Can I Divorce

A friend of mind recently asked me two questions, and I figured I would share my responses here. Please do share your thoughts, whether you agree or disagree.

The second question was:

Can I divorce [in reference to fighting or abuse]

Now, concerning divorce, I likewise find the answer both simple and complex. It is simple in the idea that I believe Scripture gives two reasons when divorce [can] occur, but are never spoken of in terms of [reasons to] divorce. [1] reason is because of fornication, as written in Matthew 5:32. The [2] reason seems to be in the unbelieving departs, as recorded in 1 Corinthians 7:15. Although, does “the unbelieving” pertain to them professing they are lost, or they claim to be saved but their actions proclaim they are lost? Now, Scripture clearly teaches [Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. - Matthew 19:6] Scripture also compares marriage to the relationship of Christ and the Church [Ephesians 5] which teaches security of the believer, in that Christ will never forsake the Church. When a man leaves his wife or a woman her husband, they are breaking that picture. Once saved, Christ cannot separate Himself from His sheep, nor can the sheep totally separate themselves from Christ [even if they try, for He will go get them – Matthew 18:12-14] Such is why a saved person is considered to be committing spiritual adultery when they choose to disobey God.

When it comes to questions like “two people fighting all the time” and “physical and/or emotional abuse”, I don’t find anywhere in Scripture that says it is okay to divorce. I know this goes against man’s nature and our initial knee-jerk reaction, but it simply isn’t in the Bible [at least not straight forward] as justifiable means to leave your spouse. Remember Christ said [Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. - Matthew 19:8] Sin is what causes two persons to always fight [or sometimes it could possibly be just one as the “main” cause over time] or to abuse one another [which can sometimes be the woman over the man]. We must remember that two persons choose to get married, and sometimes their choices were not soaked in the knowledge and wisdom of God but in fleshly appeal and desire. Then divorce is merely adding sin to the initial sin of getting married without God in the first place [even if held in a church]. So, a lot of factors play into the actual finalization of seeking divorce, which is why it is a hard question to answer when it comes to what may be permissible and what is not; at least to us, because God clearly knows.

With that said, I think there is wisdom we can glean from Scripture regarding the abuse [at least the physical type]. Scripture is clear to talk about how we are to treat people as we want to be treated, and for those who abuse people [whether physically, or steal from, murder, etc.] we have law enforcement, etc. [1 Timothy 2] So, I believe a person is biblically justified in calling the police and filing charges against their spouse if they are truly being abused. I also believe they would be justified no longer living with that person until there was a guarantee [by whatever means necessary] that it would be safe. Though, the question still remains: where in Scripture does it say they can divorce? Possibly, the Scripture about the unbelieving departing could be used, but I see no other references.

Same holds true with spouse who seems to fight all the time. We would like to say “God doesn’t want us to be alone” or “God doesn’t want us to be unhappy”, but that is not biblical teaching. That is man’s emotions.

Paul said, [Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you. - 1 Corinthians 7:27] Once we have chosen to marry [regardless as to why or what transpires due to our sin or that of our spouse] we are commanded to stay married. Even fornication is not a reason [to] divorce, as there are many marriages when have been dealt that blow yet survived through forgiveness and reconciliation to God and each other. Nor is the unbelieving departing a [necessary to divorce], for it also says [Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. - 1 Peter 3:1-2]

I once had a friend of mine ask if it was okay for them to get a divorce, and I told them they had two options to consider:

[1] They could forget God and the Bible, and do whatever you want to do.

Or,

[2] They could [a] examine their own hearts in light of Scripture and the Holy Spirit, [b] confess and repent of any sin in their own life [regardless of what the other person is or isn’t doing], [c] obey God by submitting to or loving the other person [because God says so in Scripture, not because the other person deserves it], [d] choose to forgive the other person [whether they deserve it or not], [e] and beg God to help change them and that other person to renew their marriage.

They [easy] thing to do in our minds is to just leave, because we think we will be leaving the entire problem behind; but that’s not the case. We will [1] have our own issues of sin [because we are not perfect] even in another relationship, [2] if we have kids we will always have contact with the other person, [3] the kids will suffer and not understand, and [4] surely there will be financial, emotional, possibly other family and friend issues for many years to come [if not for as long as we live].

The first question we need to ask ourselves is: Why do I want a divorce?

That will expose our hearts.

What’s Marriage to a Chicken?

