Petros meaning a small stone, a pebble. The greek word translated as "rock" is Petra meaning a massive stone, a boulder. It is evident from this that when Jesus said Peter, He was pointing at him, but when He said "rock" He was pointing at Himself. Further scriptural proof as to who the "Rock" is is given in :

1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Historical evidence shows that an attempt was made to "take control" of Christs church from within, causing true Christians to flee. As the "members ARE the church, effectively Christ's church fled. What remained was NOT.

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon discloses that the church that emerged at the beginning of the second century was VERY different than it had been.

The remarks about protestant churches are those from a mother to her daughters.

Rev 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

The Catholic church is revealed as the "woman" riding the beast in Revelation 17:3. As is revealed in Daniel 7:17, a "beast" is a civil government. The "beasts" in this chapter match the beasts in Revelation 13.

History shows this church as the motivation for the change in God's law of the Sabbath to Sunday, the "mark" of the beast.

The "MARK" is in the same locations as God's "SIGN" of His Sabbath.

Exo 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.

Exo 13:9 And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the LORD's law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath the LORD brought thee out of Egypt.

Forehead (beliefs) and hand (what we do).

Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

With the giving of the Law, Leviticus Chapter 18 lists the prohibitions against sexual behavior between daughters and fathers, sons and mothers, nephews and aunts, brothers and sisters etc. By definition this would rule out "marriage" between these relations.

However, to my knowlege there is no Biblical prohibition against cousins, distant or otherwise.

Leviticus 18:6-18 (New King James Version)

New King James Version (NKJV)

Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.

6 ‘None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD. 7 The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for theirs is your own nakedness. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, begotten by your father—she is your sister—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is near of kin to your father. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is near of kin to your mother. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law—she is your son’s wife—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness. 18 Nor shall you take a woman as a rival to her sister, to uncover her nakedness while the other is alive.