Moses vs UBF on marriage by faith

This website does not necessarily represent the views of University Bible Fellowship or any other individual than the author

This was a draft I made years ago for publication that I performed a lot of work to proofread and add and remove sections on 2022 April 17 but I found out it seemed to stop in the middle before ending and I either never finished it or accidentally deleted a large section of it at the end.  A large portion of what I intended to write about in the draft that is missing here is in other articles.

The following links provides a explanation for how other Bible verses not explained in detail here do not line up with the marriage by faith policies  It is better to read the articles at the links below first before reading this article

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/02/what-is-wrong-with-ubf-private.html

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/01/you-can-marry-anyone-who-consents-that.html

Unlike those two articles this article addresses how Exodus 21:1-6 creates problems for the University Bible Fellowship no dating policy and how Deuteronomy 20-21 brings about problems for the UBF policy prohibiting marriage of non UBF members to UBF members

Information from online sources below were accessed on 2018 January 13

Updated Note : I have added other online source information since then so maybe some of the sources were accessed on those dates.  That date most likely refers to when the Bible verses were copied from online sources which may change results as the NIV changes what version is published on Biblegateway and with it the text for the same link.

"By asking the person to tell you what they see in the inkblot, they are actually telling you about themselves, and how they project meaning on to the real world."

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18952667

https://web.archive.org/web/20140321233525/http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18952667

Members of University Bible Fellowship generally read historical narratives in the Bible like ink blots when it comes to moral teachings and avoid more clear teachings elsewhere in the Bible.  Marriage by faith frequently is based on using Genesis 24 and Genesis 2 as proof texts and reading them like an ink blot.  The books of Moses however provide a more objective teaching of marriage for the time and place they applied to.  Before someone complains that I am using the old testament keep in mind that Genesis is in the old testament and that Genesis 2 may have been written by Moses.  

There are 6 ways to get married in the books of Moses.  

I will address how all six run contrary to the marriage by faith doctrine after explaining additional issues of consent in relation to marrying captive woman and marriage through premarital sex.

1. Exodus 21:1-6  Marriage of two servants working for a single individual

2. Exodus 21:7-11 Selling of a daughter as a servant

3. Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Marrying a captive woman

4. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 Marriage through premarital sex

5. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 Marrying a divorced woman

6. Deuteronomy 25:5-10 Marrying a widow

Updated Note : Seven instead of six, if you split exodus 21:7-11 in two, either a man designating a woman for himself to marry as in Exodus 21:8 or a man designating a woman for his son to marry as in Exodus 21:9 

In every one of these 6 ways except for possibly marrying a captive woman or marriage through premarital sex both parties can clearly opt out of marriage.  In the case of marriage through premarital sex both parties would have consented to sex and they would have likely known the rule that the punishment for consensual premarital sex is forced marriage.

The New International Version translates Deuteronomy 22:28-29 using the word rape but the Contemporary English Version uses the phrase, "talks her into sleeping with him."

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Footnotes: [a] Deuteronomy 22:29 That is, about 1 1/4 pounds or about 575 grams

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV

28 Suppose a woman isn’t engaged to be married, and a man talks her into sleeping with him. If they are caught, 29 they will be forced to get married. He must give her father fifty pieces of silver as a bride-price and[a] can never divorce her.

Footnotes: [a] 22.28,29 talks her into sleeping with him. . . bride-price and: Or “forces her to have sex.29 Then if they are caught, he will have to marry her. He must give her father fifty pieces of silver as a bride-price and."

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=CEV

There are many other translations you can look at on your own.  I believe the New International Version translation is incorrect in the context of the Bible as a whole, because an Israelite raping an Israelite would have generally had a death penalty result as an Israelite could not rape a Israelite without kidnapping an Israelite.

Exodus 21:16 New International Version (NIV)

“Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+21%3A16&version=NIV

Deuteronomy 24:7 New International Version (NIV)

If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+24%3A7&version=NIV

Kidnapping is still forbidden in the new testament

1 Timothy 1:8-11 New International Version (NIV)

8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

Regarding marrying a captive woman there are two possibilities about the consent of the woman. 

1. A man is allowed to marry a captive woman but only with her consent

2. A man is allowed to marry a captive woman without her consent.  Remember if this woman was a war captive her entire community may have planned to murder the Israelites and perhaps she could have been rightfully executed to prevent her from murdering the Israelites as a hostile enemy.  Imprisonment and forced marriage may seem like a human rights violation but it maybe merciful compared with the alternative of execution to prevent the woman from murdering Israelites.

How marriage through premarital sex in Deuteronomy 22 may run contrary to marriage by faith

UBF Bible teachers often tell their students not to date but to marry by faith.  Sometimes UBF Bible teachers pray for their Bible students to break up with their boyfriends or girlfriends even if the Bible student had sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend, I would presume even if the woman lost her virginity to her boyfriend and wants to marry him.  

By trying in very sneaky ways to forbid a Bible student from marrying a boyfriend or girlfriend the Bible student had sex with they are running contrary to the principle in Deuteronomy 22

Someone might argue Christians are no longer required to get married as a penalty for premarital sex in the new testament moral codes and Christian communities are not obligated to force people who had premarital sex to marry each other because such forced marriages were only for the Israelite nation during that time period.  

That might very well be true but if it was mandatory for people to get married who had premarital sex in Mosaic law it would not make sense for it to be mandatory for people who had premarital sex not to get married in the new testament moral code in the time period after the writing of the New Testament if both the New Testament and the Mosaic Law were originated from the same divine law giver.  

If it was a sin to get married after premarital sex in Mosaic Law they would not have been commanded to get married if they had premarital sex.  Therefore one could conclude that according to the rules set by the God who gave Moses the law, it is not a sin to get married to someone who you had premarital sex with, although that does not mean that having premarital sex in the first place is not a sin.

Now I am not saying that people who had premarital sex should be forced by a Church to marry each other but I am saying that people who had premarital sex should not be forced by a Church not to marry each other.  A Church organization forbidding people who had premarital sex from marrying each other runs contrary to the principle in Deuteronomy 22. 

Now a Church organization that would force a boyfriend and girlfriend who did not have premarital sex to not marry each other instead insisting that they break up but allow a boyfriend and girlfriend who had premarital sex to marry each other would be punishing people for not having premarital sex, which would not make any sense from any Church that preaches that people should not have premarital sex. 

