My fiancée is not a Christian--BUT WE`LL BE OKAY NOW!!!

[Arkstfan]

A friend is a therapist.

He describes his job like this. "Many of my clients are people who pay me a lot of money per hour to work through problems they know the answer to in the hopes that I'll give them another answer they like better."

If the act of sexual intercourse created a God ordained marriage there would be no such sin as fornication.

Now to the root question.

If you wish to marry a person who is not a Christian I say that's your decision but before taking that step, do so only if:
1. You are totally confident that you will be content being married to that person to the end of your days without him ever becoming a Christian.
2. You are totally confident that his lack of belief or obedience to God will not cause you to lose your faith and obedience.
3. You are totally confident that you can raise children in the way of the Lord sharing a roof and a bed with an unbeliever.

[ConnieLard]

Your congratulations are premature.  She is not married.  She is only engaged to be maried. 

[janine]

That's probably because some of us hold the idea that the marriage is made when two people become one flesh and decide between the two of them and God that they are married.

Other factors entering into it -- like, can that happen when one or both of the participants does not belong to God -- that's a whole discussion for another thread, probably.

[CSloan]

Your congratulations are premature.  She is not married.  She is only engaged to be maried. 

Ok.  Someone in a post further up on this page accused her of being married.

I accused her of lying about being married.

I understand why your getting confused though, because she deliberatly deleted all her posts.

[kensington]

The things is Janine... She did know it was sin.  And that makes it sin. If she hadn't, she woud not have ever called him fiance.  This topic started out with her wanting to know if it made a difference and telling us they were engaged to be married.  Meaning, she in her heart knows that they are not married.

Jesus attended the "Marriage Supper" at canan.  There was a marriage ceremony and a celebration of that.  Jesus made a point to put this in the Gospel.  There will be a marriage supper of the LAMB. 

There is more to "getting" married than just getting together, and making a pledge. That is called "going steady"... its not marriage.  When Josheph married Leah, there was a giving in marriage ceremony,  She had a veil on, he thought it was Rachel.  He could have just made a pledge and took Rachel, but he worked and had another ceremony 7 years later to marry Rachel.  I don't see how just "saying" it makes it so.  And I agree with whoever said, that as New Testament christians we are called to go by the Law of the Land, and the authoritites set above us.  No man is in authority, unless God allows it.

And our Laws are pretty easy to understand.  Marriage.. takes a marriage license and a ceremony by someone who has the authority to proclaim them man and wife. 

I'm not sure of any country where people just declare they are married. Even in the remote villages of 3rd world countries, the elder in the village does that job. 

You said that many of you believe that just making the vow together makes you married Janine... Is that what your church teaches?  Is there no authority over marriage ceremonies there?  Just curious.

[janine]

kensington, who gave you the right to marry?

The power to marry?

The ability to marry?

[James Rondon]

Janine, are you insinuating that huckfinn is actually married to her fiance, and that she is not engaging in fornication?

[kensington]

kensington, who gave you the right to marry?

The power to marry?

The ability to marry?

God gave me all of that, (Mostly by the Laws of the Land placed before I was born) but that doesn't make me married.   Nor does standing in a park or anywhere and just speaking the words, "I want to be married".

Is that how you answer a genuine question sister?  With questions?  I don't mind answering yours, but will you answer mine?

Does the church or religion you profess as your own, marry or not?  Do they teach that "living together" is the same as being married or getting married?  

[kensington]

I thought there might be something wrong with the way I asked the question, but if there is, I can't find it. 

I hope you don't mind if I ask it again. 

Janine, You said that many of you believe that just making the vow together makes you married Janine... Is that what your church teaches?  Is there no authority over marriage ceremonies there?  Just curious.

[kensington]

Janine, are you insinuating that huckfinn is actually married to her fiance, and that she is not engaging in fornication?

I don't think it matters in huckfinn's situation what Janine believes.  It's evident that Huckfinn did not actually believe it.  She said "fiance" from the get go.  And that makes it fornication.

The WORD says that "to him who believes it is sin, it is counted as sin".   For Huckfinn it is sin regardless of what Janine believes.  But, by the WORD... sex outside of marriage is sin. And in this country, we have marriage (as far as I know).

The Bible teaches there is a marriage ceremony that includes a giving of the bride, and usually an authority of God attends and witnesses.  The Marriage at Canan is evidence of that.

Jesus told the woman at the well, she had already had 5 husbands, and she was with a man she was not married to.  He didn't tell her to go back to a man at all, but to "go and sin no more"...  And yet, he attended a "marriage" in Canan. So, He did indeed recognize the difference here on earth.

