Ever wonder what the bible says about the subject of interracial marriage. It was Isaac who married Rachael who was the daughter of Laban (the Syrian). Moses, a Levite married an Ethiopian(Zipporah) and David the king married the wife of Uriah the (Hittite). All of these mixed marriages were part of the linage of Jesus Christ. Even the one of Rahab the harlot who was of cannanite ancestry. I've written a little e-book about the subject. Still I'd like to hear from others. The ebook is available at: goodbooklets (dot) net
Interracial Marriage
- Thread starter brodave
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 54
- Points
- 48
My position on interracial marriage: one should not marry outside the human race. 
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2013
- Messages
- 5,279
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
Smellin Coffee said:My position on interracial marriage: one should not marry outside the human race.
But if you're from Tralfamadore, you might want to consider it.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,323
- Reaction score
- 75
- Points
- 48
Of course, one from Brobdingnag marrying one from Lilliput might pose some peculiar difficulties.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Smellin Coffee said:My position on interracial marriage: one should not marry outside the human race.
My wife takes exception to that.
brodave said:
Well, it pretty much doesn't really say very much about it, but what it does say isn't particularly negative about "interracial marriages". It primarily has issues about interrmarriage between true religion and false religion, although it did have a prohibition against Moabites marrying into Jewish lineage(although there are exceptions).
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,040
- Reaction score
- 2,132
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Several nitpicks:
First, Isaac married Rebekah, not Rachael. His son Jacob married Rebekah's niece, Rachael.
Second, Rebekah and Laban were the children of Abraham's nephew, Bethuel (Gen. 22:20-23). That made Isaac and Rebekah first cousins once removed (and Jacob and Rachael second cousins once removed). In other words, they were close relatives, which is pretty much the opposite of an interracial marriage.
Besides, Abraham specifically told his servant to go back to his home country and find Isaac a wife from his own kin (Gen. 24:2-4), because he did not want him to marry one of the local Canaanites.
Zipporah was a Midianite, not an Ethiopian. She was the daughter of Reuel, a Midianite priest (Exod. 2:16-21).
Literally, Num. 12:1 says Moses had married a "Cushite." While this term is generally taken to mean an Ethiopian, the name "Cush" sometimes described a territory spanning both sides of the Red Sea, and the territory of Midian is in the northwest part of the Arabian Peninsula.
The Midianites were a kindred nation to the Israelites: Midian was a son of Abraham by his second wife, Keturah.
Either way, however, you are correct that Moses married a Gentile, and this was the supposed cause of Miriam and Aaron's opposition to him.
Uriah was the Hittite. Bathsheba was from the tribe of Judah: she was the daughter of Eliam, one of David's mighty men (2 Sam. 23:34; called "Ammiel" in 2 Chron. 3:5). Eliam was the son of Ahitophel of Gilo, which was a settlement of the Judahites. David's marriage to Bathsheba was therefore intra-tribal, not interracial. It was Uriah's marriage to Bathsheba that was interracial, though of course that does nothing to support your thesis about interracial marriages in Jesus' lineage.
But speaking of Jesus' ancestry, it's odd that you missed David's great-grandfather Boaz, whose wife Ruth was a Moabitess. You seem to see interracial couples where they don't exist, and miss them where they do.
If these are the arguments that you are using in your booklet, then your thesis is true in spite of them, not because of them. It would be immoral to profit from such sloppy research. I strongly suggest a rewrite.
brodave said:
First, Isaac married Rebekah, not Rachael. His son Jacob married Rebekah's niece, Rachael.
Second, Rebekah and Laban were the children of Abraham's nephew, Bethuel (Gen. 22:20-23). That made Isaac and Rebekah first cousins once removed (and Jacob and Rachael second cousins once removed). In other words, they were close relatives, which is pretty much the opposite of an interracial marriage.
Besides, Abraham specifically told his servant to go back to his home country and find Isaac a wife from his own kin (Gen. 24:2-4), because he did not want him to marry one of the local Canaanites.
Zipporah was a Midianite, not an Ethiopian. She was the daughter of Reuel, a Midianite priest (Exod. 2:16-21).
Literally, Num. 12:1 says Moses had married a "Cushite." While this term is generally taken to mean an Ethiopian, the name "Cush" sometimes described a territory spanning both sides of the Red Sea, and the territory of Midian is in the northwest part of the Arabian Peninsula.
The Midianites were a kindred nation to the Israelites: Midian was a son of Abraham by his second wife, Keturah.
Either way, however, you are correct that Moses married a Gentile, and this was the supposed cause of Miriam and Aaron's opposition to him.
