Marrying The Same Blood

[Jobeliano]

What I mean is for example, is it allowed to marry your own brother, sister, cousin,etc? Is there a verse that says it is not allowed?

 

[Lute]

no i dont believe there is any verse that says this. but science tells us that sisters an brothers procreating is not a very good thing. you have a much higher risk of birth defects and other problems. also there are tons of fish in the sea. i dont see why you would need to get get with a cousin or sibling...

 

[Nomad]

What I mean is for example, is it allowed to marry your own brother, sister, cousin,etc? Is there a verse that says it is not allowed?

Incest was forbidden under the Mosaic Law.

Lev 18:6 "None of you shall approach any one of his close relatives to uncover nakedness. I am the LORD.
Lev 18:7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness.
Lev 18:8 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife; it is your father's nakedness.
Lev 18:9 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether brought up in the family or in another home.
Lev 18:10 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son's daughter or of your daughter's daughter, for their nakedness is your own nakedness.
Lev 18:11 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife's daughter, brought up in your father's family, since she is your sister.
Lev 18:12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister; she is your father's relative.
Lev 18:13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister, for she is your mother's relative.
Lev 18:14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother, that is, you shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt.
Lev 18:15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son's wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness.
Lev 18:16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife; it is your brother's nakedness.
Lev 18:17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, and you shall not take her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter to uncover her nakedness; they are relatives; it is depravity.

There are those who say that these injunctions no longer apply under the New Covenant. The Apostle Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit doesn't seem to agree.

1Co 5:1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife.
1Co 5:2 And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.

Paul condemns this man for 'having' his father's wife, (stepmother), which is classified by Lev. 18:8 as incest. Paul says that this man's immorality is not tolerated even among pagans and that he should be removed from fellowship.

 

[veteran]

As far as I know, incest per the Book of Leviticus is STILL against the law in all U.S. states and still punishable by imprisonment. It's about having intercourse with any immediate family member (like mother, father, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, son, daughter,etc.). Leviticus includes more acts as abominations, like intercourse with beasts (which is against U.S. law). See Leviticus 18.

Before God's giving of His laws through Moses, half-sister and half-brother marrying was not condemned with Abraham and his wife Sari, for they were actually half-sister and half-brother (Gen.20:11-12).

After Abraham's days it must have been revealed as sin, because Noah's curse upon his grandson Canaan was about Noah's son Ham having incest with his own mother. To uncover they father's nakedness per Leviticus 18 & 20 means to have intercourse with one's own mother. That's what Ham did, and the offspring was Canaan. That was before God's giving of the law through Moses also. That shows at least by the time of Noah incest was a sin, though no law punishment was yet given.

 

[Anastacia]

It looks as though the previous posters have shown with scripture that we are not to marry a brother or a sister, etc.

From the Bible we can see that there were many cousin marriages.

I got this information from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Glad to research this for you. I hope this helps.


Two of the most famous are prominent in Genesis. Isaac was married to Rebekah. (Genesis 24:12–15).

Also, Rachel and Leah were both cousins of Isaac's son Jacob. Jacob loved Rachel and worked seven years for her father Laban in return for permission to marry (Genesis 28–29).

Jacob's brother Esau also married his cousin Mahalath, daughter of Ishmael.

According to many English Bible translations, a fourth example is the five daughters of Zelophehad, who married the "sons of their father's brothers" in the later period of Moses.

Caleb gives his daughter Achsah to his brother's son Othniel. (Joshua 15:17)

The daughters of Eleazer also married the sons of Eleazer's brother Kish in the still later time of David (1 Chronicles 23:22).

King Rehoboam and his wives Maacah and Mahalath were grandchildren of David (2 Chronicles 11:20).

 

[TexUs]

No immediate family for sure. Cousins is still creepy.

I could start to understand more of a second or third cousin situation. Generally second and third cousins aren't as close to your family. And they're far enough genetically removed (I'd think).

If you aren't biologically related I'd say that removes an even greater barrier for a second or third cousin. I still wouldn't want to marry someone I knew well as "family", biologically or not.

 

[mikefaulkner]

My theory on this may be misguided and not intended for literal translation but in a way if you all really want to look at it...we are all descendants from Adam and Eve and we are all said to be Brothers and Sisters in Christ...so we are all related...just a thought.

 

[archaeologist5]

What I mean is for example, is it allowed to marry your own brother, sister, cousin,etc? Is there a verse that says it is not allowed?

yes there is. God forbade not long after the flood. i am just not sure where the passage is found at the moment.

because Noah's curse upon his grandson Canaan was about Noah's son Ham having incest with his own mother. To uncover they father's nakedness per Leviticus 18 & 20 means to have intercourse with one's own mother

that is a new one. what credible sources do you have that back up that idea?

 

[australia]

that is a new one. what credible sources do you have that back up that idea?

Lev 18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

Lev 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Gen 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

 

[archaeologist5]

still, are you sure ham had incest with his mother as the passage does NOT make that claim.Gen 9:20-24 Since Noah was BEFORE the law was given to the Israleites at Sinai, i think you are stretching the lev. verses here to make a point you cannot prove. Ham and Noah's wife would both have to be put to death if you want to use those verses in LEv. clearly it means something else in the Gen. passage or there is more than 1 way to see one's father's nakedness.