Now if people in such a Church organization believe dating someone you are not married to is sinful they could say either get married or break up, but sometimes they simply tell people to break up as their only option in UBF which runs contrary to the principles in Deuteronomy 22.  

Most other Church organizations in the United States from at least the years of 1930 to 2018 that taught people should not have premarital sex also taught that it is acceptable to date and or court people as long as you do not have sex with them before or outside of marriage.

1930 is the first year that is not part of the 1920s

The first decade of the 20th century was marked by the figure of the gentleman caller. If a young man was interested in a young woman, he would follow the proper protocol of calling upon her, which meant that he would come to the family's home and (hopefully) be welcomed into their parlor. If he was invited back for subsequent visits, he would be free to come and call upon the young woman during hours specified by her parents.

As the years rolled on into the 1920s, however, this system quickly became outdated and unfavorable. Author Beth L. Bailey writes in her book From Front Porch to Back Seat: Courtship in Twentieth Century America, "Dating had almost completely replaced the old system of calling by the mid-1920s — and, in so doing, had transformed American courtship."

https://web.archive.org/web/20170630044605/https://www.thelist.com/62575/dating-changed-last-100-years/

Fortunately not all Bible teachers in University Bible Fellowship force people dating to break up and not get married.  I knew one who had a woman Bible student who got pregnant by her boyfriend and they got married without objection from her Bible teacher, this Bible teacher soon left UBF later.  I am not saying UBF should force Bible students to marry people they had sex with but they should at least allow them to marry.

How marrying a captive woman in Deuteronomy 21 may run contrary to the interfaith marriage prohibitions of the UBF marry by faith policies

Look at some of the context of the previous chapter

Deuteronomy 20:10-18 New International Version (NIV)

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

Footnotes: [a] Deuteronomy 20:17 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+20%3A10-18&version=NIV

By genocide I do not necessarily mean mass execution of a genetic group or biological race of people but possibly the mass execution of a cultural group of people identified by a unifying set of behaviors deemed unethical enough to merit execution by the Biblical God according to my understanding of the Biblical narrative.  

Such a cultural group may have strong correlation with certain genetic groups but the goal might not have been to wipe out a genetic group even if that might indirectly occur as a result of wiping out a cultural group.  

Some people think that the goal was to wipe out a genetic group and such people were biological descendants of fallen angels, evil rebellious angels or demons who mated with humans.

If it was a genetically based genocide another possibility would be that the genocide could be to wipe out incest related problems that would effect future generations mentioned to have occurred in Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20.  

The mass execution might have also been done to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases as a result of the bestiality and other practices mentioned to have occurred in Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20.  

Each of these reasons for the execution are not necessarily mutually exclusive as it could be punishment for the behavior of incest, bestiality and human sacrifice and also to wipe out the symptoms of incest and bestiality which would have been genetic defects and diseases that could spread to the rest of humanity if those people were not eliminated. 

This would especially make sense in explaining the destruction of "anything that breathes" if they even spread these infectious diseases among non human animals in that area through bestiality and even the domesticated animals in those locations needed to be destroyed to prevent the spread of these diseases.

Perhaps humans mating with non human angels or non human demons would be classified as a type of bestiality.  

Answers in Genesis claims incest was not initially forbidden until a certain time period when it no longer could be done without too much danger of genetic defects resulting.  

Perhaps God told those people not to do incest anymore from that time period onward and those people would not listen before they were assigned to be wiped out.

The captive women permissible for marriage were from places far away that did not come under the special judgment of the women in the groups listed for genocide in Deuteronomy 20.  

The groups listed for genocide worshiped other gods in such a way that their value system included human sacrifice, incest and bestiality (See Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20.)

I am going to suggest that the woman from far away cities did not have the same religion as the Israelites and even if they did worship the same God as the Israelites their religion's legal code and rituals would have looked very different than the Jews at that time being far away from where Moses physically spoke the Jewish laws.  

These women might have even worshiped different gods but they were explicitly permitted for marriage.  

There was something especially evil about the value system of idolaters in the area targeted for genocide different than modern polytheists such as Hinduists today who generally do not practice human sacrifice in modern times.  

If one Bible student goes to a UBF Church and they want to marry someone who goes to a Presbyterian, Baptist or Lutheran Church who does not attend University Bible Fellowship, UBF Bible teachers will frequently discourage this but in the Mosaic time it was probably permissible to marry women from other religions or at least the equivalent of a different denomination of the same religion.  

An exception like this can not prove a rule allowing interfaith marriages to apply universally but it can disprove a rule forbidding interfaith marriages from applying universally. 

This example could mean that interfaith marriage was allowed under at least some circumstances but would not mean interfaith marriage is allowed in all circumstances (in which a factor other than religious faith would not forbid a marriage from occurring.)  

This example could mean it is wrong to say interfaith marriage is forbidden by the God of the Bible under all circumstances.

Although these verses alone may not be sufficient to demonstrate my point I may write another article discussing what is wrong with UBF members forbidding interfaith marriage.

Marriage of two servants working for a single individual in exodus 21:1-6 has at least three mutually exclusive common interpretations I have found either online, reading commentaries or talking to people.

1. It is not actually marriage.  A Male Jewish servant would have sex with a woman gentile slave of the same master, never actually marrying the woman.  Any children born to this woman, as well as the woman belong to the master when the man's term of service is up.  

This was my understanding from talking to someone dressed in orthodox Jewish type clothes who had a sign to ask questions about Judaism.  

I asked this individual who appeared to me to be orthodox Jewish the meaning of Exodus 21:1-6 and particularly if the woman is still married to the man or no longer married to him after the six years are up if he chooses not to stay working with the master

I mentioned that it was not easily comprehensible to me because everywhere else in the Bible marriage appears to be designed to be an agreement to a permanent commitment that should only be ended by death or divorce and that you should not premeditate to get divorce before you get married but have the goal of getting along with the person you will marry and the goal of not needing to get a divorce where as in Exodus 21:1-6 it appears someone could agree in advance that it would end before they marry that person if they are not planning to continue working for that master at the end of the six years and do so without sinning or violating the law since the law specifically allows that option as one of two options you are specifically permitted by the Biblical God to choose to do of either continuing to be married and working for the master or ending your marriage and not working for the master.