[janine]

Yes, I occasionally answer a question with a question.  Since Jesus sometimes did it, I figure I'm in good company.

Somewhere along the way, there seems to have been some adjustment in previous posts.  Perhaps that makes what I thought I read earlier less clear now.

As I understood it, she referred to the dude as "fiance" at some point -- but also said that they considered themselves married, as married as commitment etc. makes people.  And of course followed that at some point with the usual pooh-poohing of the "just a piece of paper" marriage license.

At some point after that, one of my replies hit on the idea that I agreed with her.  To a point, anyway.  A  couple is wed based on their commitment to each other, on them being "one flesh", etc.

They can have all the pieces of paper they want from all the churches and governments they want, but without the covenant between them, under God, "getting married" means nothing.

I then asked her something like "Well, if the 'piece of paper' doesn't mean anything, why not get married?  Why would you not want to stand up before God as well as Man and record your commitment to each other?"

So, back to my questions...

Who gives the right, the power, the ability to marry?  Who created the idea in the first place?

God.  There, that's my non-question answer.  It's God's business, and the business of a man and a woman who want to become one under Him.

If you want the status recognition & privileges -- the "rights", if you will -- accorded to married couples, then it pays to go ahead and submit to your Earthly authorities where you live, and see what criteria they want you to meet, to be considered a married couple -- but I contend that no mere man or group of men can give you the right to marry.

If you want your church family to consider you married, then it pays to have a ceremony that will satisfy them so that they can know you are married.  But I contend that there is no man or group of men -- even churchmen -- who can decide if you are married, or not, or who can give you permission to marry, or declare that you are not marriage material.  They can make all those determinations for themselves, so as to guide how they treat you -- but if a man and a woman are married, that status or state or condition did not come from the church.  It came from God.

[CSloan]

Janine,

I don't believe you answered James question. If you did, I missed it.

Janine, are you insinuating that huckfinn is actually married to her fiance, and that she is not engaging in fornication?

I think his question deserves a yes or no answer.

[HRoberson]

At some point after that, one of my replies hit on the idea that I agreed with her.  To a point, anyway.  A  couple is wed based on their commitment to each other, on them being "one flesh", etc.

Since Janine is carrying the lance, I guess I'll support her view to a large degree.

There are various methods of "getting married" in the world but the one constant is the committment of two people to one another [for life]. It seems that once we've made that committment, we've made it. Period.

Going through a marriage ceremony is an appropriate thing to do and is a signal to others that the two people are now one. As such, the ceremony is a valid and valuable symbol of what has occured, and society and the church can reasonably expect it to occur.

But the couple can be considered "married" on the day of their betrothal.

None of that means that we should simply flaunt our "right" to be married without a ceremony. A large part of living the Spiritual life is behaving ourselves in accordance with social expectations. So if living together is perceived as a no-no, then mature folks wouldn't do so.

The mature Christian behavior then is to have a marriage ceremony even if we don't think the paper means much.

[ConnieLard]

Just listen to us.  No wonder this young girl thinks she can basically do whatever she feels like doing and call it blessed by God.  Why can't a group of adult Christians at least agree that it is morally wrong to have sex before marriage?  The girl started out stating clearly that the guy is her fiancee, not her husband.  Is there not agreement among Christians that it is God's desire that we stay pure until marriage? If we can't agree on something as basic as that, then heaven help us all! 

[ConnieLard]

Her first post was kind of long and rambling, but what I got out of it was that she is a Christian and her fiancee is not.  A friend had expressed concern about her marrying a non-Christian and she came here for other opinions.  She felt God was leading her in the direction of this relationship. She also had concerns about her role in leading him to Christ - whether she should be assertive about it or not.  At least that is what I remember. 

I had read on another thread some comments from her that made it clear that she is having sex with him and I suggested to her that purity is important before marriage - both to please God and to have any kind of Christian witness to her fiancee.  From that point, she started saying they were actually married in the eyes of God, which made it all right to have sex.  That is the summary of things as I remember it.  As you can see, she became uncomfortable when confronted with these inconsistencies and went back and deleted all her posts.

[janine]

Where, on what other threads, were the posts that made you figure she was doing the deed?  I missed those -- and if she'd been deleting things or amending them it might not do any good to go look anyway.

Yes it is morally wrong to run around having sex hither and yon with people you are not married to.

Who disagrees with that?

[ConnieLard]

It was on the "Time of the Month" thread.  It's still there.  But probably better to just let this whole thing drop.  It's really gotten out of hand.

