Concerning marriage/disclaimer

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Gina B, Apr 11, 2006.

  1. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    I put this in the last post I made there, but want to repeat it as it may get lost and some may miss it.

    This is not for debate, it's simply a statement I feel I have a responsibility to make, and didn't want it lost. Disclaimer sounded all legal, didn't it? LOL

    One thing I want to make very clear: I am not condoning young couples running off and living together without the knowledge of their families and other people, in an attempt to live in a marriage they know their family doesn't approve of. Be open, be honest. If one has true convictions about involving the government in a marriage, this can be talked about with family, and a home ceremony performed, but if it's truly an issue and will cause strife in the family, it's not an issue that's worth it at this point in time. Most people do NOT have strong convictions that say the government should not be involved in marriage.

    Strive to keep peace. Strive to live as Christ would have us live. There is a difference between convictions and what you think is ok. What you think is ok doesn't always have to be what you have to do, and can even be wrong if you do it with the knowledge that it will cause strife. Conviction from the Holy Spirit is very very different than something being alright in and of itself.

    If I were to remarry, which isn't happening anytime soon, and I chose not to involve the government, I would inform all of my family and friends of my intentions. I would seek their approval, make they understood my position, and involve them in whatever we decided would constitute our commitment, whether it was words spoken by a father (and ideally that would be the case) or a simple prayer between myself and my future husband. If it was really an issue for someone and would cause them to stumble, although I don't see how it would, I would seriously reconsider the method for their sake.

    I just want to make sure that people know I am not condoning/advising/promoting couples going off and living together and using the lack of government involvement as an excuse and an okay for possibly unethical/unbiblical actions/lifestyles.

    There, that's it.

    I am not responding to arguments/questions, as that may be done on the thread itself instead of here. This was simply to ensure that people saw this part of my posting, which was stuck on page seven and may be overlooked.
     
  2. Frenchy

    Frenchy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    SIN is SIN is SIN. :eek: :rolleyes:
     
  3. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gina .....Good post that leaves no doubt about your position....and I personally agree with you.

    Frenchy...just like most everybody else in the other thread (myself included)...most of us (including yourself) were spouting our opinions of what the bible teaches without offering much of any scripture support to back our opinions up.I'll personally admit that at the time I was just too lazy to dig up the verses....but I do know what and why I believe what I believe....AND I'M NOT QUALIFIED TO DEFINE SIN APART FROM WHAT THAT BOOK TEACHES. In the Old Testament you have to stretch your imagination a pretty good ways to get ANY KIND of legal wedding ceremony out of ANY passage that talks about marriage.That is my opinion but I'll stand by it regardless of what the "theologians" here wish to say.

    Gina....if the Lord gives you PEACE in your heart about your convictions and you are sure of them then praise God and always remember to continually pray for wisdom and knowledge FROM HIM that would help you to live by faith acceptably for the Lord Jesus.God Bless you sister.

    Greg Sr.
     
  4. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thank you Sir. [​IMG]
     
  5. Frenchy

    Frenchy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    You want bible verses here are some along with dictionary and Greek word meanings.


    "I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him." (2 Corinthians 11:2)

    "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

    "We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did--and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died." (1 Corinthians 10:8)
    "Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral." (Hebrews 13:4)

    "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars-- their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

    "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body." (1 Corinthians 6:18-20)

    "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people." (Ephesians 5:3)

    "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 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)

    In the above passage, notice that Paul had a very specific reason why people should get married: "to avoid fornication." Here is what the English word "fornication" means:

    "to have sex with someone who you are not married to" (Freesearch Dictionary)
    "Fornication: Sexual intercourse that is "illicit", outside of marriage." (Medical Dictionary)
    "fornication n. sexual intercourse between a man and woman who are not married to each other." (Law Dictionary)
    "consensual sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other" (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)
    "NOUN: Sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other.

