Marriage Customs And The Parable Of The Ten Virgins

[volgadon]

To avoid further derailling of a different thread.

Randall57:

In Jesus' time, weddings were not announced with a date, the groom would go to his fathers house and build a place for the bride and himself to live, When the father felt that the room was ready he would tell his son to call for his bride. The parable is in this context, if the brides were ready for the husbands call, then they should be ready to travel at night and have "batteries for their flashlights." Five did, five did not. Jesus stated this parable with comparing it to being like the Kingdom of Heaven, and ended saying no one nows the time or place so be ready, this is the context.

Volgadon:

Where on earth did you come up with this interpretation?

Randall57:

I have taken several new testament survey classes over the years, and study in commentaries and via the net. Do a google search on the subject.

Please tell me where I error in my interpretation?

Volgadon:

You err in your assertion that "weddings were not announced with a date, the groom would go to his fathers house and build a place for the bride and himself to live, When the father felt that the room was ready he would tell his son to call for his bride."

Weddings very much had dates set, they were significant celebrations involving multiple families.

"if the brides were ready for the husbands call, then they should be ready to travel at night and have "batteries for their flashlights." Five did, five did not."

These are not brides going out to meet their husbands, these are bridesmaids waiting for the bride and groom who tarried quite a while at the festivities in (presumably) the bride's house.

So, again, where are you coming up with this interpretation?

Randall57:

Like I said I have studied this in that past at many different levels. I just did a quick google and here, please don't hold me to any theology from these sites, I didn't really read through them to much. I googled " Hebrew calling of the bride" and these were the first few hits on this topic. The first is a paste from a PDF , I couldn't paste the link sorry, but you can find it if you google the above. (bold mine)

•

Toward the end of the yearlong betrothal period, the bride waited with

great expectancy for the groom to come and for the ceremony to take

place. Even late in the evening, the bride and her wedding party

would keep their oil lamps burning in case it was time for the wedding

to take place.

•

The day of the ceremony was a surprise to both the groom and the

bride.

14 When the bridegroom was asked the date of the wedding, he

could only say something like, “No man knows except my father.”

15

•

When the time was right, the groom’s father would issue the approval

for the ceremony to begin. The groom and his wedding party would

leave the groom’s house to go get his bride. The friends of the bridegroom

would shout, “Behold, the bridegroom comes!” and then they

would blow the shofar. The groomsmen would lead the wedding party

through the streets and bring the bride back to the groom’s home

where the wedding canopy or

huppah awaited.

•

The wedding ceremony, or the nissuin, was performed under the huppah.

The vows made during the betrothal ceremony were completed in

the marriage ceremony. The ceremony was once again sealed with a

cup of wine to indicate the great joy that would accompany the festive

celebration. After the ceremony, the couple consummated the marriage

with sexual relations and lived together as husband and wife

from that point forward.

16

http://www.opendoorm...ishwedding.html

http://www.thewayoft....com/BDbty.html

http://www.staffands...e of Christ.htm

http://www.myjewishl..._Marriage.shtml

http://www.oneaglesw...f_Marriage.html

I surprised this is so new to you, it is esential to understanding the NT and in all reality the message of Christ. What do you think He means when He says He is going to prepare a place for us (many mansions) , and that He will be back for His bride?

[volgadon]

Volgadon:

For years I've been studying the realia of Israel throughout the centuries. Even a quick glance at your links shows how most of the information is bunk. A few examples from the second one.

"Next would be what we would call an engagement. Instead of a ring they would have the marriage contract, or ketubah. The ketubah was a legally binding agreement of marriage that could only be broken by a divorce."

The ketubah could hardly have been broken by divorce when it was meant to prevent quick and easy divorce by stipulating that any portion of the husband's property could be used to provide the sum to be given the wife at the time of their divorce.

"The ketubah would state what was expected of each other. It would clearly state the rights of the bride during the marriage, what the groom would be expected to provide for her, as well as what was expected of her. There would also be provisions made for her in the case of death of her husband or divorce."

The ketubah didn't stipulate the wife's responsibilities, it stipulate the sum that the Husband would pay the wife. This is even the case in one of the earliest midrashim likening the Torah to a ketubah.

"The bride would give her consent to the ketubah and then it would be read aloud in the presence of the witnesses gathered. As unusual as this seems to us today, the bride would agree to the ketubah before it was read aloud. While it is generally believed that the contents of the ketubah were agreed upon prior to the actual reading aloud of it, this still shows the trust of the bride and her father in the integrity of her groom. This ketubah was given to the bride to keep with her."

The bride and the groom had to agree on the sum before a ketubah could be written, which is not the same thing that the link claims.

"The ketubah was not given in Abraham’s time but instead was given to the Hebrew children on Mt. Sinai more than 400 years later. And in true Hebrew fashion the children of Abraham agreed to the ketubah before it was read to them.

‘The people all responded together, "We will do everything Yahweh has said."’ Exodus 19:8

What are the terms of the ketubah? The bride’s ketubah is recorded in chapters 19-23 of Exodus. The ketubah, or the Torah, was given to teach the bride how to live so she could be His treasured possession. It informs the bride of what is expected of her as the bride of Y’shua. The bride is to keep the ketubah, she is to keep the Torah."