This person who appeared to be Orthodox Jewish told me that the man does not marry the woman, that the woman is a gentile who he would have sex with and produce children with but not marry.  He also told me he did not know the source for that answer but read it somewhere.

2.  This verse allows a temporary marriage in which at the end of the duration the couple is no longer married.  If this is the correct interpretation there would at least be some very specific situations in which a couple can pre plan to end their marriage a certain number of years in advance without sinning because it is permitted in the Bible.  Muslims sometimes use Exodus 21:1-6 to justify temporary marriage.  Numerous protestant Bible commentaries imply the marriage does indeed terminate or end in a divorce if the male servant does not choose to stay a servant to his master, these commentaries were written before Islamic teachings were well known in western Christian scholarship and I find it doubtful they got this interpretation directly from Muslims.  If temporary marriages are allowed then UBF may have great guilt for the way they treat dating Bible students who chose to have sex with some people they do not make a lifetime marriage commitment to if temporary marriages are an option.

Updated note : Upon editing this "now" years later I remember trying to read and find as many Jewish and Christian commentaries on this as possible in the past but do not remember if the commentaries really say what I wrote above or which ones.  "Now" for this specific update note is 2022 April 17

Updated Note: When I say some Muslims use Exodus 21:1-6 I mean that they claim based on Islamic religious texts that temporary marriage is permissible and then claiming that Allah also gave the Jewish and Christian scriptures which also mention the practice of temporary marriage in Exodus 21:1-6

Updated Note : Some Muslims choose to have temporary marriages in order to avoid premarital sex and also avoid making a lifetime marriage commitment with the wrong person.  If dating people want to have sex without making a lifetime marriage commitment they could get a temporary marriage to avoid sex outside marriage if the Bible allows such temporary marriages as some Muslims claim.  Or in such a case people could also claim to get a temporary marriage to avoid dating before marriage which some people in UBF might label as sinful without actually having sex during the duration of marriage in order to decide if they will get a permanent marriage later.  Whether or not a no sex marriage is a valid marriage is an interesting question which has been debated but I am simply saying they could tell people they are in a temporary marriage if the Bible allows temporary marriages and UBF people say unmarried people are not allowed to date each other and someone should only go out on dates with their spouse.  Ironically although some Muslims forbid dating before marriage to find a marriage partner sometimes a Muslim couple while get a temporary marriage in which the marriage contract or agreement says they are not actually allowed to have sex during the duration of that specific temporary marriage but are still considered to be married for that time period so they can date someone to decide if they will marry them permanently so that they are technically not dating someone they are not married to.  Not all Muslim temporary marriage contracts or agreements have no sex clauses but some do.  If people did do such temporary marriage agreements to get around a no dating policy there would be a further question of if Deuteronomy 24 would restrict them permanently marrying someone who they temporarily married to get around the no dating policy if they temporarily married someone else in between to also get around that policy.  Of course none of this would work to persuade anyone at UBF that the relationship should not be forbidden by using the Bible because some people in UBF top leadership positions do not actually use the Bible they simply say they use the Bible to get their policies but actually get their policies from Samuel Lee.  So I do not recommend telling your Bible teacher you are in a temporary marriage to get around the no dating policy because it will not work to persuade them, I am simply saying this to point out how their policy is not from the Bible.

Updated Note: I personally am not endorsing people having casual sex with people who they do not intend to reproduce with for the purpose of raising a family.  I am simply explaining that if Exodus 21:1-6 allows people to have temporary marriages this completely undermines UBF justification of practices being from the Bible.  I do not believe condoms and birth control prevent STDS and pregnancy 100% of the time and people having casual sex with random people thinking they will not get pregnant or STDS by doing so because they are using condoms is a bad idea in my opinion.  Even if people could technically get temporary marriages with random strangers they hook up with without intending to reproduce with them for the purpose of raising a family and still not have sex outside of marriage I think doing so would be a bad idea.

3.  The third common interpretation is that the woman married still owes a debt to the master after her husbands term of service to pay off his debt expires and that she is still married to him when the man is set free but is property of the master until her debt is paid off.  This interpretation has potential problems because either someone enters a six year contract or a lifetime contract, if she entered a six year contract the debt would be repaid at the end of six years at the same time as her husband, since the six year contract can end early at certain cyclical times when all six year servants are dismissed early.  At least that is the way I currently understand how debt relates to this but I do not wish to write an article on this in more detail unless there is popular demand to do so.  You should really research these three possibilities for yourself.

Updated note: Upon rereading this draft to make it suitable for publication I have not recently reread those sections of this Bible involving the relationship between debt, yearly debt cycles, yearly servanthood/servantship cycles, lifetime servitude and temporary servitude recently enough to be sure this is accurate and it may or may not be correct. Yearly debt cycles and yearly servanthood cycles would include but not be limited to events like the Jubilee.  2022 April 17

Regarding marrying widows and divorced women

Updated note:  This draft ends here maybe that is why it was never published or maybe I accidentally deleted the sections after this.

Were the top leaders guilty of human trafficking?

Views expressed do not represent those of University Bible Fellowship




I have so much trouble believing this that I am skeptical of my own memory but this is what I remember

1 The top leaders knew about the information sent by ex members and reformers. I saw Sarah Barry say she threw away letters from people complaining about UBF, I alone am not the only witness to claim this

2 Samuel Lee held people's Passports hostage.  I heard members in good standing say how it was good for Samuel Lee to do that, I alone am not the only witness.

3 A woman in my chapter was supposed to be matched with me, after she rejected many other matches in a row including to other people in the chapter. Suddenly her passport went missing

4 One of the other members said that he hoped the Pastor did not take her passport because this happened to other people with Samuel Lee according to internet articles he read and he thought the Pastor might try to be like Samuel Lee

5 This is highly embarrassing to admit and I had so much trouble believing it really happened but I remember the Pastor saying she has one week to decide if she will marry me and he took her passport because she is so stubborn about marrying anyone.  Now I might have thought this is in my favor which is good but ethically I should tell her but that will not work because she will not believe me.  I remember immediately wondering if  I really remembered that correctly because I could not believe what he told me, so I never told anyone.  If I was absolutely sure he really said that and thought she would believe me I might have told her.  I did not tell anyone because it was so unbelievable I doubted my memory and did not want to take the risk of saying that and it is embarrassing to say you believe something really happened but it is so unbelievable you are not sure if it really did.  I am not saying that my memory is foggy since that was years ago but rather that I remember doubting my memory almost immediately afterward.