    WORD HISTORY: The word fornication had a lowly beginning suitable to what has long been the low moral status of the act to which it refers. The Latin word fornix, from which fornicti, the ancestor of fornication, is derived, meant "a vault, an arch." The term also referred to a vaulted cellar or similar place where prostitutes plied their trade. This sense of fornix in Late Latin yielded the verb fornicr, "to commit fornication," from which is derived fornicti, "whoredom, fornication." Our word is first recorded in Middle English about 1303." (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.)

    "c.1300, from O.Fr. fornication, from L.L. fornicationem (nom. fornicatio), from fornicari "fornicate," from L. fornix (gen. fornicis) "brothel," originally "arch, vaulted chamber" (Roman prostitutes commonly solicited from under the arches of certain buildings), from fornus "oven of arched or domed shape." Strictly, "voluntary sex between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman;" extended in the Bible to adultery." (Online Etymology Dictionary)

    "Fornication - Hebrew: zanah / Greek: porneia
    Fornication is voluntary sexual intercourse between a man and woman who are not married to each other. Adultery is one type of fornication.

    In every form, fornication was sternly condemned by the Mosaic law among God's people, the Israelites (Lev. 21:9; 19:29; Deut. 22:20-11, 23-29; 23:18; Ex. 22:16). (See ADULTERY.)

    Fornication is also mentioned many times in the New Testament (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; John 8:41; Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25; Rom. 1:29; 1 Cor 5:1, 6:13, 18, 7:2; 10:8; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:3; Jude 1:7; Rev. 2:14, 20-21; 9:21; 14:8; 17:2,4).

    "The Greek word for 'fornication' (porneia) could include any sexual sin committed after the betrothal contract. ...In Biblical usage, 'fornication' can mean any sexual congress outside monogamous marriage. It thus includes not only premarital sex, but also adultery, homosexual acts, incest, remarriage after un-Biblical divorce, and sexual acts with animals, all of which are explicitly forbidden in the law as given through Moses (Leviticus 20:10-21). Christ expanded the prohibition against adultery to include even sexual lusting (Matthew 5:28)." (Dr. Henry M. Morris)
    The word "fornication" is sometimes used in a symbolic sense in the Bible, for example, meaning a forsaking of God or a following after idols (Isa. 1:2; Jer. 2:20; Ezek. 16; Hos. 1:2; 2:1-5; Jer. 3:8-9)." (christiananswers.net, emphasis added)

    So depending on the context, the Greek word porneia can mean adultery, incest, prostitution, idolatry, etc., but the important point here is that porneia also means fornication (premarital sex) as in this example:

    http://www.layhands.com/IsPremaritalSexASin.htm
     
  6. Frenchy

    Frenchy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gregory Perry Sr My very first post on the subject had scripture



    and I agreed with bapmoms scripture verses, many used lots of scripture and Gina didn’t!

     
  7. Wildfire

    Wildfire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    The last thread on this really got out of control. Even the moderator jumped in with opinion that isn't supported by Scripture. (e.g., The moderator claimed that marriage is first and foremost a civil matter. Says who?)

    I will make the same point I made several times: God ordains marriages. Not governments. If we are going to "give" marriage to governments, then we must accept whatever the government does with it, including homosexual unions.

    Someone said I was acting deceptively by uniting people in their 70's without a government license. That would be true if we were lying to anyone, which we're not. It's clear what we're doing, and up front with everyone.

    If government-sanctioned marriages are God's solution, why are so many of them broken? I submit to you that a marriage truly submitted to God -- with or without government sanction -- is a lasting marriage.

    "Sin is sin is sin." These are the answers of people who don't have answers. Do I disagree that sin is sin? Certainly not.

    Until someone can show me a Biblical description of what a marriage must be (not just someone's inference), then you are stating your opinion. In that regard, you are entitled to it, but it weighs zero in the discussion of what the Bible says.

    God requires us to honor our marriages. Whether we have a government license or not, that remains true. It's not illegal in most states for married people to have orgies in their own homes (some exceptions, but true in most states). Do we want to accept that government definition of marriage? If not, then why would someone argue so passionately that a marriage is first and foremost a civil matter, or that we must submit our marriage to government laws?