No ketubah was meant to teach the bride how to live. In the midrash I alluded to above, the king's bride takes out her ketubah and reads the promises made in it to her. This gives her the strength to remain faithful while she waits for the absent king. The ketubah is also held by rabbinic source themselveds as an innovation established by R. Shimeon b. Shatah, in other words, not even the rabbinic sources trace it all the way back to Sinai.

Randall57:

So tell me how the wedding was held in Jesus' day, and please provide a cf?

Walk me through it? Tell me the steps?

Volgadon:

The general contours are betrothal, a process in which the parents set the conditions for their children to be married, and then, at some interval or another the wedding itself. This time in between was the time for extensive preparation, but parents began preparing from the moment their child was born. A talmudic source considers that one of the causes of the Bar Kochba revolt was the high-handed and insensitive behaviour of the Romans, who chopped down cedars which had been planted for children's future weddings. It is inconceivable that the groom's father simply walked in with the groom and collected the bride out of the blue. The New Testament and other sources describe not only processions, but also feasts, which could last up to a week. As I already said, a wedding was a significant event involving multiple families. The procession would then noisily and brightly make its way back to the groom's dwelling (usually in his parent's home or thereabout).

I'll quote at length from one source I have easily at hand.

Until the judgment scene, the setting is largely realistic, fitting what Jesus' Galilean hearers knew of weddings, the sort of details Jesus used in other parables (e.g., 9:15; 22:3). Wedding processions from the bride's to the groom's home, accompanied by song and dancing, normally happened at night, hence requiring light. The lamps here are not the small, hand-held Herodian period lamps, which would generate very little light, but torches (as in weddings in the rest of the Mediterranean world — Eurip. Daughters of Troy 343-44; Virg. Aen. 4.338-39; 7.388; Culex 246; Ecl. 8.29; Ovid Metam. 1.483, 763; 4.758-59; 6.430; 10.6; Lucan C.W. 2.356; Plut. R.Q. 2, Mor. 263F; Ach. Tat. 2.11.1; cf. Safrai 1974/76b: 758). In poorer villages these torches may have been sticks wrapped with oiled rags, as in traditional Arab weddings (Jeremias 1965b; idem 1972: 174-75; followed by Gundry 1982: 498; pace Edersheim 541). Although details differ from one village to the next, traditional Palestinian village weddings in recent centuries climax with women torchbearers leading the bride to the bridegroom's home, and the torchbearers going out to meet the groom and his male friends (Jeremias 1972: 173). Presumably the bridesmaids wait outside the bride's home for his coming, to escort her en route to his home (Argyle 1963: 189; cf. Safrai 1974/76b: 758; pace Fenton 1977: 396; Meier 1980: 295).²⁰⁵

Greek and Roman weddings also included the torchlit procession to the groom's residence (Ferguson 1987: 55); the groom's residence was usually his parents' home, which would for a time after the banquet become the new couple's residence (Tob 6:13; Derrett 1973: 38; cf. also for other patrilocal cultures, e.g., Mbiti 1970: 182).

In this particular parable (in contrast to 24:42-44), the issue is not that the virgins went to sleep — both the wise and foolish did so; this detail is merely part

203. Although in its Matthean context the parable plainly addresses Jesus' return, some sug-

gest that the original story could address other impending tests of faith (cf. F. F. Bruce 1972a: 71). A

sage could demand preparation for such tests, but an eschatological reading of the parable better suits

the eschatological content of Jesus' message as a whole. This parable may derive from a pre-Synoptic

source collecting much eschatological material (see D. Wenham 1984b: 51-52).

204. This detail, alongside Mk 2:19, supports the authenticity of the parable's present form

more than Dodd and Jeremias suppose; see Witherington 1984: 43 (though Gundry 1982: 497, 501,

derives the whole wedding setting from the tradition behind Lk 12:36).

205. Conducting someone en route to his or her destination often functioned to honor the per-

son so escorted (e.g., Dion. Hal. 7.7.2; Char. Chaer. 4.7.6; Judg 4:18; 11:31, 34; 1 Sam 13:10; 16:4;

21:1; 25:32; Acts 28:15); it appears in royal parousia contexts (e.g., 1 Thess 4:17; cf. 2 Sam 19:25;

Jdt 5:4; 7:15; Pesiq. R. 51:8; Moulton and Milligan 1976: 53; Best 1977: 199; F. F. Bruce 1982: 102;

Marshall 1983: 131).

of the narrative's setting. The issue is that some were not watchful enough to have sufficient oil (Beare 1981: 482; Schweizer 1975: 467).²⁰⁶ Some scholars have suggested that the torches could burn only fifteen minutes before being rewrapped with more oiled cloth (e.g., France 1985: 351; Witherington 1984: 43). Some other details, like going to buy the oil, fit the logic of the narrative, although most shops would not have been open at night (though for exceptions see Argyle 1975, retracting idem 1963: 189). In traditional Palestinian Arab weddings, messengers might repeatedly announce the bridegroom's coming,²⁰⁷ yet it might be delayed for hours (Jeremias 1972: 173); delays occur while the bride's relatives haggle over the value of presents given them, emphasizing the bride's great value and hence the wisdom of the groom's selection (Jeremias 1972: 17374).²⁰⁸ That the bridesmaids would be sleepy around midnight is not surprising; because ancient lighting tended to be poorer than today, most people were asleep by midnight (e.g., Ovid Metam. 10.368).