I guess I am still somewhat naive when it comes to some things, as I had never really considered the possibility of a restaurant being forbidden to come to a city or state based on its view of marriage. I’ve witnessed some establishments being pressed against due to alcohol and those of indecent attire (or lack thereof) – but I figure those things have brought more heartache to the families, cities, and states in our country than marriage between a man and a woman. Perhaps I’ve been wrong.

I honestly don’t know much about Chick-fil-A – but that they are closed on Sundays and do hold to some personal religious convictions – although I do eat there occasionally. From what I have read, Mayor Rahm Emanuel apparently said “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values.” He further adds, “If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the First Ward.”

It appears the mayor clearly states that the values of Chick-fil-A are not only in opposition to the values of Chicago, but are also discriminating against a segment of persons. So, what exactly are the values of Chick-fil-A brought into question here?

“We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.”

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’” Cathy said. “I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.”

Looking at the above, the expressed values of Chick-fil-A are: Marriage is between a man and a woman. And that God would have mercy on those who try to redefine it.

So, the mayor has stated that Chicago neither limits the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman, nor does he ask for mercy upon those who agree with his (and all of Chicago) values.

As for as, “discriminating” against anyone, I don’t believe I have read where Chick-fil-A has said they would not sell their food to those whose beliefs were in opposition to theirs.

I can’t help but see the hypocrisy in the idea where Boston Mayor Tom Menino claims (proudly, I’m sure), “We’re an open city. We’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion.” How interesting, they are ONLY “open” and “inclusive” to those they wish to be; for they are neither being “open” or “inclusive” to Chick-fil-A. And, don’t give me the “well, Chick-fil-A isn’t being open and inclusive either”, because it is the mayor who is claiming they are the proud persons of an “open” and “inclusive” city. Does this mean that they currently agree with ALL the convictions of ALL other businesses (and those within them) currently in Boston? Why do I somehow doubt so?

Furthermore, we have “Alderman Moreno call[ing] Cathy’s comments “bigoted” and “homophobic,”” according to the article. Why do we still have the overuse of the words “bigot” and “homophobic”? The very ones who claim one is bigoted [prejudice, extremist] because they believe the biblical and formal definition of marriage are equally prejudice and extremist against those who do not agree to their trying to redefine marriage. This Chick-fil-A fiasco is case and point. And just because a person does not agree with homosexuality does not mean they are "scared of" or "hate" homosexuals. [i.e. homophobic]

City Councilman Jim Kenney joined in the “intolerance” speech, and promotes a resolution to “condemn this anti-American attitude of trying to deny civil liberties that every American enjoys.” How far have we come where standing firmly on the principle definition of marriage (that being between a man and a woman) is now “anti-American”? Every single American has the liberty to join in marriage. I don’t believe any Christian is standing against persons wishing to get married. The stance is against the REDEFINING of a scared institution (called marriage) by those who would wish to embrace what it was never intended to include (namely homosexuality).

Instead of using the name calling of bigot and homophobe through intolerance and the pressure to withdraw person’s freedom of speech, perhaps the homosexual should consider their ideals and create their own defining terms not already taken. Or, better yet, plead for the “mercy” Chick-fil-A has graciously asked God to grant them on their behalf, and refrain from the hate speech toward those who do not hold to their view.

Regardless of Chick-fil-A’s stance on marriage, I do not find any articles whereby they have denied chicken to a homosexual or even those who choose to work on Sundays.

What is marriage to a chicken?

It’s the only way to get those good sandwiches and nuggets at Chick-fil-A. ;o)

Being Granted the Right to Marry Gives One the Liberty to Divorce

For some time now, there has been much debate over giving homosexuals the right to marry, but what about the liberty to divorce?

Yes, I am a Christian.
Yes, we believe the Bible.
Yes, the Bible says marriage is between a man and a woman.
Yes, the Bible says divorce is sin.
Yes, Christian people divorce.
** I am fully aware scripture gives some grounds (if you will) for divorce, though it does not state one must divorce or that one should look for reasons to divorce.

Now that we’ve gotten past that argument, let’s proceed with the ideals of those who do not believe what the Bible teaches but demand homosexuals be given equal rights within the already defined term: marriage.

I found this article today which talks about a lesbian couple who were married in 2008. They were apparently “among 14 same-sex couples who originally challenged California's gay marriage ban in 2008.” In 2010 one of them said, "Marriage is so important it's the most important relationship that you can have as an adult when you get older." Presently, they are seeking a divorce.

