Assertion: betrothal | /r/HasProperty | binding
Facets:
value: legally
type: MANNER
value: morally
type: MANNER
value: as marriage
type: MANNER
value: as the gentile marriage
type: OTHER
value: as a marriage contract
type: MANNER
value: upon the families
type: TRANSITIVE-OBJECT
value: upon the children
type: TRANSITIVE-OBJECT
value: before marriage
type: TEMPORAL
value: unlike a formal betrothal
type: OTHER
Source sentences:
text: Divorce WAS available for betrothal fornication because betrothal was BINDING (papers drawn up/signatures/dowry, etc).
text: The period of engagement preceding marriage; betrothal was a binding contract established between two families and sealed by the exchange of gifts.
text: Such a story only makes sense if the betrothal was considered binding.
text: Unlike a formal betrothal, however, such an engagement is not legally binding, and the couple may "break off" their engagement with only emotional consequences.
text: BETROTHAL IS a binding promise leading to marriage.
text: As marriage is a covenant witnessed and ordained by God (Malachi 2:14, Proverbs 2:16-17, Matthew 19:6) and binding in every respect, betrothal is a binding commitment before marriage.
text: The betrothal is considered a binding contract upon the families and the children.
text: When Joseph learned that Mary was pregnant, and before he understood the miraculous nature of the conception, he thought that Mary had violated her betrothal, which was as binding as a marriage contract.
text: Upon the signing of the betrothal, there was no backing out of the wedding; betrothals were legally binding.
text: ……because Jesus was now laying down the law bringing marriage back to creation intent—-one man/one woman for life—-no more polygamy, no more divorce—-except for fornication (unchastity BEFORE the marriage bed) for the Jew whose betrothal was just as binding as the Gentile marriage
text: The betrothal was so binding that the couple would need a religious divorce or (get) in order to annul the contract (Deut.
text: Betrothal was binding, and it could only be ended by death or divorce.
text: Betrothal was in fact legally binding.
text: The betrothal was binding and could only be undone by a divorce with proper grounds, such as the bride being found not to be a virgin, (see Joseph and Mary - Matt 1 v18-19 )
text: So while the couple a betrothed couple did not live together, betrothal was so formal and so binding that to break the agreement required a certificate of divorce as if the couple was in fact married.
text: Betrothal was binding.
text: Although the betrothal was as binding as marriage it was not consummated.
text: Upon the signing of the betrothal, there was no backing out of the wedding; betrothals were legally binding.
text: The period of engagement preceding marriage; betrothal was a binding contract established between two families and sealed by the exchange of gifts.
text: An engagement is an intention to marry; a betrothal is a morally binding contract.
text: Although the bride and groom probably had not met yet, betrothal was considered binding unless both families agreed to annul the contract.