All the virgins would have been ready for the groom had he arrived when they expected, but grooms' delays were common enough that they should have anticipated it; this provides clear warning that the parousia might be delayed — perhaps for Jesus' first disciples who expected the kingdom to appear immediately, and surely for those who were disappointed at Jesus' nonreturn at the temple's demise in 70 (cf. 24:22-23, 48; 25:19).²⁰⁹ The apantēsis, or [meeting,] [rendezvous] (25:6), often suggested going out to meet someone and forming his escort into the place where he would be honored.²¹⁰ The [going out] itself, however, fits the parable's story line and should not be pressed for further significance (cf. 24:26).

Some think that [the calculating self-centredness of the 'wise' virgins] contradicts the piety of Jesus' authentic teaching (Vermes 1993: 113), but this is not quite true. First, the parable represents an analogy arguing that personal

206. Boring 1995: 138 cites Plut. Precepts of Statecraft 1 for another analogy with lamps but

rightly points out that it is the necessity of oil for lamps that leads both sources to share the same image.

207. The single [cry] of v. 6 may parallel the trumpet call of 24:31, with 1 Thess 4:16 reflect-

ing a tradition including both (Blomberg 1992a: 370); but the [cry] in 1 Thess 4 is probably a war cry

and thus might be unrelated to the present image.

208. Cf. Eickelman 1989: 174, where the bride's relatives are engaged in [a farewell celebra-

tion … at the bride's house,] and weep when the groom's relatives arrive to escort the bride to the

party that has already begun in his house. The groom has no reason not to delay: he is the central per-

sonage of the event, the timing of which will center around him (Malina 1993: 159).

209. Naturally those who think that the delay of the parousia is only a later motif find the par-

able inauthentic (e.g., reasonably, Vermes 1993: 113), but the delay is already an issue in what is

probably our first NT document (1 Thess 4:13), and if the initial disciples expected only a single

coming or barely an interval between comings (cf. Dodd 1980), an issue already present in Jesus'

ministry could easily translate into this problem by the time of the Gospels. Scott 1989: 70-72 rejects

the parable because it describes community boundaries; yet the very selection of the Twelve began

that process in Jesus' lifetime.

210. As in 1 Thess 4:17; see Milligan 1908: 62; F. F. Bruce 1963: 68-69; idem 1977a:

527n.26; idem 1982: 102; Best 1977: 199; Marshall 1983: 131; cf. Payne 1962: 68; Jdt 7:15;

Pesiq. R. 51:8.

choice determines one's responses to God's gift of the kingdom, an analogy that does not ask all possible moral questions surrounding that determination (cf. 13:44-45). Second, even if the characters exhibited negative features, this hardly precludes their function in the analogy; Jesus characteristically provides unpleasant analogies even for God (as tyrannical or naive; 18:12-14, 23-25; 21:37; Lk 18:1-8 ) and himself (Mt 24:43-44). But, finally, the image is simply not a negative one: the unwillingness of the wise virgins to share their oil reflects their concern for their friend's wedding. Having only enough for their own torches, sharing would cause all the torches to be extinguished, ruining the whole procession (Meier 1980: 295; Gundry 1982: 500).²¹¹

Bridal processions were so important that later rabbis even suspended their lectures so they could hail the passing bride (ARN 4A; 8, §22B); for the groom and (some held) for the attendants, weddings even took precedence over some ritual obligations (t. Ber. 2:10; b. Sukk. 25b; p. Sukk. 2:5, §1). Later teachers even insisted that God specifically supervised Adam's wedding (ARN 8, §23B; b. B. Bat. 75a; Gen. Rab. 8:13; 18:1; Qoh. Rab. 8:1, §2). In short, Palestinian Jewish people regarded weddings as critical events (contrast Romans — O'Rourke 1971: 181), and a breach of etiquette was therefore serious.

Those who fail to watch will suffer shame. The host or groom excludes the foolish virgins as a punishment, not merely because the bolt on the door was cumbersome (cf. Meier 1980: 296).²¹² Doors could be bolted or barred shut (e.g., Aristoph. Wasps 154-55), but the door would hardly be locked throughout the feast, which lasted seven days.²¹³ New guests sometimes arrived during those days, requiring the repeating of the blessings (Safrai 1974/76b: 760; cf. b. Ketub. 7b-8b; p. Ketub. 1:1, §6); elsewhere in the first-century Mediterranean world doorkeepers watched the doors during weddings (Demetrius On Style 3.167). The foolish virgins were not excluded simply because the door was locked (25:10-11), nor because the host actually did not recognize them (25:12), but because they had insulted the bride and groom, as well as all their relatives! The expression [i do not know you] was sometimes used when one wished to treat others as strangers and keep them from approaching (Blomberg 1992a: 371n.76, following Green 1975: 205). This was an offense they would never be allowed to forget.²¹⁴

211. For another bold request for oil, cf. Diog. Laert. Lives 7.1.17; but there the boldness is

that of Cynic impudence in begging, whereas here it stems from desperation.

212. The bridegroom image in the OT represented God (Is 49:18; 54:5-7; Jer 2:2; Ezek 16:8-14;

Hos 2:16-23; Witherington 1990: 212, following Payne 1981b); the banquet host in Jewish parables is

typically God as well. Yet while the parable may assume christological implications (Matthew's audi-

ence would certainly apply the image to Jesus), they remain secondary or tertiary to the parable's focus.

