Are you okay with common law marriage?

No, the standard is self-existing. Fallen man knows it. He applies it to himself everyday. He doesn't want people to kill him, to steal from him, to be unfaithful to him, to lie about him, etc.

That's common law.

 

I'm not abcgrad but if I may...

If they are married then they are married. I might not agree with how it came about, but the fact they are married 'now' is what is important at the time.

The same one you did in Gen 2 and others.
Another I like to use the example of a person becoming part of church. The church and marriage are used in scripture as illistrations of each other.
And other I like is the Wedding of the CHurch and Christ.

At these ceremonies there are always witness and these witness, who are there to observe and validate the event did in fact transpire, are at a particular place to note the 'marriage ceremony' (which is nothing more than the event and not necessarily a scripted exchange of preacher, person, etc..).

Whether it was done by a christian/pastor or not does not negate the marriage that took place and established their union before witnesses.

As for scripture on the 'license', you will find that referred to in scripture as a contract. And yes, the couple did stand before witness and it was presided over by another (the one who either performed or guided the ceremony) though not nessarily does it have to be a religious leader.

No, what you have is simply simply stating they were married (Abraham to her to be his wife). Scripture does not play out every detail of that which is was commonly understood. Research historically what established a marriage in different cultures and you will find they are remarkably very similar.

 

Ira Ellman, Family Law, p. 30:

Colorado
Weaver & Fitzhugh, Attorneys at Law

Rhode Island
http://www.ricw.ri.gov/publications/lrh.pdf

Montana
http://courts.mt.gov/library/topic/common_law_marriage.mcpx

South Carolina
Kinard & Kinard

Shall I go on?

 

And just how you would happen to find out that their marriage followed common law? A questionnaire? Interrogation by the Church Ladies League?

 

My church does not just accept someone who comes forward and fills out a membership card as a member. Our pastor will talk with/interview the person(s) wanting to join our church and this topic would be covered during that, as well as their conversion and spiritual life.

What some states might recognize does not change what the bible says about marriage and sex outside of it. Just because a couple decide to set up house does not make them married, nor does it excuse them from the sin of sex outside of the bounds of marriage. Trying to use the guise of "common law" to excuse sin will not and cannot make it right. God will still hold them accountable just as He would hold our church accountable for allowing that kind of sin within the congregation.

Another thought... what kind of example would allowing "common law" couples to become members set for the youth of the congregation? They are already bombarded with sex on every hand. Would any here willing set this kind of example before them, saying that it is OK to live together because the state said so? It is this kind of thinking and acting that has weakened our churches and neutered it.

 

Talk about splitting hairs! I think of it as married and unmarried. No gray areas....sorry. "Almost" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

Yes, I lived with my college sweetheart, every intention of marrying him. I was living in sin until the day we stood in front of the preacher and took the vows, signed the license, and declared our marriage in front of "God and these witnesses". I was not married until then.

 

jerome, as I have shown previousl, at least one state requires 1 year in order to be married by common law.

 

And which state is that?

 

Thanks for proving my point, Allen. You still are not seeing around the log.

This thread IS about common law marriage, and IS NOT about cohabitation.

I'll try to make this real simple:

Some jurisdictions around the world do not recognize it as legal marriage. In those places it is obviously a sin to try to have a common law marriage.

Some jurisdictions allow it but require cohabitation and consummation. Obviously that is also sinful.

But some places allow it without requiring cohabitation. I know of none that do not require some form of public declaration (witnesses). In these areas there is absolutely nothing sinful about it.

Provided legal marriage between a man and a woman take place, and provided it is a one man one woman marriage, it is scriptural.

Nowhere I can find in my Bible does it say it must be performed by clergy, by civil officiant, or indeed requires a ceremony of any kind.

The whole topic reminds me of something I once read by a missionary to China in the early 1900's. Some mission boards chided them because the native women were "naked." They were not unclothed, and in fact were pretty much totally covered. They just were not wearing western style clothing, hence the judgmental blue noses decided to brand them as "naked."

Now, if we really want to worry about marriages in the Baptist churches, we could start with the fact we have so many "Christians getting divorced" and deal with serial marriages in the pew.

Once we do our own marriages right we can worry about other folks's.

 

check out links I've posted on these topics, it's been posted, not my problem if you missed it

 

There are one and the same. The only difference is that some states have taken the low road and said that those shacked up are now married in the eyes of the law. That is the only difference and it is in the eyes of man... not the eyes of God. It is only the sin-sick of today that don't have a problem with this.

I am completely ashamed to see the attitudes of so many here regarding this. And we wonder why our churches are emptying out, why our youth are walking away. This is a glaring example why. We have pitched out tents toward Sodom and are living in its shadow. Our garments of white are now soiled and muddied by the sin we tolerate and allow.

I do not hate anyone who is in a "common law" arrangement. I am to love them, but I am not supposed to approve and condone their open and rebellious sin. I would welcome them to the church, but would stand against them joining until they either took up separate residences and were arranging to be married, or they agreed to be married beforehand.

That so many are so willing to wink at this sin and let it go saddens me, and I can imagine how much more it saddens God Himself.

 

Who is the authority to decide who is married?
The church or the state?

I guess what I am getting at is this...

If a man and woman come to your church, and the state says they are married... you have NO right to make them go through a ceremony before they can join.. There is absolutely NO biblical precedence for that.. Just your opinion that they are not married.. although legally they are.

You may not like the style of wedding they chose, but you have no right to say they are not married.. ONLY the state can do that.

 

If a couple is declaring in public that they have chosen each other as man and wife, that is a public declaration.
It becomes a matter of public record when they declare themselves married, as has been pointed out earlier...

As for a license, show me biblical proof that a person must get a license to be married in all cases... and I will agree with you.

But apply this to all humanity in all times.. not just Americans living in todays time.

 

Considering all the warnings and punishments for fornication and adultery, I would say that the bible has a lot to say about who is and is not married. The bible does not give us a set ceremony, but it does outline that marriage is a set thing and not just two people living/sleeping together.

I take my stand on my own, if need be. I see sin as sin and I call it like I see it. Just because a state decided that people could co-habitate and that makes them "married" does not mean that I have to agree with them. That is a law that I oppose, just like abortion's legality.

 

That's right, and statutes don't change that.

Wrong. It's about both.

All men are accountable to God to live a certain way. They know the way, by nature, and they prove it by how they demand to be treated themselves, and by the statutes they enact in their societies.

Common law is law.

 

Many states have abolished common-law marriage by statute, because common-law marriage was seen as encouraging fraud and condoning vice, debasing conventional marriage, and as no longer necessary with increased access to clergy and justices of the peace. (For example: Cal. Civ. Code § 4100; N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 11 ; Furth v. Furth, 133 S.W. 1037, 1038-39 (Ark. 1911); Owens v. Bentley, 14 A.2d 391, 393 (Del. Super. 1940); Milford v. Worcester, 7 Mass. 48 (1910)).

From here