Theology For Men of the West: One Flesh

Toad has been questioning his assumptions.  As a result…

I believe that up until now I have been wrong with regard to my exegesis on the issue of becoming one flesh as mentioned in Genesis 2:24. 

Whereas previously I believed the one flesh bond between man and woman was the result of marriage to a virgin, I now believe the spiritual bond created by God known as “one flesh” occurs each time a couple has sex regardless of their marital relationship or even the legitimacy of the relationship.  This is in harmony with Matthew 19:6 as well as 1st Corinthians 6:16, as I will demonstrate below.

From an exegetical standpoint this solidifies the doctrine that marriage begins when the eligible virgin has sexual intercourse.  By giving a better understanding of 1st Corinthians 6:16 it is easier to understand the interpretation of dabaq in Genesis 2:24.

The lack of a prohibition that forbids a man and woman who are eligible to marry from having sex points to the fact that “sex outside marriage” is not a sin.   Unfortunately this creates the specter of unrestrained sexuality in the minds of many, but perhaps a better understanding of becoming one flesh will ease those fears.

Recognizing the one flesh bond is created and strengthened with every act of sex reinforces the point that the man gives his consent and commitment to marriage every time he has sex, which results in a one flesh union of the man and woman.   If his purpose is marriage, he does nothing wrong.  If the purpose is any other reason his motives are questionable because once the one flesh bond is created, breaking it later will cause harm to the woman.

Yet, we live in a world filled with broken women and it isn’t that it’s necessary to break some eggs to make an omelet, the eggs are already broken.  A man must have wisdom.



Scripture only uses the term “one flesh” in Genesis 2:24 and when Genesis 2;24 is quoted elsewhere (Matthew 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5 and 1st Corinthians 6).  Genesis 2:24 is the law of marriage and the bond of one flesh is a synonym of marriage within the church.

Because marriage occurs at a certain point and then one is married, it’s assumed the bond of one flesh is created once and exists afterward in the same way we assume the husband only gives his commitment to marriage at a wedding ceremony. Yet, marriage is a type of the relationship between Christ and His church so we should understand there is more to it than that.  There is a point at which a person is justified (becomes a Christian), but following that a Christian goes through the process of sanctification as they grow in Christ.  First one becomes a Christian, then one grows as a Christian.

In the same way a marriage is formed with sexual intercourse and that act produces a spiritual bond (one flesh).  The husband makes his commitment to the marriage with the initial act and thereafter renews his commitment with succeeding acts of sexual intercourse.  Likewise the one flesh bond is created with the initial act and renewed and strengthened with each succeeding act.  The two are married and over time the married couple grows closer together.

I was confused about the one flesh bond because of the reference to a covenant marriage in Malachi 2 (in which God is speaking to the priests), which references the command in Leviticus 21‘s instruction to the priests that they must take only a virgin as a wife.  This caused a study of covenants and as a result I viewed the “one flesh” union as being synonymous with a “covenant” marriage that only occurs with a virgin.

As a result my view of “become one flesh” was it occurs as a single act of God when the couple is married.  It followed that after God has joined them they’re now joined in a “once and done” kind of way, but only with a virgin (due to my confusion with the reference to covenant marriage).

Yet, Paul’s admonition in 1st Corinthians 6:16 continued to bother me because he was speaking of becoming one flesh and the men were most certainly not being married to the prostitutes in question.

The question arose:  What if the one-flesh union is a product of having sex that does not require marriage and only the covenant marriage is what is restricted to the virgin?   In that case the “covenant marriage” is not the same thing as becoming “one-flesh”.

There is only one way to deal with questions like that.  Test them.

Assume the spiritual union of one-flesh results every time a man and woman have sex, regardless of their marital status.  Test that according to the Scriptures.


Re-Evaluating 1st Corinthians 6:16, “do you not know?”

Notice Paul states that being “one body” is to become “one flesh” in this passage.  It is a progression: first joined physically (one body) and with that act, joined spiritually (one flesh).  Yet, they are not married.