213. Judg 14:12, 17; Tob 11:19; Jos. and Asen. 21:8/6; Sifra Behuq. pq. 5.266.1.7; b. Ketub.

8b; p. Ketub. 1:1, §6; Meg. 4:4, §3; probably Pesiq. Rab Kah. 28:9; Lam. Rab. 1:7, §34; Safrai 1974/

76b: 760; cf. fourteen days in Tob 8:19-20.

214. Vermes 1993: 113 thinks that this [heartless refusal of the 'bridegroom' to admit those

who failed to be properly prepared] speaks against authenticity; but what then of Jesus' many other

images of damnation (e.g., Mk 9:42-48; Mt 8:12//Lk 13:28; Mt 22:13; 24:39-41) or deadly judgment

(Mk 12:9; Mt 22:7)?

-"A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew," Craig S. Keener - Author, W.B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, 1999, p. 596-598

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Randall57:

So,

The bride was chosen

The bride gave consent (typically)

Terms were agreed upon by the two families

A contract was written

The groom went away to prepare a place to live (typically at his father house)

The bride prepared for the the wedding, making a dress etc

After a time...always after 9 months for obvious reasons, usually about year the father would then call for his son to get his bride

The bride after the nine months would keep oil in the lamp in anticipation of her husband coming to get her

When the time came the father would tell the son to get his bride and the grooms party would blow the horn and announce the coming of the groom

he would come and get his bride

then the ceremony

consummation

then the festival which was usually around seven days

agreed this is pretty much it?

Volgadon:

After a time...always after 9 months for obvious reasons, usually about year the father would then call for his son to get his bride

The bride after the nine months would keep oil in the lamp in anticipation of her husband coming to get her

When the time came the father would tell the son to get his bride and the grooms party would blow the horn and announce the coming of the groom

No, no, and no.

Randall57:

Then tell me how it came down, you are certainly re-writing history.

Volgadon:

Are you seriously trying to lose even more credibility? There was not a nine month waiting period (if anything, it would have been less shameful to quickly marry once the deed had been done and it wasn't that terrible once a pair was betrothed), nor was the shofar blown (done on prescribed holidays and in times of alarm), and the father didn't send his son whenever he felt like it to pick up the bride, a date would have been set.

I should also add that men in Jesus' day got married rather late in life, so they were likely to be more or less independent or orphans. Some sources also indicate that the son had a great deal of say in the timing of the wedding, too. Men also sought out prospective brides at festivals, which provided members of the opposite sex with greater opportunity to fraternise with each other.

Randall57:

Again, show me a cf. It was always after nine months to prove the purity of the bride, I've read of the displaying the sheet (kinda gross). The father sent his son when he felt the home (honeymoon suite) was prepared. Often when the groom was asked when the wedding would take place he would say something along the line of "only my father knows." I'm sorry but this can be proved over and over again with a simple google search.

I am certainly no Hebrew historian, or scholar, but I can read and study and like I said, I have studied this in the past.

Blowing of the Shofar

In Biblical times the shofar was blown to announce important events, such as a call to worship, a wedding, the alarm of war or the coming of peace. http://www.yeshuatyi...com/wedding.htm

The wedding chamber and the Chuppah

Before leaving the young man would announce, " I am going to prepare a place for you ", and "I will return for you when it is ready". The usual practice was for the young man to return to his father's house and build a honeymoon room there. This is what is symbolized by the chuppah or canopy which is characteristic of Jewish weddings. He was not allowed to skimp on the work and had to get his father's approval before he could consider it ready for his bride. If asked the date of his wedding he would have to reply, "Only my father knows."

Meanwhile the bride would be making herself ready so that she would be pure and beautiful for her bridegroom. During this time she would wear a veil when she went, out to show she was spoken for (she has been bought with a price) http://www.wildolive...uk/weddings.htm

The preparations have to be approved by the groom’s father before he can consider it ready for his bride. The groom, therefore, cannot declare with any certainty the date of his wedding. It is incumbent upon the approval of the Chuppah by his father. Consequently you will find that as per the Ancient Jewish marriage customs the groom must answer “Only my father knows” to any query regarding the date of his wedding. The bride spoken for or betrothed will spend the time between the betrothal and the wedding under a veil whenever she steps out of the house. http://www.muslim-ma...ge-customs.html

Back at his father's house, he would build her a "chuppah" (bridal chamber, small mansion) in which they would have their future honeymoon. This was a separate building on his father's property and it had to be very beautiful yet simple since it would only be used for seven days. This construction would usually take the better part of a year and the father of the groom would decide when it was finished. If anyone asked the bridegroom when the wedding was, he would answer, "Only my father knows that." http://www.gindorf.u...es/wedding.html

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Randall57:

They were sometimes part of the negotiation of the contract, it does not change the steps of typical marriage. This is a general and typical wedding ceremony and one that Jesus models in the NT. I am sure some Jews did what ever they wanted, as with any cultural tradition.

Volgadon:

Again, show me a cf.

Kind of hard to show you a cf proving a negative.

It was always after nine months to prove the purity of the bride,

CFR, that is a call for references. Feel free to provide credible sources, even if they are only secondary.

I've read of the displaying the sheet (kinda gross). The father sent his son when he felt the home (honeymoon suite) was prepared. Often when the groom was asked when the wedding would take place he would say something along the line of "only my father knows."