[HRoberson]

I have no problem with common law marriages - in an absolute sense.

I do believe that Christians should behave circumspectly, but that desire does not in and of itself obviate a common law marriage when one exists.

[janine]

What makes a common-law marriage a marriage, HR?

[HRoberson]

What makes a common-law marriage a marriage, HR?

Depending on the state, a couple specifics:

1) length of relationship
2) a demonstrated intent to live together (shared bills; telling friends or otherwise purporting that you consider your relationship to be something more than roommates; sharing a domicile)

Essentially, a demonstrated intent to commit to one another.

Your state may vary.

[HRoberson]

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage

Or here: http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/ObjectID/709FAEE4-ABEA-4E17-BA34836388313A3C

[janine]

What makes a common-law marriage a marriage, HR?

Depending on the state, a couple specifics:

1) length of relationship
2) a demonstrated intent to live together (shared bills; telling friends or otherwise purporting that you consider your relationship to be something more than roommates; sharing a domicile)

Essentially, a demonstrated intent to commit to one another.

Your state may vary.

Are you saying that if a couple lives together for a period of time, pays their bills together and portrays themselves to witnesses as de facto married, that they are?

Or, are you saying that if the couple demonstrates to a witness from the State that they live together and pay common bills from common funds and talk about each other as husband and wife, then the State tells them "OK, you're married"?

[janine]

(I was asking you for what was in your head, HR.)

[ConnieLard]

In looking back on all this, I was the one who initially suggested to Huck that purity is an important issue to be considered in her situation.  Was I wrong in this?  I am honestly asking you guys for your opinion.  I feel that if someone is in violation of God's will it is important that Christians say something about it in a loving way.  That is all I was trying to do, but it seems to have escalated into quite a thing.  I often think this message board is not a good medium for me.   

[HRoberson]

(I was asking you for what was in your head, HR.)

I'm not following your distinction.

Common law (in those states that recognize it) is de facto marriage. There need not be a license or a ceremony.

Whether or not they articulate the relationship to the state, they are married. While it only comes to light if there is a question, the answer is that they have been, and are married.

Now to what's in my head. If marriage is primarily a decided commitment to another person, then it seems that the concepts of common law marriage is sufficient for a couple to be married in a Scriptural sense. Since God does not establish a marriage ceremony requirement, but simply says that the couple will cling to one another, any intended commitment can be considered "marriage."

Having said that, I do think that Christians should be married according to the mores of their society since Christians are to behave, as I have said before, circumspectly.

Therefore, while I can allow that cohabiting couples may in fact meet the Scriptrural requirements for being married, I believe it more appropriate to have a ceremony.

This does not mean that we are allowed to do the deed willy nilly with whomever our hormones dictate, or that all cohabiting couples (without the commitment) are "married."

[janine]

Nothing is wrong with a call to holiness!  What's wrong with standing up for purity and being a Christian example, etc.?  Ease up on yerseff, ConnieLard.

Ta, HR, I see.

[HRoberson]

... was the one who initially suggested to Huck that purity is an important issue to be considered in her situation.  Was I wrong in this?

No, you weren't. Purity is an important aspect of Christian existence.

I feel that if someone is in violation of God's will it is important that Christians say something about it in a loving way. 

I think you're spot on.

However, the standards of purity in an absolute sense, and society's expectations, may well differ. I think in this instance, the two may be different, with implications for Christian living.

[Nevertheless]

In looking back on all this, I was the one who initially suggested to Huck that purity is an important issue to be considered in her situation.  Was I wrong in this?  I am honestly asking you guys for your opinion.  I feel that if someone is in violation of God's will it is important that Christians say something about it in a loving way.  That is all I was trying to do, but it seems to have escalated into quite a thing.  I often think this message board is not a good medium for me.   

I agree 100%.  You were not wrong, nor did you communicate in an improper manner.  You were firm, not combative, kind, not wishy-washy.  Huck wanted approval for her behavior and you (correctly) did not give it to her, so her feathers got ruffled.  It's as simple as that.

[CSloan]

Two people who in their hearts are and always remain emotionally, mentally, and physically committed to each other.  What makes a piece of paper hold a marriage-of-the-heart together?  I wouldn't say much.  This is why I say there should be both.  Legal marriage certificates are for the courts to figure out during a divorce.  They aren't what build the marriage relationship, and if a couple is falling back on a x-years-old promise that seems rather outdated as their basis for commitment, rather than on what's happening now in their hearts with each other, then who cares if they are legally married or not?  In their hearts, the marriage is already dead, and it's now merely a legal arrangement that traps them in a dead marriage, nothing more.