    I'm done with this topic. If you want to jump all over me, feel free, with the sure knowledge that I won't punch back. I'll read your replies, maybe fume a little, maybe smile a little.

    (When we get to heaven, we'll all laugh at how naive we were anyway.)
     
  8. Shiloh

    Shiloh
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    937
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I were to remarry, which isn't happening anytime soon, and I chose not to involve the government, I would inform all of my family and friends of my intentions.
    -------------------------------------------------
    What is "The Government"? Isn"t it ...for the people by the people? If you feel the way you do why get married? Why not just shack up? What would you do if your daughter wants to live with her boy friend?
     
  9. Wildfire

    Wildfire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    I posted a great reply here, but then I remembered that I promised not to do that. Fortunately, I remembered in time to edit, so just ignore this space as the rantings of a man who didn't get enough sleep last night.

    Ahhh, but too bad. It was a brilliant post!

    Blessings all!
     
  10. Kilad

    Kilad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was married when I was stationed in Washington. I wish I could remember what they call it but you can get married in Washington without involving the government in any way, shape, or form. It is strictly between you, your spouse, the preacher, and God.

    Anyone in Washington remember what the state calls it? I have been trying to remember since I have left there but this old mind refuses to give up the goods.
     
  11. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    [unnecessary remarks edited]
    Who are we to rebel against the authorities that God has ordained and set over us? Do you consider yourself an outlaw? “Submit yourself to the higher authorities.” That is speaking of government.
    James 1:8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
    You seem to be preaching the humanistic relativism taught in the public schools. There are not absolutes. What is right for you is not necessarily right for me. What is wrong for you is not necessarily wrong for you. There are not absolutes. In fact that is the only absolute (There are no absolutes).
    Is that right Gina? Is that your philosophy? Is that what your brand of Christianity teaches you? Would Christ convict some people to marry according to the law, and convict others to marry without the law? Does Christ have two standards on this matter? Is God himself confused? Is keeping peace in the family more important to you than keeping the law?
    And in the eyes of most people in our society and in the eyes of the government you would be living common-law. Or what other people say—shacked up; still others—slanderously committing fornication. You “marriage” as you call it, would not be legitimate, not in the eyes of God, not in the eyes of man.

    Let me give you an example. There was a preacher giving a seminar on the family. The subject of marriage came up. He had views much the same as yours stemming from his views from separation of church and state. One young person asked him: “Do you believe that two people exchanging vows, sincerely with each other, in the presence of one or two witnesses, constitutes a proper marriage in God’s eyes? The preacher didn’t know he was being set up. He answered according to his belief system: “Yes, that is right.”
    Shortly afterward two young people (still in their teens) gathered a couple of their best friends together, and said their vows to each other in front of their friends in a secluded place. Then they started living together with the pretense that they were married. Both came from good Christian families. It was a shock to both parents of both families. The people of both churches involved and others in the community considered that these young people were simply shacked-up, and living together. No one recognized their marriage for what it was. It was a sham—an excuse for living together. It was a scandal. It was against their parents’ wishers, their pastors’ wishes, the wishes of many others that cared for them. Though no one could look into the bedroom, if they indeed were having sex, it was fornication. It was outside of the bounds of marriage.
    They finally repented of their wickedness, confessed their sin before the church, and agreed to have a legalized marriage according to the law of the land by a licensed pastor. It would have to be very small now. It certainly wouldn’t have been all that the bride’s parents would have wanted for their daughter, but the damage had already been done. A broken “wedding” had to be fixed because of the foolishness of two young people who had listened to the wrong advise of a preacher who had no respect for the law. What a tragedy!

    You already have condoned that.

    Now let’s look at what the Bible says:

    First note that after the Flood, God set up a dispensation of government. There were laws put in place such as the law of capital punishment in Gen.9:6. But these laws were to be administered by the various societies that existed at that time. And the laws and customs varied from place to place, even as they do to this day.