6  I was fasting about the marriage during this one week period.

7 the Pastors wife said if I get a  fellowship from the University I should be able to afford to get married.

8 I got a letter saying I was rejected from the fellowship

9 During the one week period the Pastor told me to consider leaving UBF

10 After  he told me to consider leaving UBF I soon later opened a letter saying I received the fellowship  as part of the second  pool of recipients after having had not received funds when I could have married her.  Also she happened to find her passport somewhere it would seem she would have seen it already if it were not placed back there around a time convenient for the Pastor no longer persuading her to marry me if he decided to punish me for my lack of reverence for the most venerable authority structure.  Was that timing divine providence?  I do not know but it seems like it.

11 She was seriously messed up in the head one of her reasons for not marrying me was that  the Pastor and the  Pastor's wife did not unanimously agree that I should marry her, instead of her personal judgment on my character and whether or not she likes me and sees the relationship as practically  feasible.

12 If all that I say is true some of the top leaders are guilty of criminal conspiracy to kidnap people through undue influence in the form of fraud, coercion via immigration officers and theft.   Since vigilante justice would lead to prosecution of the vigilantes although I do not recognize the validity of the United States legal  system I propose taking as many legal actions against them as possible through the very system they are guilty of supporting with all their speeches about obeying authority figures.

13 I am not talking about prosecuting everyone but Sarah Barry surely knew what was going on and if not her level of criminal negligence and wilful ignorance is too far beyond the shadow of doubt that should be set when deciding about trying to press charges or giving her the benefit of the doubt that she might not have known and deciding not to press criminal charges.

Sarah Barry might not have known about some individual abuses of ethics on a microscopic level that occurred in far away UBF chapters that were never reported to her but she had opportunity to hear about the individual instances of abuses that occurred and were reported to her in letters.    Sarah Barry had opportunity to know the unethical activities that were happening on a systematic scale on the macroscopic level or the big picture through the collection of individual abuses she would have been offered information about.

Sarah Barry had ample opportunity to know because she received letters mentioning these abuses then threw them away.  Sarah Barry could have known and only would have failed to know by the act of criminal negligence through throwing away letters mentioning the abuses in order to avoid reading claims of abuse. 

I can think of two motives for throwing away the letters.  First, she may have been avoiding reading claims of abuse because they make her feel bad.  A second possible motive is so that she can claim to have been uninformed of the abuse happening and therefore not guilty of something she would have been guilty of had she known.  Both motives of these motives are unexcuseable.  

Now the reason she told people that she threw out the letters may actually be different then the reason she threw out the letters if she really did do so.  She may have said she threw out the letters to try to discourage other people from reading or listening to claims about systematic abuse within UBF.  She might have actually read the letters but said she threw them away to discourage other people from reading such letters.

UBF all or none educational policies harm marriages

 Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of University Bible Fellowship

I said I wanted to marry someone who has never been to college preferably and avoid all that college brainwashing and student loan debt in a spouse.

I said it was wrong to peer pressure women to get PhDs.  There was one woman who said in her young disciples conference testimony she wanted to be married and become a stay at home mother but her shepherdess said she should get a PhD for the glory of God instead

The Pastor told me it was at one time forbidden for missionaries to attend college classes so they can teach college students full time and they had very difficult low paying jobs or lowly jobs or something like that maybe like working in fish factories and it turned out bad and later they found it worked better for missionaries to take college classes.

The Pastor even went so far as to quote Samuel Lee that it is better to drown in a lake than to not serve sheep in regards to the past policy of forbidding missionaries to attend colleges.

So later they started peer pressuring everyone to get PhDs even women that want to be stay at home moms this delays their marriage creating difficulties for women who aspire to be stay at home mothers by putting extra financial burden on their husbands for getting a PhD worth of debt then not working, decreases their husband selection as those hard to get medical doctors prefer eighteen year olds (see later anecdote) and may increase the risk in childbirth for their first child if they do not have children until after they get their PhD.

I am not saying no women should learn but I am saying 

Did the thought ever come to mind

Letting people choose instead of telling everybody the same directions as imperative behavior

Whether it is everyone in this demographic group should go to college or never go to college

But there were different rules for second generation UBF woman as one woman complained that her sister was going to marry a UBF doctor on her eighteenth birthday (SIC) (I wrote that in the past but am trying to fact check this and may change some of the details later depending on further information)

I guess I just did not meet their selection criteria to be hooked up with a eighteen year old.  And maybe just perhaps they did not want women other than their second generation daughters to compete for the limited supply of doctors in UBF so they encouraged them to get PhDs instead of competing for the doctors with their second  generation daughters but maybe not.

 Pile **it

Higher and

Deeper

You got to conform to the PHD or Doctoral standard

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sPitXyWT5kI

Let’s sweep this Campus- ex JW

Down with the Tower- ex JW

 Jehovah Witnesses also have interesting policies about college check out this video

Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of University Bible Fellowship

The B was accidentally put in instead of a M when the links was generated at Ubfriends

Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of University Bible Fellowship or Ubfriends

Copied and pasted on 2018 April 4 from Ubfriends.net


http://ubfriends.net/matchmaking-site-like-boonies/

Matchmaking site like Moonies?

December 30, 2016 3 CommentsWritten by Eddie

**Submitted and composed by fellowshipbibleuniversity**

You can post this message as an article. I want to know if I or someone should make a matchmaking, dating and platonic friendship/social network site for active, inactive, previous, reformed and ex, UBF members. The unification church or moonies who had a history of matchmaking has an open and straightforward policy posted on their website

http://www.unification.org/intro_blessing.html

They also have at least three matchmaking or dating services
https://bfm.familyfed.org/matching/the-matching-process/stage-2/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1khf6M0e3xlXhpRxhPT1v0qbdUbkk9mAC8VJjCWdiMrI/htmlview#gid=1277553693

http://www.cheon-il-guk.org

http://bcmatching.org

Here are their relationship tools

https://bfm.familyfed.org/matching/matching-support-resources/relationship-building-tools/

Please post this message as an article you can fix spelling and grammar mistakes

Thank you

college-affirmative-consent-contract

It is problematic that people are lying about consent in today's western society both men and women.  Or create gray areas where consent is unclear when they do not need it to be unclear.  This is why I am a big fan of voluntary matchmaking instead of dating for some people as I wrote in a previous article.  But remember marriage by faith as has historically been practiced at UBF is not voluntary matchmaking it is arranged marriage with deception.