This, I'm sure, has as much validity as that nonsense about the shroud being folded like a napkin.

I'm sorry but this can be proved over and over again with a simple google search.

By using a simple google search one can prove that the world is flat, which proves exactly nothing.

I am certainly no Hebrew historian, or scholar, but I can read and study and like I said, I have studied this in the past.

I'm neither a scholar nor the son of a scholar, but I do know how to read Jewish sources.

Calmoriah:

Randall, you should be aware that volgadon is an Isreali and is familiar enough with Hebrew to read original Jewish sources among other things and if you were to go and read his many past posts, you will find he practically wallows in history.

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Benjamin MacGuire:

The waiting period to check for pregnancy would have only been three months, Never nine months. This is because by the time three months has passed, the pregnancy is obvious (there isn't a need to wait nine). A required waiting period only occured within the context of Levirate marriage (on the chance that the widow was pregnant due to relations with her now deceased husband). If the widow is pregnant, and the pregnancy is viable, then early consummation between the levir and the widow would result in accidental incest. Issues arising from this come up in Yevamot chapter 4. So, while the Mishnah required the three month wait in these cases (and a longer wait if the widow is found to be pregnant within that time period to see if the baby is viable), it also lays out a number of stipulations to deal with the woman's state during this period of time. This situation is the basis for the present day rulings that halitzah is required by the end of three months, after which the levir becomes automatically responsible for the upkeep of the widow until the ceremony is performed (it can be performed sooner, but three months is the longest waiting period that a widow remains in an indeterminate status). There is a detailed discussion of this in Dvora E. Weisberg's recent book: Levirate Marriage and the Family in Ancient Judaism (2009), 128-141.

It's also possible that Randall is referring to the period of time between qidesh and huppah. But this was mainly an issue in polygamous areas, with the consequent problem of abandoning a betrothed woman and marrying another (and generally most of our literature and examples stem from Medieval Europe (predominantly Spain - although it comes up in France, Germany and Egypt as well). There was, of course edicts by Maimonides dictating that if qiddushin lasted longer than a year, divorce was automatic (suggesting, of course, that a one year waiting period wasn't common at all post-Mamionides). A similar edict was made by Rabbenu Tam. In no instance that I am aware, was this waiting period linked to some kind of purity test - or explained as waiting to verify a woman's purity. There is a great deal of information on this aspect in last year's (2012) Pious and Rebellious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe by Avraham Grossman.

You can also find some discussion of marriages arranged between men and girls (minors) who were not old enough, forcing a waiting period in Minna Rozen's A History of the Jewish Community in Istanbul: The Formative Years, 1453-1566 (2010). In these circumstances, a waiting period was also necessary - but not for the "obvious reason" that you hint at. Of course, the Mishnah contains a stipulation that a father can arrange a marriage for his daughter only if she is younger than twelve and a half years old at the time. Divorce sometimse occurred because the man simply got tired of waiting for his bride to be to become old enough.

I also have the 1993 The Jewish Family in Antiquity which isn't nearly as accessible as it sounds, but does have one of the more interesting technical articles available on the Ketubah. And I have the 2006 Sex, Marriage, and Family in World Religions which has a lengthy section (75 pages) devoted to Jewish sources with commentary, and which is reasonably accessible. I have the 1995 Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture, and the 2009 The Passionate Torah: Sex and Judaism, and a few other probably less directly related volumes. So I have done a bit of reading on the subject. My interest though, has primarily been focused on the practice of Levirate marriage and its history.

Ben M.

Randall57:

I am the one posting links for back up, all one has to do is read them (and do their own simple google search), and many are from Jewish sources. I'm sure Volgadon is very bright and learned, much more than I, but I am sorry the evidence shows he is mistaken on this subject. I pasted a dozen or so links, and I can post many more, supporting this view, I received hit after hit on the subject. If I am wrong, which I certainly can be, then show me. But keep in mind if the view I hold is incorrect there are allot of folks equally mistaken, and it will rewrite 2 thousand years of biblical interpretation of passages like the one in question and pose problem even in today's Jewish orthodox service in that in my reading some of the hits I received, it appears that many of the tradition, although abridged, are in the wedding service.

Again all he has to do is show me different, the only link he provided more or less supported my view, and after all this, I still do not understand his view in that he has not clearly laid it out.

I tell you what, I'll dig in it a little more and if I am incorrect I have no problem saying so.

Volgadon:

You posted a bunch of internet links, almost none of them sourced. That doesn't quite cut it. As for today's orthodox wedding services, I've been to more than a few of them. Different communities have different traditions, and the books Ben has suggested are a good place to start.

It's also possible that Randall is referring to the period of time between qidesh and huppah. But this was mainly an issue in polygamous areas, with the consequent problem of abandoning a betrothed woman and marrying another (and generally most of our literature and examples stem from Medieval Europe (predominantly Spain - although it comes up in France, Germany and Egypt as well). There was, of course edicts by Maimonides dictating that if qiddushin lasted longer than a year, divorce was automatic (suggesting, of course, that a one year waiting period wasn't common at all post-Mamionides). A similar edict was made by Rabbenu Tam. In no instance that I am aware, was this waiting period linked to some kind of purity test - or explained as waiting to verify a woman's purity. There is a great deal of information on this aspect in last year's (2012) Pious and Rebellious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe by Avraham Grossman.

