Marriage Contracts

[Fez]

I have been thinking, because two couples I know are in the early stages of divorce at the moment. One of the couples has been married for over 30 years!

But I digress. When two Christians are married, should they be married in community of property, or with an anti-nuptial contract?

If they are Christian it would seem to me that they should expect never to get divorced and so community of property would be the way to go? But as sad as it may be, a lot of Christian couples do get divorced.

Any comments?

[Believer1997]

I have known 2 Christians who remarried after previous spouses had passed and they had adult children. They both had property and extensive estates and to preserve their respective estates for their adult children - they not only had pre-nuptial agreements, but legal trusts were put into place to make sure that their assets remained separate. They enjoyed a wonderful marriage and there was no problem. I think if you have children from a previous marriage and have assets that would one day become theirs - this would be a reason for a pre-nuptial agreement - it does indeed make things a little easier to sort out.

[OneLight]

I have been thinking, because two couples I know are in the early stages of divorce at the moment. One of the couples has been married for over 30 years!

But I digress. When two Christians are married, should they be married in community of property, or with an anti-nuptial contract?

If they are Christian it would seem to me that they should expect never to get divorced and so community of property would be the way to go? But as sad as it may be, a lot of Christian couples do get divorced.

Any comments?

Those who want to enter a marriage with a prenuptial agreement should never get married, for they are entering the marriage with site of an end already. If someone loves another, material possessions should not matter. If there is a question of divorce, then they should wait until they are sure.

My 2

[Fez]

I have been thinking, because two couples I know are in the early stages of divorce at the moment. One of the couples has been married for over 30 years!

But I digress. When two Christians are married, should they be married in community of property, or with an anti-nuptial contract?

If they are Christian it would seem to me that they should expect never to get divorced and so community of property would be the way to go? But as sad as it may be, a lot of Christian couples do get divorced.

Any comments?

Those who want to enter a marriage with a prenuptial agreement should never get married, for they are entering the marriage with site of an end already. If someone loves another, material possessions should not matter. If there is a question of divorce, then they should wait until they are sure.

My 2

[OneLight]

It seems to me that if someone thinks that their spouse to be may take what is not theirs, then they do not trust them enough to share the most important aspect in life with them. I have never understood this agreement, maybe because I have always known poor people who married out of the idea of love, not greed, having the possibility of a treasure in the end. To those, why even marry? Are they only looking to share their bed with them?

Sorry, but I really don't understand how they view marriage.

[Smalcald]

I am not sure who this question is directed towards, but if it were possible for a Christian to have no sin in the sense they could live 100 percent right in the sight of God, I would think all Christians would strive to do that.

Hi Butaro,

But is not that what we all strive for, regardless of if we think we will 100% get there or not?

I am just having a hard time finding the relevance of this issue for Christians. We are to strive for holiness and we are to repent when we are aware of sin on a daily or continual basis. If we achieve holiness, we would not know for certain that we had, given the very fact that a holy person would also have humility.

To me it might actually be dangerous for your soul, as you may mistakenly claim yourself sinless, without need for repentance, this would be or could be a really dangerous way to live before God if you were wrong.

I have been thinking, because two couples I know are in the early stages of divorce at the moment. One of the couples has been married for over 30 years!

But I digress. When two Christians are married, should they be married in community of property, or with an anti-nuptial contract?

If they are Christian it would seem to me that they should expect never to get divorced and so community of property would be the way to go? But as sad as it may be, a lot of Christian couples do get divorced.

Any comments?

I believe that Christians should enter marriage with the understanding that for a Christian divorce will not be an option. This was my view when we were married, our pastor indeed had us pray to God in pre-marital counseling and make that very commitment to not only each other but God, so for me it is a non-issue, even if I hate my wife, even if she cheats on me and leaves me, it does not matter, that decision in my life is over until I die. However, so what, many people are not in that position and we must look at the reality of modern life.

So after that strong statement, when we enter the world of second marriages and children from previous marriage, then everything changes, at that point you must make legal provisions for your estate and your kids and the extended family you are marrying into who may not care at all about your kids from a previous marriage.

So first marriages no I would strongly disagree that you should have a pre-contract, but for older people with kids and second marriages, possibly for the sake of your children I can see it and understand.

[Fez]

I am not sure who this question is directed towards, but if it were possible for a Christian to have no sin in the sense they could live 100 percent right in the sight of God, I would think all Christians would strive to do that.

Hi Butaro,

But is not that what we all strive for, regardless of if we think we will 100% get there or not?

I am just having a hard time finding the relevance of this issue for Christians. We are to strive for holiness and we are to repent when we are aware of sin on a daily or continual basis. If we achieve holiness, we would not know for certain that we had, given the very fact that a holy person would also have humility.

To me it might actually be dangerous for your soul, as you may mistakenly claim yourself sinless, without need for repentance, this would be or could be a really dangerous way to live before God if you were wrong.

I have been thinking, because two couples I know are in the early stages of divorce at the moment. One of the couples has been married for over 30 years!

But I digress. When two Christians are married, should they be married in community of property, or with an anti-nuptial contract?

If they are Christian it would seem to me that they should expect never to get divorced and so community of property would be the way to go? But as sad as it may be, a lot of Christian couples do get divorced.

Any comments?

I believe that Christians should enter marriage with the understanding that for a Christian divorce will not be an option. This was my view when we were married, our pastor indeed had us pray to God in pre-marital counseling and make that very commitment to not only each other but God, so for me it is a non-issue, even if I hate my wife, even if she cheats on me and leaves me, it does not matter, that decision in my life is over until I die. However, so what, many people are not in that position and we must look at the reality of modern life.