Are you trying to say that its not necessary to get legally married to be married?

What about honoring the laws of the land because they are ordained of God (Rom 13:1-7)?

If thats the case, wouldn't that mean the coveant of marriage is also ordained of God?

And wouldn't that also mean God cares if they are legaly married or not?

[HRoberson]

Are you trying to say that its not necessary to get legally married to be married?

What about honoring the laws of the land because they are ordained of God (Rom 13:1-7)?

If thats the case, wouldn't that mean the coveant of marriage is also ordained of God?

And wouldn't that also mean God cares if they are legaly married or not?

And so the 35 mph speed limit is God-ordained? Bit of a stretch, no?

[CSloan]

Are you trying to say that its not necessary to get legally married to be married?

What about honoring the laws of the land because they are ordained of God (Rom 13:1-7)?

If thats the case, wouldn't that mean the coveant of marriage is also ordained of God?

And wouldn't that also mean God cares if they are legaly married or not?

And so the 35 mph speed limit is God-ordained? Bit of a stretch, no?

Not according to Romans 13.

Or are you suggesting the speed limits shouldn't be obeyed from a Christian perspective?

[kensington]

"Dear Dallas,
I just want to say that I know exactly what you mean with the whole "does he want me only for sex" thing. It seems like I only get cuddles and smoochies when we`re in bed together. I like to kiss him and touch him randomly during the day, whether we`re going to the store or gasing up or whatever. Because I like to let him know that I love him all the time, no matter what we`re doing, and that`s my way of doing it. But I get the most affection back when, like you say, there`s hope of "nookie". I understand your frustration, because I really like to be cuddled and cared for on my "days". When I feel crappy and crampy (hey that kind of rhymed!), I want his warm hands all over me making me feel better.  Am I right, ladies? But when we need it the most, they shy away! What gives??"

OK Here is what she said... in the other thread. And 6 pages does not a myriad make. So conjuring up theology based on one being too lazy to read 6 whole pages is just nuts!  If you don't want to actually participate in the topic by reading the said comments or the implied thoughts that people are posting to, what is your real point?

Sex outside of marriage is a sin.  And betrothel is not married. It is engaged. It means you are committed by it is not a license to sin or fornicate. We are not in Israel and this is not 20 AD.  This is where we live today.  IF fornication was OK within a commitment, it would not be a sin.  But it is a sin.

I agree that a couple of people have given a VERY confusing version of sin and what is not.  It's really sad to see this happen.  I have young adult kids, and I have teens, I wouldn't want them to read here.  I really think the body of Christ should be more responsible than this.

"When I was a child I spoke as a child"...  you know who says its OKAY to have sex outside of marriage?   PEOPLE WHO DO IT.  IMHO.

It's a moot point now, because she ranoft.  Her name is inactive it appears.  And probably due to the fact that she didn't want to be told she was in sin.

And she probably won't want to hear... "Depart from me, I knew you not". 

EVERYONE is a Christian until they are called to holiness, and then... we are a bunch of legalistic meanies. So be it.

[kensington]

One more thing...

I didn't see one single WORD of back up for the "Common Law" marriage in here. Or the Sex is permissable if you love each other "WORD" of God either.

My thought is...  WE are living in very crucial times in the grand scheme of things. And there is a dying world all around us.  It's time to be SOUND in biblical doctrine as to what is sin and what is not.  We have at our fingertips the possiblity to see "MILLIONS" saved for Christ.  And we compromise on the WORD of god?

IF you do not want to stand on sound doctrine and holiness and teach it to a dying world... Get out of the way of those who do. We are prepared to step up, and we have the WORD and the anointing to teach, and we have the love to reach to them and offer them the truth of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and what He did 2000 years ago when He died naked and beaten in the rain for them.  LET us do what we are called to do.

STOP being a hinderance with this nonsense.  I will stand in the gap for those who do not know truthl. But, I won't step aside for the lie.  And anyone who says that a "commitment" is a marriage is lying.  To be blunt. 

[kensington]

And for the peoples who don't want to have to read through a myriad of 6 pages... Here is my "WORD" to back up my thoughts..  SHE said she is a Christian. And SHE said they are having sex and it's OK.  And to that, God says...

Hebrews 10:26-31

[26] For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
[27] But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
[28] He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
[29] Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
[30] For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
[31] It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

[ConnieLard]

Thanks to those of you who gave me input.  I needed to know how I am coming across.