It was more an issue of the man moving somewhere outside the normal reach of the community, where none knew him, and worst of all, possibly dying there without witnesses who could inform the court. I've seen Grossman's book in the library, haven't delved into it yet.

the only link he provided more or less supported my view

Less rather than more. It did not support your eccentric notions that the virgins here are brides awaiting their bridegrooms. It did not support your notion tht the bridegroom appeared out of the blue, at an unexpected date, and that dates weren't set for weddings. If anything, the source I quoted mentioned meticulous preparations, which is quite out of place with your claims.

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Randall57:

Well, again, lay out for me, in your own words, like I did for you, the typical wedding steps in the time of Christ.

Ben made a good point in regards to waiting nine months that a women would show in three months, and I guess we can take it further to 30 days or so, yet much harder to prove. The point being the waiting time waiting for the groom to prepare a place, was also a waiting time to prove the purity of the bride. Also one thing I failed to mention and was reminded of in my reading was the future brides wearing of a veil representing "bought with a price."

My point still stands which generally follows like this ( and I understand more is involved):

the choosing of the couple by their folks

the contract

the legal binding of the two

the groom leaves to prepare a place (up to two years)

the bride prepares, waits, and keeps oil in the lamp knowing the groom can come at anytime (usually at night)

when the place was ready by approval of the father, he would tell his son to get his bride ( if asked when before this, the groom would say something like "only my father knows" )

the groom and his party would go to the bride, and the horn would be blown.

the ceremony

the bride and groom would consummate the marriage

the seven day festival.

If the souses I posted are wrong, please point out the error and again, and more importantly give me, in your own words, the general process. You asked me where I got such "nonsense", and although my original post was posted from memory, I have given you more than enough data that shows, whether correct or incorrect, that this is a/the prominent interpretation and understanding of a traditional Jewish wedding at the time of Christ. You are quick to say I am wrong, but slow to provide how that actual wedding went down?

It did not support your eccentric notions that the virgins here are brides awaiting their bridegrooms.

Hardly "eccentric" my any stretch, tens of millions of folks hold this view, who do you believe the virgins are, and how does it fit in the context of the text, what I have laid makes the passage come alive. The brides who had oil in the lamps were ready for their husband to retrive them, the five foolish ones were not, the text is clear.

Christ will come to take His possestion, the Church, which was bought with a price, so be ready in that we do not know when He will return, Only His Father knows. He went to prepare a place for us, again we were bought with a price on the cross, and we had better not be foolish like the five who did not have oil for their lamps.

Matthew 25

New King James Version (NKJV)

The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins

25 “Then the kingdom of heaven shall be likened to ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. ² Now five of them were wise, and five were foolish. ³ Those who were foolish took their lamps and took no oil with them, ⁴ but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. ⁵ But while the bridegroom was delayed, they all slumbered and slept.

⁶ “And at midnight a cry was heard: ‘Behold, the bridegroom is coming;^[a] go out to meet him!’ ⁷ Then all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps. ⁸ And the foolish said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ ⁹ But the wise answered, saying, ‘No, lest there should not be enough for us and you; but go rather to those who sell, and buy for yourselves.’ ¹⁰ And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut.

¹¹ “Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ ¹² But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’

¹³ “Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour^[b] in which the Son of Man is coming.

You tell me what the parable means to you?

John 14

New King James Version (NKJV)

The Way, the Truth, and the Life

14 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. ² In My Father’s house are many mansions; (lit rooms or dwellings...mine) if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.^{[b] 3} And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. ⁴ And where I go you know, and the way you know.”

⁵ Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?”

⁶ Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

1 cor 6;20

²⁰ For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body^[c] and in your spirit, which are God’s.

Well, again, lay out for me, in your own words, like I did for you, the typical wedding steps in the time of Christ.

Not before you answer my call for references using a credible source, preferrably one in print.

Ben made a good point in regards to waiting nine months that a women would show in three months,

He also pointed out that it applied to leviritical marriage only.

and I guess we can take it further to 30 days or so,

Says who?

yet much harder to prove. The point being the waiting time waiting for the groom to prepare a place, was also a waiting time to prove the purity of the bride. Also one thing I failed to mention and was reminded of in my reading was the future brides wearing of a veil representing "bought with a price."

I'm not even sure that a veil was worn in daily life. THe Mishnah makes a point of Jewish women in Arabia veiling themselves on the Sabbath. If women were veilied at all times, why would it be noteworthy?

My point still stands which generally follows like this ( and I understand more is involved):

the choosing of the couple by their folks

the contract

the legal binding of the two

the groom leaves to prepare a place (up to two years)

the bride prepares, waits, and keeps oil in the lamp knowing the groom can come at anytime (usually at night)

when the place was ready by approval of the father, he would tell his son to get his bride ( if asked when before this, the groom would say something like "only my father knows" )

the groom and his party would go to the bride, and the horn would be blown.

the ceremony

the bride and groom would consummate the marriage

the seven day festival.

I've bolded the more serious inaccuracies.

If the souses I posted are wrong, please point out the error and again, and more importantly give me, in your own words, the general process.

I seriously suspect that you wouldn't read it, either.

You asked me where I got such "nonsense", and although my original post was posted from memory, I have given you more than enough data that shows, whether correct or incorrect, that this is a/the prominent interpretation and understanding of a traditional Jewish wedding at the time of Christ. You are quick to say I am wrong, but slow to provide how that actual wedding went down?