    Genesis 24:2-3 And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over all that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: And I will make thee swear by the LORD, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell:
    --The taking of an oath was solemnized by a symbolic gesture. Here in a court of law we place our hand on the Bible. More casually we shake hands on a deal. But then one put his hand under the thigh, thus making a promise to keep what he vowed. Abraham made his servant vow that he would not take a wife for Isaac from among the Canaanites.
    Genesis 24:9 And the servant put his hand under the thigh of Abraham his master, and sware to him concerning that matter.

    Genesis 24:33 And there was set meat before him to eat: but he said, I will not eat, until I have told mine errand. And he said, Speak on.
    --The servant arrives at the house of Laban and insists on telling of his errand, the mission that Abraham sent him on.

    Genesis 24:49-51 And now if ye will deal kindly and truly with my master, tell me: and if not, tell me; that I may turn to the right hand, or to the left. Then Laban and Bethuel answered and said, The thing proceedeth from the LORD: we cannot speak unto thee bad or good. Behold, Rebekah is before thee, take her, and go, and let her be thy master's son's wife, as the LORD hath spoken.
    --Both Laban and Bethuel recognize that thus far everything that has befallen the servant is from God. They give permission for Rebekkeh at this point to go with him and be the wife of Isaak.

    Genesis 24:53 And the servant brought forth jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment, and gave them to Rebekah: he gave also to her brother and to her mother precious things.
    --Notice a dowry is given. This is in accordance with the customs of the land. In some lands today it is not only customary but lawful. One cannot marry their daughter without a dowry. The servant doesn’t expect to receive a bride for nothing (without some expression of gratitude). His master is very rich, and Laban also knows this.

    Genesis 24:54 And they did eat and drink, he and the men that were with him, and tarried all night; and they rose up in the morning, and he said, Send me away unto my master.
    --Here, one might say is the wedding feast. They ate and drank, and feasted all night long. Then finally the morning came and the servant wanted to depart immediately. His work there had been accomplished.

    Genesis 24:58 And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go.
    --Notice the question and answer put to Rebekah:
    Wilt thou go with this man.
    I wilt go.
    --The nature of this question and this answer has not changed to this day. “Will you be this man’s wife? I will.”

    Genesis 24:60 And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.
    --After the affirmation of her vow to be his wife she is given a blessing like none other—that she will be the mother of an innumerable progeny, and that her offspring would conquer even the territories of her enemies.
    Where could one find more of a wedding vow and ceremony than in these few verses right here. Let us keep in mind that they did not have the modern transportation that we have. Had they possessed cars, trains, planes, etc. the entire wedding party would have gone straight to Abraham’s house and all celebrated the entire wedding ceremony and feast right there. But this was done at a distance. They had to have the ceremony without the groom. They would no longer ever see their daughter again. Both a feast and a ceremony, and a blessing were in place here. It was all done according to the laws and customs of the land.

    Genesis 24:65-67 For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself. And the servant told Isaac all things that he had done. And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's death.
    --Finally the Bridal party reaches Isaac. It says that Isaac took Rebekah, and she became his wife. It doesn’t hive us all the details. It doesn’t say how much of a ceremony there was. The very next verse (in just one verse) tells us that Abraham took Keturah for a wife. But it gives no other details about the marriage. The Bible does not always furnish us the details that we are looking for. Just because it is silent here about any ceremony doesn’t necessarily mean that there wasn’t one. However, it does say, “she became his wife, and he loved her.”

    Genesis 28:1-2 And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan. Arise, go to Padanaram, to the house of Bethuel thy mother's father; and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's brother.
    --Now it is time for Isaac to find a wife for his son Jacob, and he sends him back to the same household: Laban’s.

    Genesis 29:11-12 And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son: and she ran and told her father.
    --Jacob sees Rachel and finding out who she was it appears that it is love at first sight, although probably he is more relieved that he has found the right place after traveling such a great distance.