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.” (1st Corinthians 6:16)

What we know:

  • The Apostle Paul and the men at that time knew that sex with a prostitute was not a sin because that activity was not prohibited and therefore was not and could not be immoral.
  • The prostitutes were eligible to marry and thus were not committing adultery.
  • Paul gave his prohibition within the context of Genesis 2:24 and quoted part of that verse (the two shall become one flesh).
  • The prohibition ONLY applies to Christian men.
  • The men were NOT becoming married to the prostitutes with the act of sex, because a woman who is no longer a virgin is free to marry whom she chooses (1st Corinthians 7:39) and must agree to be married (Numbers 30:9) before sex makes her married.  Prostitutes were the one group of women who didn’t want to marry the men.

Therefore, we cannot place the bond of becoming one flesh only within the domain of marriage.  If not occurring solely with the act of becoming married, it must be the result of having sex and it must occur every time one has sex.  This is the same as the man giving his commitment to marriage every time he has sex with a woman.  He “renews his vow” every single time he has sex with his wife.

Therefore, a superior exegesis of 1st Corinthians 6:16 is that Christian men are not to have sex with a prostitute because sexual intercourse with her results in the one flesh bond and thereby joins Christ to her in the process.  Because marriage is not required to become one flesh.

Think of sex and the one flesh bond as playing with fire.  Fire can be a useful servant if controlled, but a dangerous master that destroys if it gets out of control.

I previously concluded that Paul gave his prohibition on using prostitutes for sex because it was an abuse of the man’s authority to marry.  This correction strengthens the case that the men were abusing their authority to marry, becoming one flesh with no intention of being married.

With the view that the one-flesh union is created any time a man and woman have sex (without regard to marriage), we have Paul saying that because Christian men are spiritually joined with Christ, they are not to form spiritual one-flesh unions with prostitutes because in doing so they join Christ in that union.  In that case, it makes perfect sense to quote Genesis 2:24 saying “they shall become one flesh” because that is the justification of his prohibition. Becoming “one body” causes the man to become “one flesh” with the woman.


Re-Examining Matthew 19:6, “Let no man separate”

Jesus, in Matthew 19:6, speaking within the context of divorce (which can only occur when there is a marriage) said “so they are no longer two, but one flesh.  What therefore God has joined together let no man separate.”   This is the statement that tells us that the “one flesh” bond is something that God does, which allows us to better understand Paul’s comparison between the one flesh bond and becoming a member of the body of Christ in Ephesians 5:28-32.

  • The mere act of sex produces the one-flesh union, a union created by God.
  • This occurs whether it’s within or without marriage.
  • Once the two have been joined in marriage, they are not to be separated.
  • That which is joined by God cannot be successfully separated by man.

This reinforces the point that marriage is begun with the act of sex and for that reason there is no prohibition anywhere in Scripture that forbids a man and woman who are eligible to marry from having sex.  At the same time it informs us that the act of sex is to create the one flesh bond which is an act of God.  Separation following that is not something that man was authorized to do.


Conclusions From Scripture

  • The one flesh bond cannot be tied to sex with the virgin because that would associate it only with marriage.  If it were tied only to the virginity of the woman we have a two-tiered marriage system of one flesh marriage and civil (by consent) marriage.  If this were the case Jesus is saying that it is acceptable to divorce in the case of tier-II marriages because they are not one flesh.
  • The one flesh bond cannot be tied solely to marriage because Paul is stating that becoming one body with a prostitute is to become one flesh with her.  This act takes place outside the bonds of marriage (by definition) and will not result in marriage because the prostitute does not agree to be married.
  • All marriages are initiated with sex and therefore all marriages are characterized by the bond of becoming one flesh.
  • The act of sex causes God to join the two as one flesh, so each act of sex renews and strengthens the spiritual bond of one flesh between them in the same way that each act of sex is to renew the husband’s commitment to his marriage.


Science and Observation

The question of becoming one flesh has some interesting possibilities on the physical level that modern science is just beginning to explore.

Each person has a specific microbiome profile of the various flora and fauna living in them.  The microbes in their bodies.  What that means is everyone has about ten trillion cells that make up their bodies, but in addition the body is host to about one hundred trillion cells living in it that are microbes. The human genome has about twenty-one thousand genes, but the microbes living in each person have around eight million genes that interact with the body, turning genes on and off, tinkering with the immune system and things of that nature. The microbes in everyone’s body are part of who they are.

When a woman has sexual intercourse with a man she isn’t just getting his semen, she’s getting a big dose of his microbiome and as time passes they literally become one flesh. The microbiome affects who you are, how you think and how you feel. It has a huge impact on things like digestion, allergies, diabetes, obesity, bowel disorders and even psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia and depression. Researchers are just getting started looking at this, but it’s now safe to say that in some ways, mental disorders are sexually transmissible.  Crazy could be considered an STD in another generation.