Please. I've already remarked on that. Merely throwing a ton of incorrect internet links at me proves nothing.

Hardly "eccentric" my any stretch, tens of millions of folks hold this view,

Tens of millions? Feel free to provide hard evidence backing this statement. Yes, this is another call for references. I know of no serious commentary holding your view.

who do you believe the virgins are, and how does it fit in the context of the text,

I already said bridesmaids. The source I quoted also raises other possibilities.

what I have laid makes the passage come alive.

So would inserting an attack by godzilla, and just as plausible.

The brides who had oil in the lamps were ready for their husband to retrive them, the five foolish ones were not, the text is clear.

Were they all his brides he would have had to have given them a bill of divorce, not merely locked them out.

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Randall57:

LOL, I said people, not commentaries, J. Vernon McGee, Matthew Henry, John Mac Aurthur, so and so on hold this view and have tens of Millions of followers, this a a very evangelical and protestant view, not ecentric as you claim.

Not before you answer my call for references using a credible source, preferrably one in print.

What would you consider credible...John MacAurtur? A rabbi? Jewish Customs and Manners?

If you want to play a game fine, but if you can not offer your take on the parable, then it shows a complete weakness and lack of a position and argument, and a lack of ability to discuss what each of us believe and why we believe it.

Tell me what sourses are credible to you, so I don't waste our time.

Moderator note: You are expected to produce credible scholarship in the form of books or articles written by scholars or experts accredited in their fields when asked to. Google links by unknown parties are not acceptable. If you cannot produce documentation for your claims you are not allowed to continue arguing about it. You will be removed from the thread if you do.

Benjamin MacGuire:

Randall -

The problem is simple. The best resources for Jewish marriage customs in New Testament times are Halakhic material, and not the New Testament. Using a parable of Jesus to define the wedding process is deeply problematic. It's even worse to speak of the whole metaphor of Jesus and the church as a replacement for discussion of historical marriage practices in Israel.

You speak, for example, of arranged marraiges, but this is only true of women - and only true of women under the age of maturity. Most of the time father's made that arrangement when they could because there was an economic incentive to do so (they got money from the son-in-law). (There is, in the Talmud the story of R. Aqiva, whose wife proposed to him - and who was then punished by her father, because she took that economic decision away from him). We also have several texts dscribing how older women could initiate marriage proposals. And in all of the discussion of arranged marraiges in rabbinic material, the only references for men is that they always represent themselves - either in person or through an agent. They are never represented by their parents. This doesn't mean that their parents couldn't help arrange a marriage, it means that they couldn't arrange a marriage for their son without their sons consent. Jewish halakhic law is very clear on this point. Once a woman is considered an adult, her father is forbidden to make an arranged marriage for her (she must act as her own agent at that point, and her formal consent is a requirement). Or consider this passage from the Talmud (M. Taanit 4:8 ):

Quote

There were no happier days for Israel than the fifteenth of Av and Yom ha-Kippurim in which the daughters of Jerusalem would go out in borrowed white garments so as not to shame those who do not have (their own garments). And the daughters of Jerusalem went forth to dance in the vineyards. And what did they say? Young man lift up your eyes and see what you would choose for yourself.

Once a daughter was over the age - once she was an adult, there wasn't a necessity to pay the father a price (this didn't change the other economic issues).

Scholars (those that I have read at any rate) suggest that arranged marriages were much more common among the upper classes. While situations like the one described above in Mishnah Taanit were much more popular among the lower classes. It makes sense of course - marriage was very much an economic issue. If you couldn't afford to pay the price, then it limited the options for making an advantageous marriage for yourself (or for your son).

The problem with the websites you link to is that they aren't interested in relating to actual real weddings, but to the metaphorical wedding between Jesus and the Church. The one that doesn't and which provides some useful information doesn't cover most of these incorrect details. This is why your links are useless in this discussion, and why it feels pointless arguing with you. If you only use them for your sources, and demand that they are good evidence, no one is going to take you seriously.

The thing about parables is that they are only partially supposed to relate to the real world. Part of them isn't. The fact that we aren't familiar with common life at the time sometimes makes it hard for us to understand what is supposed to be startling or surprising to us. Like the parable of the harvest. The yield is so staggeringly high (at the upper ends) as to be recognizable as a pipe dream to anyone who knows much about agriculture in Palestine at the time of Jesus. If you want a good discussion on the major interpretations of the parable of the wise and foolish virgins - I recommend this link:

http://books.google....epage&q&f=false

It should take you to the appropriate page where the discussion of the parable begins in ernest. The book is 'While the Bridegroom is with Them': Marriage, Family, Gender and Violence in the Gospel of Matthew (2005) by Marianne Blickenstaff. It seems to cover most of the salient points.

Ben M.

Randall57:

Moderator note: You are expected to produce credible scholarship in the form of books or articles written by scholars or experts accredited in their fields when asked to. Google links by unknown parties are not acceptable. If you cannot produce documentation for your claims you are not allowed to continue arguing about it. You will be removed from the thread if you do.

Well I did, at least I thought I did. John MacAurthur http://en.wikipedia....hn_F._MacArthur http://johnmacarthur.org/

There is without out a doubt few that know more about New Testament theology than JM, he is a expert. I recommend his 4 volume commentary on Matthew.

