Is marriage without a public witness.

[MorningGlory]

And gays have been running around having sex for a long time...guess that means that THAT is the way things are to be by your logic, eh

Did I say anything about gay marriage? You insinuate that it's okay with me....well it's not and I'll thank you to think before you post innuendo.

[MorningGlory]

Actually the bottom line HERE is that YOU can sy what you wish and its entirely meaningless.

Do you think that those who DO make a covenant of MARRIAGE before God Almighty without godless govt's 'licensing' really CARE what your views are here on this hole in the wall forum ?

Think again.

I KNOW what Gods word teaches as a whole as it pertains to marriage, chap...Ive devoted my life to the topic.

When a man and woman COVENANT themselves IN marriage before God, poster, it IS marriage and your rejection of that fact only exposes your ignorance as to what MARRIAGE actually is at its core in the scriptures.

God doesnt turn a deaf ear to a COVENANT just because smaldcald claims He does.

God tells us not to be fools but to KEEP the vows we make. He doesnt say 'only if evil govt says its ok'...regardless of what you believe.

Cultural differences and ritual do NOT change what marriage is at its very core....a covenant that binds a MAN to a WOMAN before God. Try as you might to complicate it, it remains precisely that simple.

Then you need to learn to read. *I* have stated on some of these threads VERY plainly that we KNOW if we have stood together with the one we've taken in marriage and MADE that covenant. God isnt a fool..He knows if we have or not.

If we HAVENT, then its fornication.

if we HAVE, then its not....

Is that too complex a concept for you to grasp ?

Scriptures shows that Hebrew culture gave people in marriage.

Jesus went back to the FIRST couple, chap...WHO 'gave' Adam his wife ?

Familes are involved now, not because they are *REQUIRED* for God to acknowledge the covenant between a man and woman, but simply because families EXIST and are INVOLVED in the lifes of FAMILY MEMBERS.

As I said, I feel sorry for someone in your little world who wants to marry someone with whom their FAMILY might not approve

Guess God wont accept that covenant made between them if their dads dont get along

you have no concept about what the writ of divorce was for then.

The writ, as it was given, WASNT about 'litigation'.

It was about regulating this frivolous throwing out of innocent wives...to make the man take the time to have to write it out and make him understand that if he did this and she remarried that she couldnt ever return to him....it was to try to CHANGE his HEART...to make him THINK.

it was the perverse minds of the Jews that made it a matter of litigation....THEY were the ones who used it in that manner and who twisted it into something it was never meant to be...some 'legal' tool they could use to keep her from ever marrying again even tho they still tossed their wives into the streets as they had been doing before.

As I said, it does for YOU because YOU arent being affected adversely.

If YOU were black and in love with a white person decades ago we can all rest assured youd be singing a different tune.

what a joke. You have NO clue what you are even talking about.

I suggest that you actually STUDY the matter out before your slander of your own brethren continues.

MANY who are refusing to get licenses because they dont want a demonically influenced government 'permitting' them to do what GOD has given man RIGHT and AUTHORITY to do....take a wife.

Pity that some are so blinded that they actually believe that EVIL men have authority to PERMIT what GOD has given man RIGHT to do.

I suppose since the states require licensing for the church too in order to RECOGNIZE that church that you have to believe that God also rejects that church until the get that license....I mean, at least be consistent here for us....

I don't know about the other posters you're insulting and slamming here but I think you need to lighten up, buddy. You don't get to say whatever you want on this 'hole in the wall forum'. Welcome to earth.

[MorningGlory]

Did I say that YOU did ? How about READING and UNDERSTANDING my POINT and INTENT next time

I don't really care about your point OR your intent. It's obvious you're here to cause trouble and start fights. Make sure you're equal to an opponent before you throw that verbal punch, my friend.

[MorningGlory]

How about you stay on topic so we dont need to involve a moderator ?

Too late for that.

[MorningGlory]

I am here discussing doctrine. Anyone that disagrees with you folks is supposedly here to 'start fights'.

"You folks"? Are the rest of us different than you in some way?

[Smalcald]

Smaldcald, here is one reason Im having hard time having any sort of real respect for your opinoin.

You just said this on the PREVIOUS page....

It is a promise which includes three entities, God a man and a women, so I would totally agree it is something that God does for us, and thus we are bound by what God has joined, not what we have promised or have decided to not promise anymore. It is something that God does. On this we agree.

And then you admit...