In a sexual relationship the woman will be receiving the man’s microbiome in the act of sexual intercourse and over time they will develop a similar profile as her body becomes more like his.  In addition, during intercourse his semen is absorbed by the woman and as a result his DNA is entering into her bloodstream and tissue.  As a result of regular sex, over time the man’s microbiome and DNA becomes part of the woman’s body.

This is even more pronounced when a woman gets pregnant because fetal cells will invade her body. These are almost always stem cells and they’ll go to any part of her body that needs help and set to work repairing the damage.  Fetal cells are half her DNA and half his DNA. That means through the action of sex and pregnancy the father will literally become a part of the mother’s body with every baby he fathers in her because those cells don’t go away. His DNA will be with her for the rest of her life along with his microbiome.

At one time doctors thought semen was just the delivery vehicle for the sperm, but not any more. Semen is now considered the most complex fluid the body produces, more complex than blood. It’s loaded with enzymes and prostaglandins that a woman’s body does not produce.  Her vagina, cervix and uterus will absorb the semen and within a few hours after intercourse the woman’s bloodstream shows measurable amounts of the ingredients of semen.  The effect of this is to improve the woman’s sense of well being.

This the definition of becoming one flesh on a physical and emotional level.

Dr. Lazar Greenfield was the president elect of the American College of Surgery, a man at the top of his profession.  His career was destroyed by feminists because he wrote a Valentines Day article in “Surgery News” that discussed the benefits of semen for women.

Dr. Greenfield noted the therapeutic effects of semen, citing research from the Archives of Sexual Behavior which found that female college students practicing unprotected sex were less likely to suffer from depression than those whose partners used condoms (as well as those who remained abstinent).

Read the entire story that I linked to get the rest of the story that discusses the research.  Although the newsletter retracted the entire issue, the essay in question is here at retractionwatch.


I believe an understanding of “become one flesh” is the final piece of the puzzle for understanding Genesis 2:24 and the real-world applications are interesting.

And this means I have a lot of editing to do on posts from years gone by.

This entry was posted in Theology For Men of the West. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Theology For Men of the West: One Flesh

  1. Samuel Culpepper says:


    I have argued with my wife and others for years now that the “one flesh” concept is alluding to a spiritual entanglement that is intangible but has real world consequences we can all see. I surmise this is why there are so many mentally ill women these days. They rode the cock carousel joining themselves to all sorts of dark souls and now they are reaping their due recompense with mental disease and others. All of those men became a part of those women forever. There is now way to love a woman like this as she is a shell of the person she was in her virginity. She literally doesn’t have all of herself to give, because she is now some hideous conglomeration of various shitbags, both physically and spiritually.

    Young men take heed, do not under any circumstance join yourself to such a woman. If you care nothing about your own sanity and well being, at least thing of the mongrel children you will have with these women . . . sentenced to a life of confusion, mental illness and imbecility due to the mixing of various DNA. Disgusting!!

  2. Boxer says:

    Dear Toad:

    Why edit? You’ve published a general revision to your views here.

    In any event, this sort of openmindedness and intellectual honesty is sort of a rare sight on the ‘net, where everyone is always right and nobody ever misspeaks.



    • Renee Harris says:

      So I agree with boxer it will show the evolution of your research and conclusions if you keep would you previously had and we were able to compare it with the post if they don’t do The further research that is on them

  3. Marlon says:

    “this sort of openmindedness and intellectual honesty is sort of a rare sight on the ‘net, where everyone is always right and nobody ever misspeaks”

    Indeed! My respect chief.

    But I disagree with Boxer; take your time and edit.

  4. Pingback: Virginity, Purity, Becoming One Flesh, and Why it Matters – BlendingAme

  5. Pode says:

    I would suggest a tag and an archive folder for old posts that you no longer consider accurate. This shows the intellectual honesty and evolution of views, allows you to flag them quickly and revise as you;re able, and prevents critics from taking cheap shots by quoting you on things you no longer consider accurate and then calling you a hypocrite for contradicting yourself in new posts.

    I’ve been chewing on this too and will post some thoughts as they become more coherent. Real life is tough and eating my time at the moment, but this is important.