Now, in case you think taking a photo with a contract before having sex would be going a bit far with the whole make-sure-you-have-proof-of-affirmative-consent thing – you’re wrong. In fact, it’s not going far enough.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/07/college-affirmative-consent-contract/

https://www.waybackmachine.org/web/20180404044538/https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/07/college-affirmative-consent-contract/

https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/01/what-is-good-about-matchmaking-instead.html

What is wrong with UBF private revelation about marriage

Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of University Bible Fellowship

Here is an old draft I wrote about marriage by faith possibly last updated on April 28, 2015, I posted this on 2018 February 2 and made minor updates to correct typos and add more notes on 2022 April 13

The article explains what is wrong with third party private revelation when it comes to marriage.  The Bible does not list who is supposed to marry who, when UBF elders claim to receive such revelation it is an extra Biblical teaching and they clearly are not Sola Scriptura people who go by the Bible alone in spite of claims otherwise.  Actually no one goes by the Bible alone.


This article is worth reading even though I selected a lot of similar Bible verses to my other work because it clarifies points about them I did not think to bring up until reminded by my old work.  I had to make some major changes to odd sentence structures and may have accidentally changed the meaning to make it more understandable.  I also added several notes not in my original writing.  But it is primarily my earlier original work with few changes.



The  article is copied below with some sections labeled as updated notes added

Title: Marriage by choice or marriage by unbelief

Good help by some members of UBF at some times in regard to marriage and purity,

First I want to mention that I have respect for the idea of helping someone find a marriage partner and helping encourage them to stay pure and that there are many good teachings in line with Biblical faith taught by some members of UBF.

Purpose of this article.

There is a teaching by some members of UBF that if you pray God will lead you to marry the right person, however I wish to suggest that God already taught that you can choose who you marry so long as it is not a type of marriage forbidden for ethical reasons such as the types of marriages listed as forbidden in the Bible.  None the less some UBF leaders try to discourage followers from marrying unless the leaders perceive it is a marriage led by God, I believe this extra-Biblical leading is contrary to the scriptural idea that you can choose.  This extra Biblical leading to discourage marriage without valid grounds would be better named “marriage by unbelief” than “marriage by faith” since the leadership usurps your faith in the Biblical teaching that God gave you a choice without needing extra biblical leading by UBF leaders first.  Many UBF leaders say “scripture alone” but going by scripture plus “leading” is not scripture alone.  They might not say they forbid marriage but imply someone is settling for less than the best if the UBF leaders do not feel it is led by God. 


Problematic nature of interpretations of scripture based on private revelations (or being “led by God”) contradicting a logical or reasonable interpretation of the Public revelation of God as revealed by the deposit of faith i.e. the historical records of what God said such as found in the Bible

²⁰ Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.²¹ For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:20-21 KJV

Although I am not endorsing the Roman Catholic Church led by the pope I am endorsing the Roman Catholic teaching that we should not trust a private revelation that contradicts what is taught in a correct interpretation of the public revelation found in scripture.  What UBF calls being led by God is sometimes similar to what Roman Catholics call private revelations.  I believe that some UBF leaders often privately (“personally”) interpret scripture based on alleged private revelations which they call God’s leading and also get alleged private revelations based on a private interpretation of scripture not based on logic and reason but their desires or will.  This alleged revelation of God trumps a reasonable interpretation of scripture based on logical principles and information including information outside the Bible such as archeological findings.  Genesis 24 explains how God gave instructions for Isaac’s marriage through a servant but he did not say this was how everyone was to get married nor does it say that it is the best way for everyone to get married.  

Some UBF leaders felt this is the best way for everyone to get married even though this contradicts other passages of the Bible that apply to people in general permitting people to make choices independent of a third party servant without referring to these choices as less than the best.  2 Peter 1:20-21 talks about how prophecy does not come from private interpretation or the will of man, but some UBF members feel  they are led by God through private revelation(although they might call it something else) to tell you who to marry based on their private interpretation of Genesis 24 but no genuine prophecy (such as a prophecy about who you should marry) came by private interpretation or the will of man (their will about who you should marry or what they want the Bible to mean.)

If they are not supernaturally led by God to discourage marriage is it a doctrine of devils?

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;² Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;³ Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

1 Timothy 4:1-3 KJV

Forbidding to marry and discouraging to marry might not be the same and also for other reasons I am not sure this verse applies to them but it should be considered strongly.  It might just be bad doctrine imagined by man rather than demon or devil specific in this case.

For the sake of shortening the article the following is implied

Throughout this text when I mention that a man or woman can marry anyone he or she chooses I mean anyone unless forbidden for ethically valid reasons but I am not counting UBF leaders not feeling the marriage is led by God as an ethically valid reason.

What are some of the ethically valid reasons to forbid marriage according to the Bible or types of marriages forbidden?

Bestiality (Leviticus 20)

Males marrying males (Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20, Romans 1, 1 Timothy  1)

Certain types of incest (Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20)

Marrying a woman and her mother/daughter (Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20)

Marrying a woman and her sister to vex her (Leviticus 18 but not Leviticus 20 no death penalty)

Polyandry  via the prohibition on marrying another man’s wife (Leviticus 20, Romans 7)

A woman marrying the same man who divorced her after she marries another man (Deuteronomy 24)

A priest marrying a divorced woman (Leviticus 21)

A high-priest marrying a widow or non-virgin (Leviticus 21)

 Forced Marriage (Exodus 21, Deuteronomy 24, 1 Timothy 1)

Bible verses that imply a man can choose to marry any woman he wants

⁷ “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. ⁸ If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself,^[a] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. ⁹ If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. ¹⁰ If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. ¹¹ If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.