    Genesis 29:14-23 And Laban said to him, Surely thou art my bone and my flesh. And he abode with him the space of a month. And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be? And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured. And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter. And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me. And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her. And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast. And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
    --Now consider this story and all that is involved here.
    Laban compels Jacob to abide with him, for he is a relative.
    They discuss the matter of wages. What did Jacob want?
    Jacob loved Rachel, and said that he would work for seven years for his daughter Rachel. A contract was made. There were legalities involved.
    He worked for the seven years. A public wedding ceremony was held. Jacob was deliberately deceived by Laban.

    Genesis 29:25-27 And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me? And Laban said, It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.
    --It must not be so done in our country. speaks to custom. Going against such custom is going against the wishes of the family, which also results in rebellion on the part of the child in many cases. This may have not been the case here. Here it was Laban’s deceitful heart trying to get the most out of Jacob as he possibly could. He knew that God had richly blessed him.
    He was told to “fulfill her week.” In other words he would work another seven years for Rachel. That was another contract that he made, all according to the due process of law. It did involve law!

    Genesis 31:41 Thus have I been twenty years in thy house; I served thee fourteen years for thy two daughters, and six years for thy cattle: and thou hast changed my wages ten times.
    --The total time Jacob served Laban was 20 years.

    John 2:7-8 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.
    --This was not a wedding held in secret. It was public. There was a ceremony. It had a governor. Both saved and unsaved were invited, indicating that it was more civil than it was religious. There is nothing to indicate that this was in any way a religiously conducted marriage. The very fact that they had a governor of the feast points otherwise.

    Matthew 25:1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
    Matthew 25:10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
    --One can learn much from the parable of the Ten Virgins, another wedding ceremony.
    Only those that had prepared themselves for the wedding were allowed in. There were obviously some restrictions put in place so that not everyone could attend.

    Matthew 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
    --This was a civil wedding.

    Matthew 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.

    Matthew 22:8-9 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
    --Note that those that did come were from very poor backgrounds.

    Matthew 22:11-13 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
    --Because they were from poor backgrounds they no doubt were given a robe upon entering the marriage grounds. He had nothing of his own to give. But he was not wearing that which had been given to him. Those who refuse the gift of righteousness provided by Christ will suffer the same fate. Salvation is a free gift.

    Now look at the marriage ceremony of Samson in Judges 14:
    Judges 14:1-2 And Samson went down to Timnath, and saw a woman in Timnath of the daughters of the Philistines. And he came up, and told his father and his mother, and said, I have seen a woman in Timnath of the daughters of the Philistines: now therefore get her for me to wife.
    Samson wanted this woman as his wife. What had to be done to get her?

    Judges 14:7 And he went down, and talked with the woman; and she pleased Samson well.
    --An introductory meeting went well.

    Judges 14:10-11 So his father went down unto the woman: and Samson made there a feast; for so used the young men to do. And it came to pass, when they saw him, that they brought thirty companions to be with him. (companions = groomsmen)
    --There was a feast and the groomsmen came with Samson.

    Judges 14:19-20 And the Spirit of the LORD came upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them, and took their spoil, and gave change of garments unto them which expounded the riddle. And his anger was kindled, and he went up to his father's house. But Samson's wife was given to his companion, whom he had used as his friend.
    --Samson was deceived and his bride was given to another.

    Judges 15:1-2 But it came to pass within a while after, in the time of wheat harvest, that Samson visited his wife with a kid; and he said, I will go in to my wife into the chamber. But her father would not suffer him to go in. And her father said, I verily thought that thou hadst utterly hated her; therefore I gave her to thy companion: is not her younger sister fairer than she? take her, I pray thee, instead of her.
    --The last act in the ceremony was the conducting of the bride to the bridal chamber, where the ceremony was conducted. This is the chamber that is spoken of here. It was a civil ceremony. But Samson was denied.
    Every wedding in the Bible was according to the laws and customs of the land. Jesus never went contrary to the law, thus every wedding in some sense was a civil wedding. Never is a wedding ceremony put strictly under the jurisdiction of a church. It is a God-ordained institution. All that means is that God ordained marriage, the family unit. As he ordained the institution of the government, and the local church. We need them all. The family is the building block of our society. Any kind of sex outside the marriage union is wrong and illicit. That goes for homosexuality to fornication. If one is married outside the legal bounds of marriage they commit fornication.
    DHK