  6. anglosaxon says:

    Have you looked in to Luke 10:11? The verb Kollao is used regarding dust clinging to feet.

  7. Mycroft Jones says:

    Toad, what is this thing you are calling “marriage”. What is the Hebrew word.

    I keep my daughter away from men who think that sexing a virgin makes her married to them. Your last post, about the role of fathers, was hopeful. It seemed you do understand the proper relationship of a man, wife, and father-in-law. But then you go back to statements about sex with a virgin creates a marriage. No. Flat no. Your viewpoint abrogates a fathers God given rights to choose who he becomes father-in-law to. Sexing a virgin ONLY creates your obligation to pay the dowry of virgins; it is still up to the father whether or not a marriage results.

    • Mycroft, were you born this way or did you spend years working at it?

      “Your viewpoint abrogates a fathers God given rights to choose who he becomes father-in-law to.”

      You are completely incorrect. You have no “God-given right” to choose your daughter’s husband, as evidenced by Deuteronomy 22:28-29. If you had some sort of right to determine who her husband was to be, the eligible virgin could not be raped into marriage.

      That is not my “view” but rather what the Word says.

      If you really want to determine who your daughter’s husband will be, sell her. According to Exodus 21:7-10, you have the authority to sell your daughter to a man to be his concubine or to be the wife of another man. If she moves out of your house you lose control over her and can no longer exercise authority over her (Numbers 30).

      Given consideration of the fact that your daughter has great experience dealing with a man of your unique capacity to ignore reality in favor of your opinions, if she is of age to be married, under 25 and a virgin, I hereby offer $100 for her sight-unseen. If she’s not a virgin and you agree to forbid her marriage I’ll raise that offer to $200. Feel free to communicate that to her.

      • Mycroft Jones says:

        Are you trying to make me do your Bible study for you? Show me the Bible definition of “marriage” and we can continue this. When your posts show you don’t even know what marriage is, how can you write about it?

        • In Deuteronomy 24:1 Moses gave instruction on divorce, which requires that there be a marriage first. Note that the linked page has links to the concordance so you can satisfy yourself of what I’m saying. The relevant portion of the verse is this:

          “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…”

          That passage concerns the instruction on divorce. In Matthew 19 the Pharisees brought the subject forward to Jesus, asking Him about the meaning of the word translated above as “indecency”. Jesus then quoted the Law on Marriage, Genesis 2:24:

          “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.”

          That, Mycroft, is the Biblical definition of marriage. Marriage occurs when a man takes a wife. The woman becomes his wife with the act of the man having sex with her. Obviously you have difficulty with this, so do try to follow along.

          If you follow the link you’ll see that the word translated into English as “joined” is the Hebrew word “dabaq” and as used in this passage it means “sex” so marriage is begun with the act of the virgin being deflowered. I have provided conclusive exegesis on that point repeatedly.

          The grant of authority was given to the man. This means a man does not need the permission of anyone else to marry, thus no third-part solemnization (wedding ceremony) is required. The consent of the virgin is not required and Scripture demonstrates three different ways a virgin can be married against her will and over her objections with the act of sexual intercourse. If the virgin agrees to marry some man and that agreement results in the act of marriage (she is seduced), in the day he hears of it her father may choose to forbid that agreement. The result is that after the fact the man is declared to be ineligible and the act of marriage does not result in marriage. However, there is no requirement that a father give his permission for the virgin to marry and the father can only forbid her agreements if she is in her youth and living in her father’s house when she made the agreement.

          Mycroft, you told me you were having health issues and with your latest round of comments, I think I’ve identified the problem. I’m reminded of those Church of Christ idiots who observe no mention in the New Testament of musical instruments, so therefore musical instruments are not to be part of worship.

          I think you noticed that nowhere in the New Testament is there any mention of defecation by a Christian. Obviously you’re trying to hold to that standard and the result is you’re full of shit.

          Have you considered an enema?

      • Renee Harris says:

        How are you paying more for the nonvigin?
        Is it the extra warm he have to do? Where did you get your price point

        • Renee, it’s not about her, the price reflects the value of what I think the father and mother are capable of producing in terms of a well-trained daughter.

          • Renee Harris says:

            OK. OK I I get that. Is that a good price

          • one-third and two-thirds the price of a decent escort.