I believe that exodus 21:1-11 gives the overall structure of marriages in the Bible and that Deuteronomy 21, 22, 24 and 25 give more specific cases of marriage that fall within the model of Exodus 21:7-11.  A phrase within  Exodus 21:8a says the following (although NIV and NASB have alternate ways to translate it in the footnotes)

“If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself”  NASB

“If she does not please her master, who designated her for himself” NRSVCE

“If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself” NIV

All of these readings imply the man can select who he marries.  To say it is less than the best for him to select who he marries unless UBF leadership feels it is, is God’s leading is to contradict the leading of God in scripture that he can choose indicated by the translations “designated for himself” or “selected for himself.”  But someone might object this is in the old testament, however so is Genesis 2 and Genesis 24 that some UBF leaders use like ink-blots to justify their marriage doctrines, I will address this later.

 

But doesn’t Exodus 21:9 also allow a man to select a spouse for his son?

Yes but that does not negate that Exodus 21:8 allows a man to select his spouse for himself.  Additionally  the son is not required to marry the spouse his father selected for him, nor does it say it is better to let your father choose for you, nor does it say your father is symbolic here for UBF leadership.  

Is it OK for UBF leadership to just show you a picture of someone and let you decide if you marry them based on the picture? (Note: I think I asked that because in Exodus 21 a third party can delegate a spouse, otherwise this question and answer seems out of place)

I suppose you could do that if you want to but it does not have to be that way as the only way or the best way.

But why not Genesis 2 as your basic model?

The majority of the text in Genesis 2 is a historical event not a command.  One small portion of it is interpreted by Jesus in the new testament as a prohibition on divorce however elsewhere in the Bible some valid reasons for divorce are explained, clearly divorce is then prohibited except where there is a valid reason.  But Genesis 2 does not appear to set rules for initiating marriage when interpreted by Jesus in the new testament and I do not want to open a can of worms for anything goes hermeneutics by adding on interpretations of the Genesis 2 not supported elsewhere in scripture.  Many UBF leaders tend to misinterpret historical events as rules they make up.

Updated note: 

See Mark 10:2-12 and Mathew 19:3-12 to see Jesus interpret a section of Genesis 2 in regards to divorce prohibitions and not as meaning the marriage by faith doctrine.  He also does not interpret Genesis 2 to mean who is allowed to marry who or not marry who and when and how to decide who you marry, but only to prohibit divorce in some cases for people already married.  He also does not interpret Genesis 2 to forbid homosexual marriage or anything like that in Mark and Mathew, if that is forbidden it is not from Genesis 2 but elsewhere in scripture and to say otherwise is not according to sound Biblical interpretation principles but from listening to sermons on Genesis 2 rather than reading Genesis 2 yourself and thinking the sermons on the text are equivalent to the text, such as when people imagine the word "antichrist" is in the book of revelation where it is never found because of hearing sermons on the book of revelation.

Special Cases Deuteronomy 21 and 25

if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. Deuteronomy 21:11 NIV

If someone was attracted to a captive woman?  Did they need UBF leaders to pray about it before they decide to marry her only with their permission or is it less than the best without their permission?  The Bible says, “you may take her as your wife” although this text does not generally apply in most cases today (Updated Note: Possibly not in any case today) none the less it does not contradict the principle of choice in Exodus 21, but certainly would contradict the UBF concept of “marriage by faith” in the “servants” to find the right person for you (matchmaking through private revelation of UBF leadership) as the best way.

⁸ Then the elders of his town shall summon him and talk to him. If he persists in saying, “I do not want to marry her,” ⁹ his brother’s widow shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, take off one of his sandals, spit in his face and say, “This is what is done to the man who will not build up his brother’s family line.” ¹⁰ That man’s line shall be known in Israel as The Family of the Unsandaled.

Deuteronomy 25:8-10 NIV

All I want to point out is that in this case he can choose whether or not he marries the widow.  

I really want to make some Sandal jokes about UBF members who refuse to marry people in spite of their elders persuasion, but I have not yet seen this at UBF yet….  If anyone has experienced sandal based persecution for refusing to marry someone the elder suggested (other than their sister in law or brother in law after….) please post about this.  (Updated Note:  I think I was saying I could see UBF elders twisting this scripture to start throwing shoes at people who refuse their suggested match, even though I never saw it happened or heard it suggested by elders yet, I am laughing about that possibility seeing how they twisted other Bible verses)

²⁸ But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.

1 Corinthians 7:28a NIV

³⁶ If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong^[b] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. ³⁷ But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. ³⁸ So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better.^[c]

1 Corinthians 7:36-38 NIV

It does not say if you marry you have not sinned if the UBF leadership felt it was led by God.  You can marry someone without sinning, if this is God’s word you do not need to pray about it to know whether or not it is sinful to marry the person you want to because God allows it without considering it sin.  You can also choose not to marry someone without sinning.  If God’s word says either choice is not sinning then could saying that you are settling for rest than the best if you do not have UBF leadership tell you which way they feel God is leading the decision possibly contradict scripture?  Do you really need supernatural leading of God if he already told you either way is acceptable?  If 1 corinthians 7 is inspired by God then you already know the answer if you pray and get an answer that contradicts the Bible then what?  Do you need to pray that prayer?  None the less I say if it is God’s word because Paul says stuff like, “(I, not the Lord)” in the NIV translation of verse 12 but also I say If it is God’s word to ask you if UBF leaders are really consistent about what they consider to be God’s word and whether or not they respect what they label as God’s word.

Bible verse that implies a  widow can choose which man she marries in post new testament times

 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord.

1 Corinthians 7:39 NIV

This is very clear it says anyone she wishes I believe that if this is God’s word than God is leading her by scripture to let her know she may marry anyone she wishes, but if the leadership says they must feel she is led by God than this alleged private revelation of theirs trumps the public revelation that she can marry who she wishes which is wrong!

