Married Under God or Licensed
Marriage
Gill Rapoza
June 2015
Hello 92251 List Members,
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.
Married
Under God
Let us start at the
beginning, at creation.
The Man:
4 This is the history of the heavens and the
earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and
the heavens,
5 before any plant of the field was in the
earth and before any herb of the field had grown. For the Lord God had not
caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground;
6 but a mist went up from the earth and
watered the whole face of the ground.
7 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 being.
8 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:
18 And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be
alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”
19 Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field
and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call
them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.
20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and
to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper
comparable to him.
21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he
slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place.
22 Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into
a woman, and He brought her to the man.
23 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.”
24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined
to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
25 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 or 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 to the man”. This is the
first marriage. This is the only
marriage in the Garden of Eden.
V 24 says “Therefore a man
shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall
become 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.
4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He
who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’
5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and
mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what
God has joined together, let not man separate.”
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 v5 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 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 dealt
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:
28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they
drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built;
29 but on the 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:
noun
1. anal or
oral copulation
with a member of the opposite sex.
2. copulation with
a member of the same sex.
Jesus also never spoke directly
about dealing with pedophiles that we know about, so did that make it OK by
Him? No, and it is utter foolishness for
those who say things like Jesus did not talk about homosexuality in His
teachings. And 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.
Licensed
Marriage
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? And the driving license we can assume was for
the same reasons, did not want to pay the penalty for driving without one.
OK, 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, under some other progressive (rhymes with oppressive) leadership, got
together with other like minded people 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: …
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 US 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 gov will do
this. They will discriminate against us.
Trewhella
also stated that the first US 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:
Amendments
Violated by the Court
Amendment I
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.
Amendment X
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 Other
Considerations
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 is 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 without. Some also issue a Confidential Certificate of
Marriage and some call it a Confidential Marriage License. I am not promoting these things, but 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.
== EDIT ==
These concerns led Louisiana, in 1997, to enact the first
covenant marriage law in the United States (L.S.A.-R.S. 9:272 et seq. [1997]).
The law created two forms of marriage in the state: the traditional marriage
contract, with minimal formalities of formation and dissolution, and a covenant
marriage, which imposes heightened requirements for entering and leaving a
marriage. Supporters of the covenant marriage law saw it as a way to strengthen
marriages and families. Opponents expressed doubts. They were troubled over the
creation of a marriage contract that had religious connotations—the word covenant
is associated in Christianity with a contract between man and God. Critics also
pointed out that there would be additional costs associated with the additional
requirements.
I located a web site called
Covenant Marriage: http://covenantmarriage.com/ 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:
The Covenant
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
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 other 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, 2015
One 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.
Related
Scriptures
Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil
good, and good evil;
Who put darkness for light,
and light for darkness;
Who put bitter for sweet,
and sweet for bitter!
Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a
male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male
as he lies 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
6 And the angels who did not
keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in
everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and
the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves
over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as 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
suppress the truth in unrighteousness
Romans
1:24-31
24
Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts,
to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25 who
exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature
rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this
reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the
natural use for what is against nature.
27 Likewise
also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for
one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in
themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even
as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a
debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness,
sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy,
murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God,
violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 undiscerning,
untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
I Corinthians 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the
kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were
sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the
Spirit of our God.
Last Words
If you follow the federal
judges on this matter, you may be OK 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 OK 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. But it could be. 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 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,
Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
««««««««««««««««««««««««««««≈»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
Posts