    [ April 19, 2006, 08:19 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]
     
  12. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    DHK;
    Very well put together with a lot of effort and study. It is the best description I have seen on here concerning marriage and will put it in my knowledge chest for future use, thank you
     
  13. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    As the other thread is now closed, I'll go ahead an respond in this one.

    This is my response to you, DHK.

    Your opening statement...

    There was no reason for you to do that. I said, in exactly these words and this type:
    You stated that I said the opposite, that most people do not have strong convictions that the government should be involved in marriage.

    Why did you do that? :confused: I certainly have no desire to respond to comments addressed to me that argue against things I didn't say. LOL

    (and I'd really prefer if you didn't say I said things if I didn't)
     
  14. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    I apologize Gina on that one point. Sometimes those double negatives get really confusing. [​IMG]
     
  15. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thank you, I honestly appreciate that.
    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    I will now read the rest of your post, and most likely respond to it tonight, or tomorrow morning.
     
  16. Karen

    Karen
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    0
    But the reason you are doing it is so that in the eyes of the government they won't be married. Because if they were, it would change their Social Security benefits.
    You are trying to marry them without them being married.
    My taxes are paying for this.
    (Yet in other places you argue that they don't need the government involved because your way makes them married, period.) So, yes, I think that is deceptive.

    Karen
     
  17. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Me too!!!
     
  18. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    Moderators are permitted to post and give their opinions on any given subject also. [​IMG]
    Marriage is a civil institution. It is a basic building block of our society. Without it our society would crumble. God ordained it just as he ordained government. Both government and marriage are ordained of God. Why would you accept one and not the other? Are you in favor of anarchy? Or, theologically do you believe in antinomianism? Every society in the world that was ever based on any other marital institution than that which God has ordained (i.e., the one-man--one-woman family unit) has quickly gone into decay. Furthermore, demonstrate from Scripture that marriage is under the jurisdiction of the church, if you think it is strictly a religious institution. Where in the New Testament did any pastor perform a marriage?
    God ordains marriages. God also ordains governments. I hope that you approve of both.
    What kind of rational reasoning is that? Our nation has already legalized homosexual marriages, and your country flocks here to have their unions solemnized. Because our government does evil in one area, does that mean it does evil in every area. If your opinion was that it was wrong for the U.S. to be involved in Vietnam, does that mean it would be wrong for the U.S. to be involved in every war?
    The Bible ssys to stand against evil, not against government. It teaches to submit yourself to every ordinance of man. That means government.

    Romans 13:1-2 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
    You weren't up front with the government and the rest of society.
    I just filled out my taxes. The very first question they asked: Are you:
    Married
    divorced
    single,
    common-law

    If you are not legally married the answer is that you are living common-law. The sex that one practices is called fornication in that state. That is the way that the government looks at it. And if the government looks at it that way, so does the rest of society. Christianity is not composed of a bunch of rebels.
    They are broken because our society is corrupt. Do you have any proof that any other kind of marriage has a lower rate of attrition? Do you have any kind of accurate statistics of how many pastors/ministers are ordained compared to not ordained? How would you gather information on those not ordained? They wouldn't tell the statistic gathering government even if they were. :rolleyes:
    Then why advocate fornication outside of legal marriages.
    Read my previous post. I gave plenty of Scriptural references to various weddings in the Bible, and demonstrated how they were all civil weddings. None of them were private ceremonies. They all adhered to the laws and customs of the land. You are the one with an unsciptural opinion, and that is all it is--opinion. I have given Scripture and lots of it. You have not.
    Good point. So does God condone it? Does your church condone it? Do you condone orgies? Why then would you condone marriages outside the legal bounds of the law? It is the same--advocation of fornication.
    The government doesn't define an orgy as a marraige, so what is your point here? We accept a Biblical definition of marriage as that marriage was and accepted by our government and has not gone contrary to the Bible. Only recently in our nation has the Biblical and traditional definition of marriage been changed to include homosexuals. That is when we oppose it--only when it contradicts the Bible. But the church doesn't have to accept that definition, neither is it forced to marry homosexuals. In fact I am not forced to marry anyone that I don't want to marry.
    DHK
     
