ezra
Member
it sure appears that wayIt always amazes me how some Christians and others toss around words like fornication and adultery, yet have so little understanding of what they actually mean!
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Having Sex Before You Say I Do With Your Spouse Before You Marry Them!
- Thread starter iLOVE
- Start date
Lewis
Member
You do become one flesh, you marry them without the ceremony. If it is a women not Bruce Jenner
J
jocor
Guest
In this day and age, I would say it depends on the country you live in since we are to abide by the laws of the land. In this country (USA), I would say mutual consent of a man and a woman desiring marriage, a marriage license, and a ceremony. Some jurisdictions don't require a license until after the ceremony.
In Biblical times, I would say mutual consent between two parties (this may not include the future wife's consent).
Obadiah
Member
I think you're right about how it was done in Biblical times. It was essentially a contract for valuable consideration (money, property, or whatever was agreed upon) between two people, usually the husband to be and the woman's father. Essentially you purchased your wife in the same way you would purchase a car from you neighbor today. In fact, in Biblical times, many times a good donkey or camel was worth more (monetarily) than the daughter! There was not a lot of value or respect given to women back then. When you think about it, Jesus telling people things like to love their wives the way He loved them was actually pretty radical thought at the time!
If we are to "do" marriage today in the way it was done (and apparently supported by God since He never condemned it) in the Bible we need to get ready for a completely different and completely foreign way of getting married that most people here in 21st century America will not be too happy with. But fortunately I'm not so sure that's what God wants. I'm just not convinced that just because something was done one way in Biblical times that it must always be done exactly the same way. If the modern version is not violating any commands of God nor sinning in any way, I don't see anything wrong.
J
jocor
Guest
I totally agree.
Ok, agreed.
However, if two people consent to get married, and get a license, and have a ceremony, but these two people are both men, is the marriage license and ceremony of any value in God's eyes?
On the other hand, if two people love each other, and dedicate themselves to each other as a husband and wife, and are faithful to each all their lives, but have no marriage license or ceremony, are these two people considered married in God's eyes?
JLB
ezra
Member
i had a lady ask me about marriage . her and the man she was seeing wanted to get married. both live on social security if they got married he would lose his Medicaid .he has to have high priced meds for his heart. they both want marriage but it will hurt them. they decided to live together . not much else i could say both are christians. i can,t agree with them but not much else i could say
Absolutely not.
IMHO, no. How is that any different from two people living together? A couple isn't married because they say they are. I could be wrong as far as how YHWH sees it.
Is it the love from a committed and faithful heart the important thing, or the paper work?
JLB
Obadiah
Member
I've always felt marriage for Christians was a vow to each other and to God. I don't believe God is controlled or dictated to by the secular earthly government, so their paperwork is worthless to him. Not only is the marriage license meaningless to God, but also the ensuing divorce decree that over half will eventually get. Of course this is just my opinion and is only loosely based on the scriptural concept that God is all powerful and doesn't need our governments to help Him.
So I would think the important thing to God is the condition of love and commitment in the people's hearts, not the government paperwork or even any special words said by a pastor or justice of the peace. However, if there is no practical reason to not also get the license and have the accepted ceremonies performed it would make me wonder about the sincerity of that proclaimed true love and desire to make a true lifelong commitment to each other. In such a major life event it's really not that much to ask to get the paperwork too.
But then when there are other factors involved that do not indicate a problem in their level of love or commitment, such as the one Ezra mentioned, I will not judge them at all. If I were ever in the same situation, to be perfectly honest, I may do the same thing myself. I don't know if that's right or not, and if ever in that situation perhaps the Holy Spirit would give me directions when needed, but from my viewpoint today I can not condemn them. It is the secular government that has gone out of their way to make it impossible for them to get a legal marriage, not any evil in their hearts.
Paul did tell us “All things are lawful,” (1 Cor 10:23a ESV) although with the caveate: "...but not all things are helpful." Maybe this is an example of one of those "things" that in this case are OK...
So I would think the important thing to God is the condition of love and commitment in the people's hearts, not the government paperwork or even any special words said by a pastor or justice of the peace. However, if there is no practical reason to not also get the license and have the accepted ceremonies performed it would make me wonder about the sincerity of that proclaimed true love and desire to make a true lifelong commitment to each other. In such a major life event it's really not that much to ask to get the paperwork too.
