Three women and two men who wear robes to work` have decided that they know more than God on what marriage is. They have chosen to throw out all that we have known as Godly marriage. I fully and firmly disagree.
What does it mean to be “married under God”? Let’s start at the beginning, at creation.
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Genesis 2:4-8
Just so we are clear, that was the man, the first one. There were none before him.
The Woman:And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; and the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Also being clear, this was the woman, the first one. There were none before her.
God did not want the first man to be alone but to have one “comparable to him”. She was different in some ways, but she was comparable, not above him nor below him in importance. A companion for life she was made to be. Adam said of Eve that she was “bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.” God saw and knows what the best thing is. A man for a woman and a woman for a man is the divine combination. If God, who knows all, makes a choice, that is sufficient.
V 22 (from above) says “…He brought her unto the man”. This is the first marriage. This is the only marriage in the Garden of Eden.
V 24 says “Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.” This is God’s description of those involved in a marriage– one man and one woman.
Strictly speaking, the context means a man leaves his home, that of his parents, takes a wife and does the same thing his parents did. They cleave together, and they form a new home. There is no other combination available. The design is for one man and one woman.
Jesus made His own statement as to what God meant for marriage.And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Matthew 19 4-6
Jesus thought enough of God’s definition of it that He also said the same– the man and the woman were joined and became one flesh. If there was a time for anything else Jesus would have mentioned it, but it was not. They were discussing marriage, defined as the same as the first man and woman– one of each. The context in verse five is the same joining as Gen 2:24 with no other options.
Some people have stated that Jesus never directly dealt with “gay marriage” or homosexuality, and they have said He would have spoken against it if He was. That is a very foolish argument from silence. There was no “gay marriage” among the Jews, and a homosexual pairing was well taught as an abomination for centuries. Jesus had no reason for it in the Mat 19 discussion or any other place. However, He did indirectly deal with it in Luke 17:28-29. That was where Jesus said that God destroyed Sodom. It is where we now get the word sodomy from. Read here how God used fire and brimstone against them:Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
That was a heavy indirect verse concerning Sodom. Here is the Dictionary.com definition of sodomy:
1. anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
2. copulation with a member of the same sex.
3. bestiality (def 4).
Jesus also never spoke directly about dealing with pedophiles that we know about, so did that make it okay by Him? No, and it is utter foolishness for those who say things like Jesus did not talk about homosexuality in His teachings. Just in case anyone wanted to ask, those who prey upon children (pedophiles) are also rapists and should be dealt with as such and then some.
Keeping these things in mind, it may now be law of the land by judicial decree to violate what God said, but it never becomes right to do so. We, as Christians, have a higher responsibility to what God has said than to what any man has judged.
Did you ever get a license for your dog? Was it because some agency said if they catch your dog without one they will impound the dog and fine you for having a dog and no license? How about fishing? Did you get a fishing license so as not to be caught with fish and no license? The driving license we can assume was for the same reasons; you did not want to pay the penalty for driving without one.
Okay, maybe the state has jurisdiction over dogs, fishing, and driving. So what does that have to do with a spouse? Can the state really tell us we are not married without getting a license? You may or may not be aware of it, but in 1911, some other progressive (rhymes with oppressive) leadership got together with other like-minded people and made what is called The American Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act. In part, it reads:AN ACT Relating to and Regulating Marriage and Marriage Licenses; and to promote Uniformity between the States in reference thereto. [Defining the essential elements of a marriage contract; prescribing the manner of contracting marriages; requiring the consent of parents or guardians of minors; requiring a marriage license in all cases; providing for the issuance thereof, the recording thereof, the form thereof, and the form, delivery and recording of the certificate of marriage; imposing penalties for solemnizing marriages without a license, or without authority of law, for refusing to return or record the certificate of marriage, for refusal or neglect by any marriage license clerk of the duties prescribed by this Act; providing that a certified copy of the record shall be prima facie evidence of any marriage; prohibiting common law marriages; providing for the legitimation of children by ex post facto marriages; requiring re turns by marriage license clerks to the ____ of this State; fixing the fees of marriage license clerks; and repealing, consolidating, and extending existing laws in relation to these subjects.Section I. Be it enacted, etc., That marriage may be validly contracted in this State only after a license has been issued therefor, in the manner following: …
And it goes on. It is 51 pages long. You can read and download the whole thing here if you like.
But in 1911, it was decided for all of us that we needed to be licensed under the law to be considered to be married. Some states went with it within a few years, and by 1929 all went with the requirement. My problem with that is that at least several thousand years earlier God had already ordained marriage, and there was no license involved because God said that this is the way it should be. There were no marriage licenses issued in 1776, nor when the U.S. Constitution was signed. So, in my own opinion, phooey on the American Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act and phooey on any agency that thinks that they must require a license on what God has ordained.
Pastor Matthew Trewhella had made some very good points in his pamphlet entitled “5 Reasons Why Christians Should Not Obtain a State Marriage License”, which he wrote before five judges were trying to overrule God. One struck me as very much on the point. He said that under the law if two gays get a marriage license and a Christian couple are married in a church without one, the law will recognize the homosexuals as married but not the ones in the church. I believe Mat Trewhella’s logic in this is exactly right, that the government will do this. They will discriminate against us.
Trewhella also stated that the first U.S. licenses were required so that blacks and whites could not get married. I have read similar elsewhere, and some have added that in some cases judges or other officials in places required a license that they were not willing to issue so that white men who wanted to marry Asian women they brought home could not always do so. Mixed race marriages were called Miscegenation. Late this year, my own wife and I will be married 42 years. She is Asian– a Filipina.