Bible verse that implies a woman divorced by her ex-husband can choose if she marries

When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.² And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.³ And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;⁴ Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.⁵ When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

Potential Objections to a woman’s choice: The divorced woman verse does not say any man but another man and what about woman that are not divorced or widows

The word “may” is very important.  Since she may be another man’s wife she may choose to either marry or not marry another man other than her ex-husband (she can also remarry her ex-husband provided she is not disqualified under verses 3 and 4.)  [Updated note: That is if she did not marry another man after the divorce] This verse in the context of other scripture implies she can choose who she marries.  UBF leaders might object it does not say any man she wishes but another man so she can marry another man but only if they feel it is God’s leading otherwise it will be less than the best or even sinful.  If you only look at this Bible verse that might make sense but there are numerous verses that allow a man to choose any woman as a marriage partner.  A man can not choose to marry any woman he wants if he can not choose to marry the divorced woman unless the UBF leaders feel it is God’s leading and since he can marry any woman he wants based on other sections of the Bible, the divorced woman is eligible to choose to marry any  man who chooses to marry her, but she does not have to wait for him to propose she can ask him to propose to her and thus choose to request to marry any  man without sinning even if UBF leaders do not feel it is God’s leading.  This does not apply to divorced woman only because forbidding a man from marrying a (unmarried) non-divorced woman would also contradict the idea that a man can choose who he marries expressed elsewhere in scripture and thus allows any woman to marry any  man she wishes even if UBF leaders do not feel it is God’s leading. [Updated note: That is any woman can ask a man to propose to marry her, thus if a man can select any woman that means a woman can select any man unless otherwise prohibited]

Is there any value in the fact that woman who were divorced by their husband and widows are specifically mentioned as being permitted to marry if all women are permitted to choose their marriage partner? 

Yes some people think woman divorced by their husbands and widows are forbidden from remarrying, so it is a useful clarification that death or divorce does not forbid remarriage in all or most circumstances.

Fine detail on how the prohibition of kidnapping implies against forced marriage and a potential argument against the use of the word “rape” in some translations of Deuteronomy 22:27-28.  Which are useful to understand my overall reasoning structure but not meant to imply the practice of kidnapping or forced marriage occurred in UBF.  This section is last because it is not necessary reading to understand my main points for most readers but it is important to respond to some liberal counterarguments against my main points in which someone might try to claim the Bible especially the old testament is “pro-rape” and therefore should not be used as a basis for doctrine about marriage. [Updated Note: the word liberal has frequently changed it's meaning] [ Updated note: forced marriages did not occur in UBF in the sense of a shotgun to the head but did occur in the sense of using fraud to influence someone to marry simeone else ]

There are numerous verses in the Bible that imply that someone can choose their marriage partner or choose to be unmarried.  If one man were to marry one woman two people would be involved in the marriage, none the less some of the verses that mention a woman can choose her marriage partner do not mention that a man can decide whether or not he marries her and some of the verses that mention a man can decide to marry a woman do not mention that the woman can decide whether or not he marries him.  

Updated Note : I am not saying the Bible endorses rape but that there are some sections of the Bible that some people think endorse rape.  Even if hypothetically the Bible endorsed rape that does not mean that I endorse rape.  I am not telling people whether or not they should obey the Bible.  People in UBF who tell people to obey the Bible would be endorsing rape if the Bible endorsed rape.

Some people interpret (or in my opinion misinterpret) these scriptures to imply that the Bible allows men to force women to marry them.  I wish to suggest that the prohibitions on kidnapping in the Bible imply against forced marriage (since someone is not allowed to force you to stay somewhere you do not want to be and they cannot consummate the marriage if they are not together) with at least two possible exceptions the case of a man having premarital physical relations with a non-betrothed virgin woman (Deuteronomy 22:27-28) and the case of marrying a captive bride because someone who is captive could be in a sense kidnapped and so the verses permitting taking captives might imply exceptions in which kidnapping is allowed.  

None the less even though the verses in which kidnapping is forbidden would not work to show the captive war bride could reject a marriage partner it could be true that God has allowed the captive bride to reject the man as a marriage partner based on the fact that something does not have to be found in scripture to be true, to make this claim is not to say that scripture is false but rather to claim that scripture simply does not state every true fact in all of existence.

Updated note: I am saying there are two ways to interpret Deuteronomy 21 one allowing forced marriage of the captive woman and one only allowing marriage of her if she agrees.  To say these are two ways to interpret it, is not the same as me encouraging forced marriage myself, but simple academic honesty.  This issue of interpretation can not be resolved using the Bible alone and the original meaning may very well never be known.

In the United States it is permissible for someone to marry someone who is a prisoner in jail but even though they are a prisoner they can still choose not to get married to a specific person or at all, perhaps the same could be said about the permission to marry a captive woman.  Regarding the case of forcing people who had premarital relations to marry, in some NIV translations the word rape has been used in Deuteronomy 22:27-28 but the KJV does not say rape but “lay hold on her, and lie with her”  instead of the word “force” such as in Deuteronomy 22:25 KJV, it might be that the translators of the KJV assumed it was consensual in Deuteronomy 22:27-28 but forced in Deuteronomy 22:25, such that it could be possible the woman and the man who were forced to marry each other both willing chose to have premarital relations first as opposed to if the man raped her in which case he would have been put to death for kidnapping and there would be no forced marriage or if the woman kidnapped the man she would be put to death and there would be no forced marriage.

Updated note: The Contemporary English Version does not refer to it as rape at all except as a possible alternative translation in the footnotes

Suppose a woman isn’t engaged to be married, and a man talks her into sleeping with him. If they are caught, they will be forced to get married. He must give her father fifty pieces of silver as a bride-price and[e] can never divorce her.

[e] 22.28,29 talks her into sleeping with him. . . bride-price and: Or “forces her to have sex.29 Then if they are caught, he will have to marry her. He must give her father fifty pieces of silver as a bride-price and.”

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 Contemporary English Version with footnote

Accessed online on 2018 February 2

Bible verses forbidding kidnapping

And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

Exodus 21:16 KJV

If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him; then that thief shall die; and thou shalt put evil away from among you.

Deuteronomy 24:7 KJV

⁸ But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; ⁹ Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, ¹⁰ For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; ¹¹ According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
1 Timothy 1:8-11 KJV

Note that even though some of these words look like they are masculine in the English if an audience contains a 100 women and 1 man you are supposed to address the audience as though they are masculine plural, a masculine word can refer to woman/women in addition to men in both Greek and Hebrew so theses verses could still prohibit kidnapping woman.  These verses are important in that kidnapping being forbidden implies forced marriage being forbidden in most cases as I discussed above. [Updated Note: I am saying that the verses prohibiting kidnapping may apply to both males and females and not males only]

UBF dating break up policy vs Deuteronomy 22 and 1 Corinthians 7

Views expressed do not necessarily represent the official teachings of University Bible Fellowship nor any other current or ex member of University Bible Fellowships point of view

There was a woman I saw give a testimony in front of a large audience at UBF.  I am pretty sure the testimony was filtered by UBF members to ensure it was OK to say by UBF standards and I am pretty sure she was in line with standard operating procedure at the time.