Uriah was the Hittite. Bathsheba was from the tribe of Judah: she was the daughter of Eliam, one of David's mighty men (2 Sam. 23:34; called "Ammiel" in 2 Chron. 3:5). Eliam was the son of Ahitophel of Gilo, which was a settlement of the Judahites. David's marriage to Bathsheba was therefore intra-tribal, not interracial. It was Uriah's marriage to Bathsheba that was interracial, though of course that does nothing to support your thesis about interracial marriages in Jesus' lineage.
But speaking of Jesus' ancestry, it's odd that you missed David's great-grandfather Boaz, whose wife Ruth was a Moabitess. You seem to see interracial couples where they don't exist, and miss them where they do.
If these are the arguments that you are using in your booklet, then your thesis is true in spite of them, not because of them. It would be immoral to profit from such sloppy research. I strongly suggest a rewrite.
Brodave... if you stick around, you will get solid advice as you just witnessed above.
Or... if you are just dropping a link with no intent on discussing the issue further... it will vanish.
Or... if you are just dropping a link with no intent on discussing the issue further... it will vanish.
Smellin Coffee said:My position on interracial marriage: one should not marry outside the human race.
I could possibly consider marrying a near-human alien, such as a D&D elf, or an Irathient (from the Defiance TV series).
I have absolutely no problem with people of different races marrying....im white and if my children found a black/Asian/white/Hispanic/ whatever....good Christian spouse....that would be a lot better than a sorry white one....
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
brodave said:
When I first read this I suspected another uninformed KJVO.
If you start off like this you'll most likely be off on everything else or not.
you believe interracial marriage is unbiblical?bgwilkinson said:
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
Bo said:
It was wrong during OT times for unsaved to marry saved as it is today.
Decedents of Adam should marry within their race and only to decedents of Adam, other humans. The people who want to marry their dogs or cats or their pet rocks are wrong to do so, even if permitted by man's law.
we have struck common ground brother...bgwilkinson said:
I believe by your response that you believe like I do that when someone says "race" that the color of the skin is not called into question. Because we are all the human race. I agree with everything you just stated
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
Bo said:
Correct humans, the human race is differentiated not by skin color or ethnic origin but only by saved or lost all others are not valid.
I am intrigued by the subject -- today, it seems that most people have no problems with mixed marriages; however, not all that long ago, it was considered wrong.
I've never heard a Biblical defense of the "no mixed marriage" - most of the verses used are warning against marrying heathen (unbelievers).
I've never heard a Biblical defense of the "no mixed marriage" - most of the verses used are warning against marrying heathen (unbelievers).
If it weren't for interracial marriage, I wouldn't be here. My parents and my grandparents on both sides all married someone of a different ethnicity. The result was pretty good I think. I have ancestors from four different continents, and look more or less darkish Eurasian, and fairly attractive if I do say so myself.. I'm sometimes mistaken for Filapina, which is a reasonable guess but wrong.
I don't actually believe there's more than one human race. We are all children of Adam and Eve (though I consider that story allegorical rather than literal).
I don't actually believe there's more than one human race. We are all children of Adam and Eve (though I consider that story allegorical rather than literal).
This is my take on interracial marriages and especially interracial breeding. If you want to call me a racist because it helps you to sleep at night and satisfies your liberal white guilt, go for it. At 63 I have long ago given up caring what others think of me. I speak my mind. If you don't agree with me, well that's your prerogative, move along. If you need, go get some therapy.
Each race is unique, and it is that uniqueness that brings diversity to our planet in myriad different aspects. But when you have interracial breeding that dilutes that uniqueness with half-breeds and with it, it brings other sociological and medical aspects to it as well. I am a retired PhD clinical microbiologist with a Masters in Public Heath so I am more than adequately qualified to bring this point up. Each race and ethic group have genetic diseases unique to that group; SCA (Sickle Cell Anemia), Tay Sachs, Fanconi Syndrome to mention just a few; there are many more. Many are only marginal manageable and some are ultimately fatal. Interbreeding spreads these disease over a much wider demographic so in addition to the sociological aspects, it brings medical aspects to it as well. There are plentiful members of your own race to choose from, can't you find one?
Each race is unique, and it is that uniqueness that brings diversity to our planet in myriad different aspects. But when you have interracial breeding that dilutes that uniqueness with half-breeds and with it, it brings other sociological and medical aspects to it as well. I am a retired PhD clinical microbiologist with a Masters in Public Heath so I am more than adequately qualified to bring this point up. Each race and ethic group have genetic diseases unique to that group; SCA (Sickle Cell Anemia), Tay Sachs, Fanconi Syndrome to mention just a few; there are many more. Many are only marginal manageable and some are ultimately fatal. Interbreeding spreads these disease over a much wider demographic so in addition to the sociological aspects, it brings medical aspects to it as well. There are plentiful members of your own race to choose from, can't you find one?