George Washington was married without a marriage license in any case. He did not need one and us neither.
Anyone who is interested can download the full pamphlet by Pastor Trewhella here: http://www.mercyseat.net/pdfs/marriagelicense.pdf
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Some people have said if people do not get “legally” married through the state they live in they will lose tax benefits. I figure if you are getting married with a license because of tax reasons then there are problems already. We would all be better off if the feds and the states dropped the deductions for everyone and everything and stopped playing with people’s lives. A reasonable flat tax, the same for all, would be better anyhow.
Some say that children would not have the benefits of married parents. Is that because a state did not say so? If you were married in a church under God, in front of witnesses hopefully, you are married. There should be no issue in my non-legal opinion.
For those who think they need or want a license, I certainly will not prevent anyone from getting one. I have just reached the point where I have no plans of signing a marriage license that is state or county issued any longer as the officiant or pastor. Not so long as the feds insist on imposing that marriage means something other than one man and one woman. I would be happy to sign a Certificate of Marriage issued through a church.
I am not as familiar with the laws in different places, but some states also issue a Certificate of Marriage after a church ceremony, and I think some do not. Some also issue a Confidential Certificate of Marriage and some call it a Confidential Marriage License. I am not promoting these things, but I am relaying that there are those things out there for those that think they need them.
Something else to consider is a Covenant Marriage. It can be written or verbal, but it is a covenant under God, which is more than a contract, between a man and a woman. I have officiated at Covenant Marriage ceremonies. Here is part of the definition you can find on Covenant Marriage in the Legal-Dictionary.A legal union of Husband and Wife that requires premarital counseling, marital counseling if problems occur, and limited grounds for Divorce.
I located a website called Covenant Marriage. I have no tie or affiliation with them, but I like what they have in mind– one man, one woman under God. I very much like what they have in their “What we believe” section. It says this:
Believing that marriage is a covenant intended by God to be a lifelong fruitful relationship between a man and a woman, we vow to God, to each other, our families and our community to remain steadfast in unconditional love, reconciliation and sexual purity, while purposefully growing in our covenant marriage relationship. Our Vision In recognition of the movement of God to restore the sacredness of marriage, we purpose to call individual couples, families, churches, communities, the nation, and the world back to an understanding and practice of marriage as covenant, which is the foundation of society, for God’s glory. Our mission is to restore churches and society to an understanding and practice of marriage as covenant by applying the timeless principles of God’s Word.
I very much support Covenant Marriage over a federally-defined marriage that attempts to overrule God. Such a federal ruling invites even more judgment. The feds and many others do not care, but I do.
Franklin Graham had this to say, and I agree 100%.Franklin Graham Warns Gay Marriage Ruling Will Lead To Christian Persecution
By Todd Starnes, Fox Nation
Published June 28, 2015One of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders issued a dire warning for the nation in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s ruling on homosexual marriage. “I believe God could bring judgment upon America,” said Franklin Graham in an exclusive interview. Graham told me that Christians should be prepared for persecution in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s ruling on homosexual marriage. “You better be ready and you better be prepared because it’s coming,” Graham said just moments after the court handed down its ruling. “There will be persecution of Christians for our stand.” Graham, the president and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse, said he was disappointed in the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling. “I’m disappointed because the government is recognizing sin,” he said. “This court is endorsing sin. That’s what homosexuality is– a sin against God.” Graham said regardless of the ruling, he will refuse to marry any same-sex couple. “I will never recognize it in my heart because God gave marriage between a man and a woman and that’s what marriage is,” he said. “And I don’t think the court – since it never defined marriage – doesn’t have the right to redefine it. God gave us marriage. Period. And God doesn’t change his mind.” The Supreme Court’s decision means gay rights now trump religious liberty. And if you think the cultural purging of the Southern States has been breathtaking, wait until you see what LGBT activists are about to unleash on American Christians. “If pastors are going to be forced to provide marriage services for gay couples, I’m not going to do it,” Graham declared. Churches and faith-based business should prepare for lawsuits and government investigations. Pastors who refuse to perform gay marriages and preach from the Bible should prepare for hate crime charges. All dissent will be silenced by the government and the activists. But I believe that an overwhelming number of Christians will defy the law. Governor Mike Huckabee posted this message on Facebook: “I will not acquiesce to an imperial court,” vowing to “resist and reject judicial tyranny.” In closing, I am reminded of something the late Charles Colson wrote: “If we’re not willing to fight this, even to the point of breaking the law, or refusing to recognize the law, then we will lose everything.” Given the choice of obeying God or the government, I believe Christians will obey God – even if there is hell to pay.
Like Franklin Graham, I will defy this judicial law also.Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.Jude 6 & 7 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;Romans 1:24-31 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:I Corinthians 6:9-11 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
If you follow the federal judges on this matter, you may be okay for awhile with the tyrannical leaders, but it will never end. They will always want more. They will always come to take from you again. And you would not be okay in God’s eyes.
This might be the beginning of the end for our nation. God did not make me a prophet, so I can say only what it looks like from here. As more than one family or friend and I have discussed, America is not listed in Scripture. My tendency is to think either we will not be here as a nation or we will be broken into smaller parts or just not important enough to mention.
In the meantime, none of us should be surprised if we are persecuted in our churches by members of our own government. The media could go after you. You and your church could be called a hate group. In the extreme, you could get locked up or fined. You have some choices to make. I have made mine.
Godspeed,Bookmark the permalink.