Taking the her last name

[Annessa3]

wait. . Link, the ultra traditionalist, was not married by a member of the clergy?
because he didn't find that in the Bible.....

are you *sure* you're legally married in each country of the world?

 

[LinkH]

wait. . Link, the ultra traditionalist, was not married by a member of the clergy?
because he didn't find that in the Bible.....

are you *sure* you're legally married in each country of the world?

You need to go back and read a little more carefully. I have a friend who is a part of a house church where the father of the bride conducts the ceremony. Mine was performed by a Baptist pastor in Jakarta. But her father gave her away at the wedding.

 

[ValleyGal]

When you marry your wife, she joins your family. She joins your clan. She takes your name and becomes part of your family.

Actually, the Bible does not support this. Here's what it does say: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife...." With this verse in mind, it makes sense that he would take her name.

 

[rick357]

Actually, the Bible does not support this. Here's what it does say: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife...." With this verse in mind, it makes sense that he would take her name.

When it says united to his wife it is talking about a consumation. marriage is a picture of Jesus and us...he left his Fathers house to come and consumate with us making us his bride and we took his name because his name is his fathers name.
That aside you wont find much scripture on the subject since surnames are a post biblical invention....so the name doesnt matter as much as will the grooms parents feel dishonered by his decision this would be the biblical issue. I dont know his situation so cant answer the op

 

[mkgal1]

Personally, I think that verse means more than consummation. I think "cleave to his wife" also includes the idea that his future wife's opinions and feelings have a greater influence on him that any one else's do.

 

[rick357]

Personally, I think that verse means more than consummation. I think "cleave to his wife" also includes the idea that his future wife's opinions and feelings have a greater influence on him that any one else's do.

Yes consumation is the physical symbol of the two becoming one as baptism is a physical symbol of resurection in christ.
From that time forwardwhatever you do to your spouse you do to yourself..if you hurt them you hurt yourself if you nurture them you nurture yourself if you disagree you are double minded...why could Sara call Abraham lord because it took nothing from her...if a man abuses his wife he has crippled himself..if a wife belittles her husband she makes herself small.they are one. This is why divorce makes people crippled to their core...God can heal them but they always carry a scar
As to the lord thing people dont like it because they think of it like the gentile kings who lord over a subject...this is not how we are to be but instead we serve we lay down our life we are joint hiers of christ...
At the last we remember that spouses and children do not belong to us but the Lord...if we watch over them and keep them we have a blessing from the Lord...if we instead abuse them and use them to do our will and serve us then we bringe the judgment and wrath of God against ourself

 

[LinkH]

Actually, the Bible does not support this. Here's what it does say: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife...." With this verse in mind, it makes sense that he would take her name.

I see what you are saying about joining her clan. I get that more from the passages about the patriarchs and Israel. Lineage in the tribe was passed through the father. Lavrite marriages carried on the name of a man, too.

I don't see any arguing for his taking her name in that passage. Adam names her 'kind' as woman, isha, and later names her personally as Hawa, Eve. He didn't take any name she gave him as far as we know.

 

[LinkH]

Btw, I wish the OP and his future bride a long and happy life.

But there is a problem with a man taking his wife's name. If the wife dies first, then he's got his wife's maiden name. It's weird enough as it is to take the wife's family name. But if he remarries is he going to give the second wife the first wife's family name? How would she like that?

Is dumping one's last name to take one's wife's family name a way of cutting ties and burning bridges with existing family? It could have some bad effects. It would be weird if the wife's family were hurt if she took her husbands name since most wives do that in our culture. But it sure could hurt some feelings for a man to dump his family name.

 

[Hetta]

Btw, I wish the OP and his future bride a long and happy life.

But there is a problem with a man taking his wife's name. If the wife dies first, then he's got his wife's maiden name. It's weird enough as it is to take the wife's family name. But if he remarries is he going to give the second wife the first wife's family name? How would she like that?

A woman who marries a widower would take a name that his previous wife had. She would be the "second" Mrs x. People who love each other don't get that stressed out about these things.

 

[mkgal1]

I don't see any arguing for his taking her name in that passage. Adam names her 'kind' as woman, isha, and later names her personally as Hawa, Eve. He didn't take any name she gave him as far as we know.

No one is "giving" anyone a name. It's the OP (and his future wife) *choosing* names.

 

[LinkH]

No one is "giving" anyone a name. It's the OP (and his future wife) *choosing* names.

The post I was responding to was 'reaching'. My comment made sense in context.

Taking the wife's name may create havoc if any of his descendants try to figure out their own geneology.

 

[Hetta]

Taking the wife's name may create havoc if any of his descendants try to figure out their own geneology.

Seriously? Have you heard of ancestry.com? You can put in any name and trace any part of your family. Also, most people keep a record, and also there is verbal history.

I think there is a little too much drama being attached to the OP's choice, which remains his choice, not the choice of anyone else. I don't know why anyone else would get so upset about it.

 

[mkgal1]

The post I was responding to was 'reaching'. My comment made sense in context.

Taking the wife's name may create havoc if any of his descendants try to figure out their own geneology.

Your post was in reference to Genesis....and I disagree that it made sense....like I'd said, "no one is 'giving' names here---they are choosing a name".

"Create havoc"? Using hyperbole isn't going to make your point any stronger. You realize that a lot of people's last names were changed at Ellis Island.....right? That's what we have public records for. A person can't just start using a new name---there needs to be an official record of it.

 

[DZoolander]

Well, most of the time genealogy is handled via birth records...which have the birth name of mother and father on them. While it might create an interesting question of "How'd that happen?" four or five generations down the line...I can't imagine it creating havoc. lol

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

In the end its a couples choice on whos name to take. No matter whos name you take the world will not end. And it won't change anything in your life really. Although I'm sure you may have confused people when they see their male friend has a new last name lol. Although I do imagine some family may not like the idea. Biblically whos name you take doesn't matter either.

 

[Jake and Jenn]

You sure don't hear of that often. It's really a matter if preference I guess, albeit strange. I get along with/respect/feel more a part of my wife's family than my own, but taking her name because if it? Hmmm. Call me insecure, but as a man I couldn't do it.

 

[LinkH]

If judges keep reading 'rights' into the Constitution that aren't there to support people engaging in sexual perversion like they have been, incest may eventually be legalized. If that happens and a man has the same last name as his wife's family, others may suspect him of incest.

In some cultures, you are allowed to marry lots of your mother's relatives but no one from your father's last name. Koreans are like that (assuming it's the same lineage of last name. Seoul Lee's can't marry each other, but can marry Pusan Lees.) Some Indonesian people-groups are like that, too.

 

[LinkH]

No one is "giving" anyone a name. It's the OP (and his future wife) *choosing* names.

Adam, in a sense, named woman after himself. She shall be called ishah (woman) because she was taken out of ish (man.)

 

[Hetta]

Omw.

 

[DZoolander]

If judges keep reading 'rights' into the Constitution that aren't there to support people engaging in sexual perversion like they have been, incest may eventually be legalized. If that happens and a man has the same last name as his wife's family, others may suspect him of incest.

Did I miss something about judges/rights/etc in this thread?