Maybe a license is not needed by scripture, I would agree,

Then you turn around and contradict your own statement by saying its NOT marriage

The bottom line is that you can make up whatever promise you want to God, it is still not marriage.

In one breath you say VERY clearly that marriage IS between the man, the woman and GOD and that HE joins them.

You ADMIT that scripture says NOTHING about licensing.

And then you absurdly turn around and contradict yourself by now saying its not a marriage.

Sorry, but its really hard to take you seriously at this point...

No, you just don't get it.

Marriage certainly is between God a man and women, it is a lifelong vow between those three parties. What is the nature of a vow? A vow or commitment to be true is not hidden in the dark, but made public. In many ways it is much like our commitment to Christ Himself; it is done in public before men, as He said "He who publicly professes Me.... etc.

A further nature of a marriage vow is to become one, not just sexually, but legally, emotionally, fiscally, and this binding must be done to create ONE family. Now, if you can figure out how to do that in our culture with some sort of secret promise you make between you and your girlfriend great. But I don't see how it could create a family?

Like I said from scripture alone maybe a license is not needed, however you would have to re-create the effect of that license with a series of contracts, which I think you admitted was necessary.

To me this comes down to one thing, some people don't want the hassle of divorce so they avoid the legalities of marriage. This should be a warning sign to every man or women considering someone who refuses to legitimatize their vow, why would they be ashamed of the vow?

Which takes us right back to the OP.

As far as evil men, well the Church, the Bride of Christ IS made up of men.

[MorningGlory]

So can I assume that you are a mod and that here again Im going to have to watch my P's and Q's because yet another moderator on this forum will use their authority to stifle anyone who disagrees with their doctrinal views?

If thats the case here on this forum then it needs to be in black and white here that no one is permitted to disagree with a moderators assessment.....in which case Ill be more than happy to hang out at any of 100 other forums that dont have such restrictive rules.

I am not a mod; this is evidenced by the line under my username. Get with the program, buddy.

[Smalcald]

I don't find what I am saying that inconsistent, it is however addressing various sidelines and issues which may make it confusing.

I still have not seen anything which would show the difference between fornication and your definition of marriage. But then again I guess when I think about it you have not given your definition of marriage in any complete way. If you are saying two people can simply say in the heat of the moment we are married, then have sex and the deal is done; then there are certainly thousands of married 16 year olds running around in this country, well I guess they are all divorced now and remarried numerous times. When in reality we have many people running around fornicating.

This secret promise business really demeans the seriousness of marriage. If my wife had said I don't want to legally bind our marriage, I would certainly have had major concerns about how serious she was about the whole thing.

You can always come up with different scenarios, but yes in scripture witnesses were always present for marriage; even in the Garden there was a witness, God Himself, IF there would have been more humans, they would have been witnesses.

If someone does not want to get a marriage license because they are severely anti-government then I could understand that, as long as they still made a legally binding and public vow before God.

When Christ spoke of divorce, how could divorce happen if the vows were secret and just between the two people and God? How would the divorce Christ is speaking of work in that case?

As to your questions I usually do not respond to that sort of thing on the internet as I don't think it is a fair way to debate, but I will answer your questions.

So your contention is that no man can make a vow to another man or a woman without going public with that vow ?

My contention is that no real vow would be kept secret. You see words are cheap, put the name on the dotted line dude.

Are you actually claiming that if a man sincerely repents within himself that God rejects that repentance?

Ill ask you again to clarify a response with a clear yes or no so we know where you stand

Christ said that those who are ashamed of Him and His Word, He would be ashamed of them. There is NO scriptural example of someone who is really saved hiding that decision, not one. I would say this is much like the marriage vow, what kind of person would want to keep their vow secret and not public? That would mean that they are ashamed of their wife and their family. I don't know what you are talking about with your statement about repentance.

[OneLight]

The marriage bed does not "seal the deal". What is a marriage bed? If you pick someone up at a bar and take them home and mumble that you want to marry and then go to bed you are married, is that the new marriage bed? Please.

What seals the deal is being "given in marriage" according to scripture; this is a lifelong promise made to God by FAMILIES, which of course means a joining of the legal assets and families of two people. Maybe a license is not needed by scripture, I would agree, but it is the easiest way to join the assets and obligations of two people as one. I think if you don't want the government involved that is fine as long as you do the legal needs of combining your assets and retirement and wills and so forth, which is a big pain in the butt.