 

[jacobtaylor]

Ask him about Cain and Able being twins and who the fathers are heteropaternal superfecundation

 

[whirlwind]

Lev 18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

Lev 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Gen 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

I agree Australia, those verses tell us what is meant. Last year I wrote a thread on this topic you might be interested in. From the study, it is my belief that the culprit wasn't Ham but....was Canaan:

Who Uncovered the Nakedness of Noah?​

After the flood.....

Genesis 9:21-24 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.​

Much more is being said than Ham seeing his naked daddy.

Leviticus 18:3,6,8 After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. (6) None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD. (8) The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.​

The three sons of Noah are listed in the order of "Shem, Ham, and Japeth: and unto them were sons born after the flood." [10:1] "And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan." [10:6]


If Ham was the youngest of Noah's sons...why was he listed in that order?


Bullinger wrote that "Japeth was the eldest." Ham was the middle son...and he believes Ham was termed "younger son" (in the following passage) as he was younger than Japeth, and "Shem was the youngest."


That doesn't make any sense to me. Would it be written that Noah knew "what his younger son had done unto him," if it meant he knew what his son that was younger than Japeth, who was the eldest, had done? :blink:

Genesis 9:22, 24-25 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. (24-25) And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him? And he said, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren."​

Why mention "Ham, the father of Canaan" and not Ham the father of....Cush, Mizraim and Phut...as well as Canaan? And too....Why curse Canaan and not Ham's other sons...why not curse Ham himself? I can only think of two reasons. Either Canaan was the result of what Ham did or....Canaan was the "younger son." Someone taught me that there is no term for biblical grandfathers, etc. Perhaps saying someone was your "son" could also mean your grandson in that time. Was Canaan referred to as Noah's "younger son?" But then, we have to contend with...."Ham...saw the nakedness...and told his two brethren."


Did Ham see what happened ("saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren") and report it to his two brothers or did Ham commit the act? It didn't say "Ham uncovered his father's nakedness" but rather "Ham saw the nakedness."


I see Canaan, the grandson of Noah and son of Ham, as the one doing the deed...hence he was cursed by Noah.




.

Ask him about Cain and Able being twins and who the fathers are heteropaternal superfecundation

They are twins...same mother, different father.



.

 

[archaeologist5]

From the study, it is my belief that the culprit wasn't Ham but....was Canaan:

yet the passage in God's word clearly states that it was HAM>

They are twins...same mother, different father.

this is heresy.

If Ham was the youngest of Noah's sons...why was he listed in that order?

if you look at the chapter on the table of nations you will find that Moses did not list many children in chronological order. it wasn't important to do so and if clarification was needed then it was given later in another verse.

 

[australia]

this is heresy.

1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one...

Was Adam 'that wicked one'?

 

[archaeologist5]

1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one...

Was Adam 'that wicked one'?

hat verse has nothing to do with biological fathers or cain and abel being twins. please read proverbs and highlight all the times it says to get wisdom and understanding. then ask for it from God.

 

[tomwebster]

still, are you sure ham had incest with his mother as the passage does NOT make that claim.Gen 9:20-24 Since Noah was BEFORE the law was given to the Israleites at Sinai, i think you are stretching the lev. verses here to make a point you cannot prove. Ham and Noah's wife would both have to be put to death if you want to use those verses in LEv. clearly it means something else in the Gen. passage or there is more than 1 way to see one's father's nakedness.

"Seeing your father's nakedness" is a Hebrew expression for having intercourse with your father's wife. It was not a sin against God at that time because there was not a law against it. When you read the text you will notice that it was Noah that cursed his son, not God. If your son has a baby by your wife you might get upset with your son.

 

[archaeologist5]

"Seeing your father's nakedness" is a Hebrew expression for having intercourse with your father's wife. It was not a sin against God at that time because there was not a law against it. When you read the text you will notice that it was Noah that cursed his son, not God. If your son has a baby by your wife you might get upset with your son.

just to remind you---noah wasn't a hebrew. and unless you have links to credible and legitimate scholars's websites which talk about this... hearsay is not credible.

keep in mind that Ham had a wife already and would not need to sleep with his mother and the passage clearly does not indicate any such activity: " Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vneyard. When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent...' Gen. 9: 20-1.

now unless you have other biblical passages that talk about this incident, NOT the ones in lev. as they do not apply here, then you have no reason to read into the words that sex took place between a mother and her son.

 

[tomwebster]

just to remind you---noah wasn't a hebrew. and unless you have links to credible and legitimate scholars's websites which talk about this... hearsay is not credible.

keep in mind that Ham had a wife already and would not need to sleep with his mother and the passage clearly does not indicate any such activity: " Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vneyard. When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent...' Gen. 9: 20-1.

now unless you have other biblical passages that talk about this incident, NOT the ones in lev. as they do not apply here, then you have no reason to read into the words that sex took place between a mother and her son.

So you think Noah cursed Canaan because _______. Sorry, but there are figures of speech that apply whether you like it or not. Noah cursed Canaan because Canaan was the child of Ham through his mother. It's not hearsay, it's SCRIPTURE!

 

[australia]

keep in mind that Ham had a wife already and would not need to sleep with his mother...

You're suggesting then, that not one married man in the history of time has slept with his mother?

 

[whirlwind]

yet the passage in God's word clearly states that it was HAM>

No, it didn't say Ham uncovered the nakedness but....Ham saw the nakedness.


Genesis 9:21-24 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

this is heresy.

No, it is written.

if you look at the chapter on the table of nations you will find that Moses did not list many children in chronological order. it wasn't important to do so and if clarification was needed then it was given later in another verse.

It was important.



.