But then when there are other factors involved that do not indicate a problem in their level of love or commitment, such as the one Ezra mentioned, I will not judge them at all. If I were ever in the same situation, to be perfectly honest, I may do the same thing myself. I don't know if that's right or not, and if ever in that situation perhaps the Holy Spirit would give me directions when needed, but from my viewpoint today I can not condemn them. It is the secular government that has gone out of their way to make it impossible for them to get a legal marriage, not any evil in their hearts.
Paul did tell us “All things are lawful,” (1 Cor 10:23a ESV) although with the caveate: "...but not all things are helpful." Maybe this is an example of one of those "things" that in this case are OK...
Times past i believed ( speaking of Christians here ) we needed to have the state licence ... Now that they have changed the ruling of what a marriage is... forget the state.. be married in the eyes of God.. .. as far as obeying the laws it is not against the state laws to live together..
Obadiah
Member
And that's another great point. When you can now legally marry your dog, what value is in that paper anymore anyway. Other than to enable one spouse to take more from the other one when they get divorced a couple years later.
ezra
Member
i agree that God seals the marriage not the paper work. i do feel we should follow the laws of the land. as far as we can.. the divorce issue its not a sin to divorcee unless its to move straight in to a mate from a adulteress relationship . i also feel there are marriages God does not honor. the elderly couple i posted on. i did my best giving alternative ways to the marriage courtship or even living in same home sleeping in separate rooms. . i do know they chose to live together both as Christians. i have no idea if they are intimate (not my business} . i have even thought of offering to do a ceremony for them in private . it is them who gives a account . our government likes to penalize for doing the right thing. instead of helping
Obadiah
Member
I'm sure if they want to be married, they want to be sexually intimate. Otherwise why worry about it? It's no sin to live together, or even to sleep in the same bed when these terms are used to mean exactly what they say. The question only comes up if they are being used as euphemisms for having sex.
Seems to me if they are serious they would love to have you do a ceremony for them!
Seems to me if they are serious they would love to have you do a ceremony for them!
Jethro Bodine
Member
I always wonder why people who insist they are completely devoted to each other as in a marriage and, therefore, consider their relationship a marriage don't just go ahead and get married. I mean, if it really is the way they say it is, it should not be a big deal. And it's also interesting to see that when things go wrong they suddenly exercise their privilege to not be married.
Jesus sheds light on this subject for us. When he told the woman at the well to go get her husband....well, let's just read the story:
"15The woman said to Him, “Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw.” 16He said to her, “Go, call your husband and come here.” 17The woman answered and said, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You have correctly said, ‘I have no husband’; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly.”" (John 4:15-18 NASB)
Jesus recognized that there was something different about the relationship she was having with the man "whom you now have" (vs.18). But if it can be argued that simply being with someone constitutes a marriage then Jesus would not have been correct in saying "the one whom you now have is not your husband". He would have said, "Oh, that's cool that you're together. Besides what does a piece of paper, or a ceremony, or some kind of official joining together mean anyway, right? Now, go get the big lug and bring him here." No, instead he says she is correct in saying that she has no husband, even though she is with someone.
Jesus sheds light on this subject for us. When he told the woman at the well to go get her husband....well, let's just read the story:
"15The woman said to Him, “Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw.” 16He said to her, “Go, call your husband and come here.” 17The woman answered and said, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You have correctly said, ‘I have no husband’; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly.”" (John 4:15-18 NASB)
Jesus recognized that there was something different about the relationship she was having with the man "whom you now have" (vs.18). But if it can be argued that simply being with someone constitutes a marriage then Jesus would not have been correct in saying "the one whom you now have is not your husband". He would have said, "Oh, that's cool that you're together. Besides what does a piece of paper, or a ceremony, or some kind of official joining together mean anyway, right? Now, go get the big lug and bring him here." No, instead he says she is correct in saying that she has no husband, even though she is with someone.
Last edited:
Jethro Bodine
Member
Exactly! To me, not getting married suggests that they aren't as committed as they say they are. They're still holding out the option to not be together. Just my opinion.