I am getting a pretty good idea on these boards why evangelicals have such a hard time with marriage and divorce since there seems to be no accepted definition of marriage outside of fornication. So fornication=marriage?

If someone is really in love and serious about marriage vows they would give their spouse the very powerful protections and rights and responsibilities included in that "little piece of paper".

Can you explain to me what legal assets Adam and Eve had when God described marriage here?

Genesis 2:24 - Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

As for your comment about comparing a one night stand to marriage, you are truly stretching it a bit here, Smalclad. I really believe that you know the difference between love and lust, yes?

As for assets, that is the what I see as basically the only reason why one should have a marriage license, for legal reasons. I agree with this 100%.

Again, your statement about fornication=marriage is really searching. Get your concordance out and look the two up.

[MorningGlory]

If my wife had said I don't want to legally bind our marriage,I would certainly have had major concerns about how serious she was about the whole thing.

Come on. If ANYONE said it like THAT of course our brows would raise in suspicioun...be reasonable here.

Now, if she had said she loves you and wants to be with you forever...and shes REALLY having a hard time with licensing because it seems like it would be letting godless govt rule over her marriage to you...that it would feel like it was being tainted ...that hopefully would have had a big impact on your heart in the matter.

You can always come up with different scenarios, but yes in scripture witnesses were always present for marriage; even in the Garden there was a witness, God Himself, IF there would have been more humans, they would have been witnesses.

And you can go on for 28 more pages about *IF* there was this or that, but the FACT is that Christ went back to THAT couple....ONE man, ONE woman and GOD....ALL that was *REQUIRED* for the marriage to exist. That is the CORE of marriage....what it is in its BASIC form. All the rest is ritual and fluff.

If someone does not want to get a marriage license because they are severely anti-government then I could understand that, as long as they still made a legally binding and public vow before God.

Well, I really dont think that many are worried about your personal demands in the matter. But MOST that I know of who refuse to get a license are still having public ceremonies and even using other methods of recording their marriages....but in the end marriage is defined by what existed in the garden. One man, one woman before God.

When Christ spoke of divorce, how could divorce happen if the vows were secret and just between the two people and God? How would the divorce Christ is speaking of work in that case?

And when Joseph was going to put Mary away privately ?

And please, dont claim that it wasnt divorce there because betrothal then had to have a divorce writ to be ended.

Yet scripture says he was going to do it privately.

Now how would that have looked from the outside ? Young Jewish woman all nice and betrothed to a husband...suddenly it seems like something changed....was it anyones business ? Apparently not since scripture calls Joseph a 'just' man, yet he WAS going to put her away privately.

My contention is that no real vow would be kept secret. You see words are cheap, put the name on the dotted line dude.

Interesting.

So youre saying that you cant be trusted to KEEP your vow you made to your wife without being forced to ? That your words to her were 'cheap' and wouldnt be honored without signing on the dotted line ?

I dont know how else to take your statement.

Or are you only applying this to the everyone OTHER than yourself ?

You know what MY wife accepts as absolute ? My WORD !

With or without a license, with or without witnesses, MY wife knows that *I* am a man of MY WORD and that if I say I will honor her as my wife then I will DO so.

I personally would be VERY concerned if my wife said many of thing things Ive seen in this thread so far. I dont really know if Id be so trusting of her if it seemed like she NEEDED to have it in writing before she would HONOR her COVENANT to me.

Ill take her WORD of HONOR...her SINCERE VOW...over some meaningless signature on some worthless piece of paper any day.

And we are discussing what marriage IS....not whether a 'real vow' would or should be kept secret.

Christ said that those who are ashamed of Him and His Word, He would be ashamed of them.

There is NO scriptural example of someone who is really saved hiding that decision, not one.

Nice dodge, but that ISNT what I asked you.

Does God IGNORE sincere repentance if that repentance isnt 'public' ?

Its easy enough to give a response without dodging. I didnt mention a thing about shame, did I ? Please answer the question as I stated it if you will.

I would say this is much like the marriage vow, what kind of person would want to keep their vow secret and not public?

We are discussing whether or not it IS a marriage without it being public....not what kind of persons would want it private.

That would mean that they are ashamed of their wife and their family.

Hmm...so what Abraham had Sarah lie and say she wasnt his wife YOU claim it was because he was ashamed of her and his family ?....uh...yeah...

Nothing like being abrasive and continuing to try to start fights. You've NO clue how to debate anything.