  19. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    From Gina: This is not rebelling against the government. For the zillionth time...it is NOT illegal.
    From Gina: That is not double minded. I said that just because one thinks that it's ok to marry without the involvement of the government, that doesn't make it right to do in every situation.
    That's exactly right. Right for you isn't always right for me, wrong for you isn't always wrong for me.
    Humanism does get some of its ideas from Christianity. Almost every human perspective does. Kinda like a hallmark and half the definition of humanism is that man has his own free will.

    Yes, it does. It teaches personal responsibility. It teaches me that while something may be lawful, it may not always be expedient.

    1Co 6:12 - Show ContextAll things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

    1Co 10:23 - Show ContextAll things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

    Apparently, yes.

    Apparently not. Marriage is good, and marriage belongs to God and doesn't have to involve the government. I don't see two standards there, just two ideas. He's allowed to have more than one.

    I would doubt it. Why do you ask?

    I can't think of any laws like that. There is no law that says that God doesn't recognize a marriage that the government won't.

    I can think of a few situations though. Betraying a family member for his religion could be a way to obey the law and break peace in the family, which would be wrong. If a family member does something illegal and has harmed only himself, or yourself, I have no problem with keeping that in the family to keep the peace, and settling the problem without government interference. Etc.. I don't get your point though. What part of not getting married in the eyes of the government is illegal? Can you point to cases where people who marry in the eyes of God and live as married couples have been punished by the government for simply doing so? (not counting those who defraud or try to claim government benefits by saying the government has approved their marriage when they haven't)

    Common law marriages are still legal in some states. Oregon still recognizes them if they occurred outside of the state. Are you going against the government?
    The world can call it shacked up or whatever silly term they want. This is the same world that call Christianity stupid and hates God. If I'm gonna worry much about what terminology they use and give their ideas validity because of certain wording, I'm gonna be spending a whole lot of time worrying. Thankfully, I don't have to follow the ideas of man.
    Now, you claim to know exactly what God says about this, by saying he doesn't recognize marriages that the government doesn't recognize. Where did you get this information?

    That's nice, but I spoke against exactly this type of situation in my first post.

    If you're not going to read what I say or put any thought into what I have said, why should I be sitting here spending my time responding to you?
    If you want to rant and rave and continuously argue against what I've not said, as you did from your very first sentence and had to delete, you need to rant on your own.

    I don't mind having conversations with my brothers and sisters in Christ, in fact I enjoy it, but please don't be dishonest and misrepresent my position in order to prove yours. We're in this Christianity thing together, not against each other.

    You've already had to delete and apologize in your very first sentence for the same thing, and now I'm seeing it again.
    A mistake is a mistake, but you're doing this with my whole post, and it's not just one mistake, it seems quite purposed.

    How can we come to any resolution or decent discussion like this?

    I'm going to quit reading and responding to your first post again. Here's what I'd like to see from you.
    Rephrase what I wrote.
    I already gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you made a mistake, you've now proven that you either are purposely misrepresenting me or you haven't read what I said.
    Please demonstrate that you understand what I said, by rephrasing my post to accurately represent my thoughts on it. THEN you can go through and add your points of disagreement with each statement I made. That way, if you truly misunderstood what I said, I can correct your errors on those points, and answer the ones you got right.
    If you will do that, I will continue.
     

Share This Page

Loading...