          • Renee Harris says:

            I wouldn’t know. I was involved in a ministry ride look at the prices a local prostitutes ( don’t ask ) they were never that high. More it was 75 for a half an hour Paul said all things are lawful for me doesn’t that mean the Christian men can go to p prostitutes?
            Also if women have no value why are they being sold at all?

  8. Mycroft Jones says:

    Sex does not initiate marriage. Otherwise, sexing a betrothed woman wouldn’t carry the same penalty as sexing a married woman.

    • If you care to refute the position that sex with an eligible virgin does make her married, feel free. You have not done so, except to point to the question of why the woman is referred to as a wife when she is also first labeled a betrothed virgin.

      The betrothal is an agreement that makes every other man ineligible to marry the woman in the same way a wife is permanently ineligible to any other man. The purpose of a betrothal period is to ensure that the woman was not pregnant and perhaps for social reasons or to ensure the man had time to come up with the bride price. A case of “locking in” the bride first.

      Consider the fact that if the betrothed virgin was a woman married in deed, she would not be referred to as a betrothed virgin. Yet, she is referred to as a betrothed virgin in the beginning and the justification for killing the man who rapes her was because he violated his neighbors wife (forced adultery). Thus, she is a wife in name but not in deed.

      If her betrothed was killed, she’d still be a virgin and not a widow. She could marry as a virgin for the first time, not as a widow for the second time. Virginity trumps unfulfilled agreements.

      Mycroft, I don’t expect you to agree, I don’t even expect you to understand.

  9. Pingback: Theology For Men of the West: Becoming One Flesh | Toad's Hall

  10. Derek Ramsey says:

    “The Apostle Paul and the men at that time knew that sex with a prostitute was not a sin because that activity was not prohibited and therefore was not and could not be immoral. The prostitutes were eligible to marry and thus were not committing adultery.”

    Did you forget that a prostitute had to be a virgin at some point? When she had sex the first time, she must therefore have been married to that person and become one flesh. You can’t say that prostitutes were eligible to marry because you don’t know if their husbands were alive. If a prostitute had sex a later point with another man that would be adultery by both man and woman, because the woman is already married to another man (her first). Sex with a prostitute is absolutely forbidden because it is obviously adultery.

    For a Christian, sex with a prostitute is even worse than standard adultery because it additionally joins the members of Christ’s body to a prostitute. A Christian is “married” to Christ and sex with a prostitute is adultery against Christ.

    • “Did you forget that a prostitute had to be a virgin at some point?….

      …Sex with a prostitute is absolutely forbidden because it is obviously adultery.”

      Did you forget that marriages end with the death of the husband, or with divorce? So, what about widows and women legitimately divorced by their husbands? How dare you accuse those honest whores of adultery! You whore-hater!

      Obviously a prostitute can be an adulteress, but just as obviously a prostitute can be a righteous prostitute. Rahab the prostitute was identified as righteous. Did her decision to betray her city in favor of Israel trump your claim that she was an adulteress… or can you admit that at least some portion of her righteousness was that was because she was not an adulteress, she was a righteous prostitute. The point is that being a righteous prostitute meant something completely different to the people of that time.

      Prostitution is regulated by the Law’s prohibition on adultery in the same way that farming is regulated buy the Law’s various commands (give the land a Sabbath rest) and prohibitions (do not mix your seed, do not bind the mouth of the ox that treads the grain) concerning farming.

      Thus, one can be a righteous (female) prostitute and one can be an adulterous or cult prostitute. And this really throws people off because “zanah” is used to describe both. One is not sin, the other is sin, both were considered distasteful. If you somehow believe that men didn’t understand that back then and act on it, you’re claiming that men aren’t attracted to sexual variety.

      Are we to sit in judgment of a man who decides to be a farmer? If the man obeys God’s Law concerning farming what is there to say? How is that any different for a prostitute? When you judge a prostitute who is not committing adultery or idolatry, are you not in violation of the command not to judge as well as the command not to add to the Law?

      And, you left out a word here, I fixed it:

      “For a Christian man, sex with a prostitute…”

      And then…

      “A Christian is “married” to Christ”

      Really? The marriage has already occurred? And the church is the bride? I guess that means neither of us got an invitation to that one.

      Read Revelation 21. Scripture clearly says the bride of the Lamb is the new city of Jerusalem, not the church. And before you bend your brain on that, recall that God the Father said He was married to the house of Judah and the house of Israel.