She said she prayed for her Bible student to break up with her boyfriend.  I want to address if Bible teachers should be encouraging people to break up with their boyfriend or girlfriend, encouraging them to marry or being neutral.  I suggest that encouraging them to marry and being neutral can be supported but not encouraging them to break up.  When I say encourage to marry I am not talking about forced marriage, but suggesting marriage as an option.

I will first address this within what would be done in the Israelite community within the old testament and then what would be done within the new testament.  Considering two possibilities if the person had consensual sex with the person they are dating and if they did not have sex at all

Here is a document explaining my outlook on interpreting the old testament in modern times

https://discipleshipmethods.blogspot.com/2018/01/how-i-interpret-temporal-nature-of-old.html

Old testament Israelite community and couple had consensual sex

28 Suppose a woman isn’t engaged to be married, and a man talks her into sleeping with him. If they are caught, 29 they will be forced to get married. He must give her father fifty pieces of silver as a bride-price and[e] can never divorce her.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 Contemporary English Version

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy+22&version=CEV
Accessed online on 2018 February 1

So if the couple has consensual sex and the woman was a unmarried virgin not engaged to marry another man, the couple would be required to marry.  If a common UBF Bible teacher policy of encouraging the couple to break up was followed that would have been contrary to the rules in the word of God agreed upon by the Israelite community ( Exodus 19:8 ) and God.  If they were required to marry in the law spoken by God to Moses then how can people today say they are not even allowed to marry but instead the Bible teacher should pray for their break up?  By saying this I am not saying a forced marriage should always be required for consensual sex with a unmarried virgin woman in all modern societies but certainly if it was required in the land of the ancient Israelite society with God's approval how can a Bible teacher pray they break up?

Old testament Israelite community and a man is dating a unmarried divorced woman

When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 King James Version with bolding and underlining

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy+24&version=KJV
Accessed online on 2018 February 1

If they were dating a divorced women in the old testament Israelite community and they wanted to marry it says she may go and be another man's wife but even if one of the members of the couple is hoping to marry the other, who knows your Bible teacher might encourage them to break up instead of saying they may marry if they want to do as the Bible taught.

Old testament community and the man is dating a unmarried virgin who he did not have sex with

7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself,[b] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her.9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.

Exodus 21:7-11 NiV

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus+21&version=NIV

Accessed online on 2018 February 1

There is a designated way for them to marry and God has given them permission if they want to but the Bible teacher encourages them to break up anyway?  Should they be punished by discouraged marriage for good behavior of not having sex before marriage where as the couple that had sex is now allowed to marry?  Is encouraging them to break up instead of reminding them they are allowed to get married really Biblical?

New testament time period and couple did not have sex

8 Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

1 Corinthians 7:8-9 New International Version

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+corinthians+7&version=NIV

Accessed online on 2018 February 1

The Bible does not say if they have trouble controlling their passions break them up but that it is better to mary than to burn with passion.

Again in the new testament the Bible allows the couple to get married but the bible teacher might encourage them to break up.  What is the Bible teacher afraid of?  Outside loyalty, information transfer or sex outside of marriage are the typical fears I can think of.  If the fear is information transfer this suggests it is a cult, if the person is not a member of UBF so they want a break up this reminds me of Julia in the book 1984, but if the fear is sex outside of marriage because they can not control themselves while dating that person the suggestion is that they marry not that they be discouraged from dating.  I am not saying to push them to marry but certainly to discourage them from marrying by encouraging them to break up is contrary to 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 that encourages them to marry if they can not control themselves.  If they can control themselves should we punish that virtue by encouraging them to break up thus discouraging them from marrying?  How foolish

As the novel closes, Winston discovers that his love for Julia has been replaced by love for Big Brother – the only form of love that is approved by the Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_(Nineteen_Eighty-Four)

Accessed online on 2018 February 1

New testament time period and couple did have sex

But if anyone supposes to be behaving improperly to his virgin, if she is beyond youth, and it ought to be so, let him do what he wills; he does not sin; let them marry.
1 Corinthians 7:36 Berean Literal Bible

If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married.

1 Corinthians 7:36 New International Version

If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin.

1 Corinthians 7:36 English Standard Version

But if any man thinks he is acting improperly toward his virgin, if she is past marriageable age, and so it must be, he can do what he wants. He is not sinning; they can get married.

1 Corinthians 7:36 Holman Christian Standard Bible

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/7-36.htm

Accessed online on 2018 February 1

37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better.[c]

1 Corinthians 7:37-38 New International Version

[b] 1 Corinthians 7:36 Or if she is getting beyond the usual age for marriage

[c] 1 Corinthians 7:38 Or 36 If anyone thinks he is not treating his daughter properly, and if she is getting along in years (or if her passions are too strong), and he feels she ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. He should let her get married. 37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind to keep the virgin unmarried—this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who gives his virgin in marriage does right, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207

Accessed online on 2018 February 1

Although the principles above for 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 already would apply for this situation additionally depending on how 1 Corinthians 7:36-38 is translated my claims above may apply extra so not less if the couple already had sex. (SIC)

All the reasons for allowing them to get married if they did not have sex also apply to allowing them to get married if they did have sex.  However depending on how 1 Corinthians 7:36-38 is translated it may also specifically allow them to get married if they did have sex which is contrary to the policy of the Bible teacher pushing them to break up and not get married.

A true story of a better Bible teacher

One of the Bible students a teacher was teaching got pregnant by her boyfriend she was dating at the same time that she was a Bible student.  This teacher did not discourage them from marrying and encourage them to break up but approved of her students decision to get married.  This student left the group and the teacher seemed fine with that and she did not seem to use the marriage to try to hook her into the group.  I think this teacher was a good influence.  This teacher later decided to leave UBF after years of service to UBF because they were to controlling.

For a better understanding of the voluntary choice to get married please read this foundational article of mine

https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/01/you-can-marry-anyone-who-consents-that.html

For a better understanding of what is ethically wrong with marriage by faith please read this article

https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/01/marriage-by-faith-is-rape-via-third.html

If you do not like my writings on this topic and think I am the one who is suggesting unethical forced marriages and not UBF please read my response here

https://marriagebyfaith.blogspot.com/2018/01/who-really-is-pro-rape-here-me-or-ubf.html