So after that strong statement, when we enter the world of second marriages and children from previous marriage, then everything changes, at that point you must make legal provisions for your estate and your kids and the extended family you are marrying into who may not care at all about your kids from a previous marriage.

So first marriages no I would strongly disagree that you should have a pre-contract, but for older people with kids and second marriages, possibly for the sake of your children I can see it and understand.

Yeah it's not simple is it? And I can't really find a scripture that directs my opinion one way or the other. I mean, OneLight has a very valid point, and I like yours about first marriages, but both you and Believer make a good case for the antinup option when it comes to second marriages and children.

[Believer1997]

It seems to me that if someone thinks that their spouse to be may take what is not theirs, then they do not trust them enough to share the most important aspect in life with them. I have never understood this agreement, maybe because I have always known poor people who married out of the idea of love, not greed, having the possibility of a treasure in the end. To those, why even marry? Are they only looking to share their bed with them?

Sorry, but I really don't understand how they view marriage.

Well.... when two 80-year young people marry and they both have accumulated a lifetime of business assets and items and other things that they would like to make sure their respective children obtain at their deaths - a pre-nuptial agreement and separating otherwise community property is not a bad thing at all. We are not talking about mistrust or divorce, etc. The reason for the separate trusts can come into play when and if one of them becomes so disabled and in a nursing home that the assets of the other spouse does not become seized as payment for costly care. The surviving spouse can lose all their assets and estate in some states to pay for care of the deceased spouse. When older people determine to marry for companionship late in life - imo, they need to protect the future inheritance of their adult children and the long-term care that they will eventually require.

[OneLight]

It seems to me that if someone thinks that their spouse to be may take what is not theirs, then they do not trust them enough to share the most important aspect in life with them. I have never understood this agreement, maybe because I have always known poor people who married out of the idea of love, not greed, having the possibility of a treasure in the end. To those, why even marry? Are they only looking to share their bed with them?

Sorry, but I really don't understand how they view marriage.

Well.... when two 80-year young people marry and they both have accumulated a lifetime of business assets and items and other things that they would like to make sure their respective children obtain at their deaths - a pre-nuptial agreement and separating otherwise community property is not a bad thing at all. We are not talking about mistrust or divorce, etc. The reason for the separate trusts can come into play when and if one of them becomes so disabled and in a nursing home that the assets of the other spouse does not become seized as payment for costly care. The surviving spouse can lose all their assets and estate in some states to pay for care of the deceased spouse. When older people determine to marry for companionship late in life - imo, they need to protect the future inheritance of their adult children and the long-term care that they will eventually require.

What about a will? Would not the spouse honor the desires of their spouse pertaining what their wishes are concerning their children? To be honest, if I had billions and it all had to go to the care of my dying wife, so be it ... she would be worth every cent. To me, wanting to hold onto your "stuff", placing the expense back onto the care facility, or even stopping the care because I was not willing to spend my money seems wrong. We came into this world with nothing and we will leave with nothing. What we have is given to us all by God. It is His money and we could do the honorable thing with it.

[Believer1997]

It seems to me that if someone thinks that their spouse to be may take what is not theirs, then they do not trust them enough to share the most important aspect in life with them. I have never understood this agreement, maybe because I have always known poor people who married out of the idea of love, not greed, having the possibility of a treasure in the end. To those, why even marry? Are they only looking to share their bed with them?

Sorry, but I really don't understand how they view marriage.

Well.... when two 80-year young people marry and they both have accumulated a lifetime of business assets and items and other things that they would like to make sure their respective children obtain at their deaths - a pre-nuptial agreement and separating otherwise community property is not a bad thing at all. We are not talking about mistrust or divorce, etc. The reason for the separate trusts can come into play when and if one of them becomes so disabled and in a nursing home that the assets of the other spouse does not become seized as payment for costly care. The surviving spouse can lose all their assets and estate in some states to pay for care of the deceased spouse. When older people determine to marry for companionship late in life - imo, they need to protect the future inheritance of their adult children and the long-term care that they will eventually require.

What about a will? Would not the spouse honor the desires of their spouse pertaining what their wishes are concerning their children? To be honest, if I had billions and it all had to go to the care of my dying wife, so be it ... she would be worth every cent. To me, wanting to hold onto your "stuff", placing the expense back onto the care facility, or even stopping the care because I was not willing to spend my money seems wrong. We came into this world with nothing and we will leave with nothing. What we have is given to us all by God. It is His money and we could do the honorable thing with it.

I'm sorry - I didn't express what I wanted to say adequately. I'm not saying to stop their care or not give them the care you would give a beloved spouse. I'm saying that in our state - if one spouse is incapacitated and in a facility for long-term extensive care - it seems that they must exhaust all open assets before accepting Medicare as payment in full - if the assets are not separated in a revocable or another type of trust. That is not fair to the other spouse who is perhaps the same age and will need assets for long-term care also. A will doesn't take precedence in some states. If, for instance, your father had worked his entire life to build a business and a comfortable estate and he dies and this of course passes to your Mother... she decides (at age 80) to remarry - the man she is marrying has also built a lifetime assets to be able to live comfortably and pass something to his children in the way of a lucrative business. It is only fair that his children receive that when their father dies - yet in some states - it doesn't happen that way unless there is a trust in effect or a prenupt agreement in place. I don't mean to reduce marriage to a piece paper or a legal agreement...