      Given the very clear statement that the New City of Jerusalem is the bride of Christ, is there another equally clear statement in Scripture that definitively states that the church is the bride of Christ? The answer is no.

      • Derek Ramsey says:

        …death of the husband…women legitimately divorced…

        Then she is free to remarry under the Law. Every prostitute necessarily commits adultery because she becomes married to her first partner.

        …can you admit that at least some portion of her righteousness was that was because she was not an adulteress, she was a righteous prostitute?

        No, I will not admit that. Rahab was considered righteous because of her righteous works: she gave refuge to the spies and sent them out in a safe way (Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25). Notably missing from the list of her righteous works is being a prostitute (Joshua 2:1) and lying (Joshua 2:4). There is no such thing as righteous prostitution (Exodus 20:14) or righteous lying (Exodus 20:16).

        Prostitution is regulated by the Law’s prohibition on adultery in the same way that farming is regulated by the Law’s various commands and prohibitions concerning farming

        So (1) Farming is regulated by laws concerning farming; and (2) prostitution is regulated by prohibitions on adultery. Yes, I agree with that. What’s your point?

        Thus, one can be a righteous (female) prostitute and one can be an adulterous or cult prostitute.

        Citation? If you can somehow show that prostitution is not automatically adultery, then perhaps some of what you say can be accepted.

        “Really? The marriage has already occurred? And the church is the bride? I guess that means neither of us got an invitation to that one…God the Father said He was married to the house of Judah and the house of Israel”

        It doesn’t matter that the marriage has not occurred: we are Christ’s betrothed (figuratively). A Christian having sex with a prostitute is unfaithfulness to Christ (adultery).

        The ‘bride of Christ’ is obviously a figure of speech. See 2 Corinthians 11 and Ephesians 5. The House of Judah and the House of Israel were nations made up of people. Using a building (‘house’) or location (‘city’) to refer to a group of people is idiomatic usage. God calls his people a great many different things (including various animals). Ezekiel describes the people as an adulterous wife. Various other prophets say similar things.

        • Derek, please examine your premises.

          Every prostitute necessarily commits adultery because she becomes married to her first partner.”

          Cite, please. You are hanging your doctrine on a very Catholic teaching that originated with the hatred of sexual pleasure by Augustine, Jerome an Gregory (et al). There is no Biblical basis for it.

          Why do men use prostitutes? For sex. Look at the case with Samson, who went into a prostitute but didn’t violate his Nazerite vows. Because he did not sin. At that time, there was no prohibition on men using prostitutes.

          You have this completely wrong because the virgin has no agency while the non-virgin (widow or divorced woman or the woman no longer bound) does. Numbers 30:9 and 1st Corinthians 7:39.

          A virgin can be raped into marriage (c.f. Deuteronomy 22:28-29). The non-virgin cannot. She is free to choose (c.f. 1st Corinthians 7:39) who she will marry and according to Numbers 30:9, she will be bound by her agreements (no oversight by her husband because she no longer has a husband). Which means the non-virgin has to make an agreement in order to be bound by it.

          Just as women and men have differing standards of sexual morality, virgins and non-virgins are not the same and are not held to the same standards.

          • Derek Ramsey says:

            Look at the case with Samson, who went into a prostitute but didn’t violate his Nazerite vows.

            This has nothing to do with the Nazirite vows.

            “Cite, please. There is no Biblical basis for it.”

            Genesis 2:23-24, the analysis you laid out in “Theology For Men of the West: Biblical Marriage”, and my comments on that post.

            “A virgin can be raped into marriage”

            Because sex is marriage.

            “She is free to choose”

            Of course she is free to choose! If she chooses to have sex, she is married because sex is marriage. There only difference between the virgin and non-virgin is that a father can revoke a virgin’s vows. Nothing about virginity prevents a woman from making vows.

            “virgins and non-virgins are not the same and are not held to the same standards”

            I can see that we are going around in circles here, with different sets of assumptions and only informal arguments presented. So rather than trying to respond, I’m going to take some time off and try to prepare a formal deductive argument that shows that it is completely consistent, lacks contradictions, and isn’t circular reasoning. And ideally I’ll also show that yours is the opposite. Or who knows, maybe I’ll find out that I’m wrong.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s