Also, the Expositors Bible Commentary, Zondervan

http://en.wikipedia....nneth_L._Barker

http://www.amazon.co...er/e/B001IGHPGM

Both agree with my exegesis, I wish that expensive commentaries were available to cut and paste online, but I do not know of any, but i will keep looking, that is why I asked what commentaries he would except. I have both commentaries above, but not online. Honestly I know Volg. believes I am wrong, and that's Okay, but I think it would be fair if I knew what his position is so I can respond in context to his thought.

I am trying,

Nemesis:

Wikipedia scholarship? Really? Most grade schools don't even allow Wikipedia to be used a source we don't allow it here either.

Nemesis

Randall57:

I used wiki for credentials only.

Thanks I will read through it.

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[volgadon]

Volgadon:

Found MacArthur's commentary, here is what he said on the identity of the virgins. "moment the foolish bridesmaids realized their predicament: they had no oil. It

was not that they had been unaware of their lack of oil but that they were not

concerned enough about it to acquire it before the bridegroom's arrival. Perhaps

they ..."

So, he also says that they are bridesmaids, not brides.

Randall57:

And? it is a parable, the virgins represent people, 5 were ready, 5 weren't, for the coming of the groom (Christ)...okay they were bridesmaids, it does not change a thing. Did you read the rest of what JM wrote?

What is your interpretation of the parable?

Volgadon:

It changes a lot. It was one of the linchpins of your argument, not to mention that it shows how relaible your claims are when your own sources directly contradict them.

Randall57:

I assume you are not going to answer my questions, or address the context of the parable?

Edited February 19, 2013 by volgadon

[wenglund]

Men also sought out prospective brides at festivals, which provided members of the opposite sex with greater opportunity to fraternise with each other.

You mean they didn't have singles wards or online dating services back then?

(Oops...I didn't see until now your "No posting yet, please")

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited February 19, 2013 by wenglund

[volgadon]

Posting can now begin.

[volgadon]

You mean they didn't have singles wards or online dating services back then?

(Oops...I didn't see until now your "No posting yet, please")

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Leper colonies.

[volgadon]

I assume you are not going to answer my questions, or address the context of the parable?

You still have an outstanding CFR.

[Randall57]

You still have an outstanding CFR.

Please give it to me again?

[wenglund]

Leper colonies.

That pretty much describes some of the older singles dances I have attended.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[volgadon]

It was always after nine months to prove the purity of the bride,

CFR, that is a call for references. Feel free to provide credible sources, even if they are only secondary. By credible, print is preferable, with sources. Not something general like, say, John MacArthur, but the actual work and page number, that sort of thing.

[Randall57]

CFR, that is a call for references. Feel free to provide credible sources, even if they are only secondary. By credible, print is preferable, with sources. Not something general like, say, John MacArthur, but the actual work and page number, that sort of thing.

John MacAurtur's New Testament Commentary of Matthew vol 4 of 4 vol. . Moody Press. pages 83-93

Expositors Bible Commentary of the New Testament (abridged edition) Dr. Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger Zondervan, pages 113,114.

There, now will you give me your exegesis of the parable in your words so I know your position.

[volgadon]

John MacAurtur's New Testament Commentary of Matthew vol 4 of 4 vol. . Moody Press. pages 83-93

Expositors Bible Commentary of the New Testament (abridged edition) Dr. Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger Zondervan, pages 113,114.

There, now will you give me your exegesis of the parable in your words so I know your position.

I checked those pages of the MacArthur commentary, they say absolutely nothing about a nine month waiting period for purity purposes.

I don't have access to the Barker and Kohlenberger book, so you are going to need to copy the precise passage in which the claim appears.

[Randall57]

I checked those pages of the MacArthur commentary, they say absolutely nothing about a nine month waiting period for purity purposes.

I don't have access to the Barker and Kohlenberger book, so you are going to need to copy the precise passage in which the claim appears.

It is obvious you don't want to have a conversation you just want to play games. I gave you enough links to get my point on the parable and the wedding, a waiting time for purity is discuss via the net, if you don't believe it fine. This on eof many reasons why the church is in trouble, and members are bailing out, this one reason why I left... Most LDS folks can not engage anything past or out of their confort zones and talking point that were feed to us...good luck I'm sure the mods will bail you out again, maybe I'll see you on NOM, or Shades where you can hide behind the mods.

[volgadon]

It is obvious you don't want to have a conversation you just want to play games. I gave you enough links to get my point on the parable and the wedding, a waiting time for purity is discuss via the net, if you don't believe it fine. This on eof many reasons why the church is in trouble, and members are bailing out, this one reason why I left... Most LDS folks can not engage anything past or out of their confort zones and talking point that were feed to us...good luck I'm sure the mods will bail you out again, maybe I'll see you on NOM, or Shades where you can hide behind the mods.

Randall, cut the posturing. You've shot your own credibility to pieces, you make wild claims, and cannot back them with credible sources. When finally pressed to do so you posted one that absolutely does not say what you claim, not even remotely, and are now refusing to provide the other. In other words, you have nothing.

[volgadon]

BTW, here is the MacArthur commentary. If anyone can point out the slightest shread of evidence for Randall's assertion, feel free to do so.

http://books.google.com/books?id=SocB82Mv5AIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22John+F+MacArthur%22+matthew&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tlwkUdm9C9OEqQHhv4GgDg&sqi=2&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=betrothal%20period%20the&f=false