What happened?

How can two persons having a relationship for 18 years + fight so hard for 7 years for what they claimed to be equal rights + believe God must have wanted it for them = even consider the possibility of ending such a liberty after a mere 3 years on the basis “"We're human and we went through difficult times," Tyler said. The marriage ran its course, she said.”?

Why can’t persons (or rather, why do persons choose not to) fight for their marriage as much as they fight for the right to marry in the first place? If God wanted them to marry, does He now want them to divorce? How scripturally based is this? If one is going to use God’s name, then they need to acknowledge and obey His word. And this goes for the heterosexual marriage just as much as the homosexual unions. How many times is God/rights used to justify both the marriage and the divorce?

My point is this: What purpose did it serve for these persons to fight 7 years for a right they were only committed to for 3 years? Same holds true for those who live together for years, only to divorce shortly after marriage. Why are we so prone to leave, rather than to cleave?

When we see marriage as a right, then we view divorce as a liberty.

Marriage is a privilege: A sacred opportunity instituted by God between a man and a woman, giving the couple the honor of sharing their lives together in a committed relationship.

It’s interesting (and rather sad) how something worth fighting for to obtain as a right can be easily dismissed as worthless by liberty. May God help us!

F- Biology Confusion

The Bing search posted the other day on the front page of MSN read, Another Pregnant Man.

It further states, ‘The man is Scott Moore, who grew up as Jessica. His parents helped him make the transition to being male at a young age.’ According to the New York Daily News, Scott (aka Jessica) apparently told his/her parents that (s)he ‘realized he wanted to be a man’ around 11 years old. But, because (s)he is actually a female, (s)he had to start taking male hormones when (s)he was 16 years old. Although they did remove some female anatomy, the cost of surgery meant (s)he could not have the ‘full sex reassignment surgery’; therefore, (s)he ‘still has female reproductive organs’.

Moore’s partner Thomas, was born as the female named Laura, but ‘underwent sex reassignment surgery last year’. Thomas has two children ‘from a previous relationship with a woman who has since passed away.’

This story is just so bizarre, and apparently is not the only one of its kind. Just looking at the facts presented, how can one claim such is natural, normal, or suggest it should be considered even remotely similar to marriage or the proper natural relationship of a man and a woman according to nature (not to mention the Holy Word of God)?

We have, according to the articles, two people born female who desired to be likened unto males. The one (Thomas, aka Laura) that was able to have the sex reassignment was once already in a relationship with a woman. That by definition is homosexuality. The other (Scott, aka Jessica) was born female, did not have sex reassignment, and is now using her female reproductive organs to carry a child, all the while claiming to desire to be male. This too is homosexuality, with even a more perverted twist. Being both females, they could not biology produce a child, so (s)he ‘got pregnant using the sperm of a friend in June 2009, the Daily Mail reports.’

But, yet there is even more confusion to the story. Not only do we have (1) two females wanting to be males; (2) with one female wanting to be male, yet carry a baby as a female; (3) they are ‘legally married’ because Scott (aka Jessica) still uses her female birth certificate to do so.

It is amazing at what lenghts people will go to try to justify their love of sin, and not only with such cases as these, but with many other sins we have and are guilty of committing ourselves. May we be moved by the Holy Spirit unto conviction to repent of sin, and put our faith in Jesus Christ. Pray for your children and those you know, for such stories may surely become the 'norm' should those who despise the Light have their way...

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

Click below to read the full Manhattan Declaration.

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

Health: Renew Marriage Commitment Rather Than Divorce

Today, I came across an article at MSN.com, apparently provided by Redbook, entitled ‘Can You Spot the Hidden Heart Dangers?’. What caught my eye was not so much this title, but the included subtopic, ‘3. Your marriage’. They propose, ‘It's normal to have your share of tiffs with your spouse, but if your relationship with your partner is marked by constant stress and strain, your risk of heart attack increases up to 34 percent, according to a 12-year study of more than 9,000 men and women published in the Archives of Internal Medicine.’

This really got me thinking. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, we are approximately at a divorce rate of 3.5 per 1,000 population in the United States. (see data) The Christian Science Monitor claims, ‘The divorce rate fell 4 percent in 2008 to 16.9 divorces per 1,000 married women, according to Census Bureau data. It had previously been on an upward path, rising from 16.4 divorces per 1,000 married women in 2005 to 17.5 in 2007.’

By some sources, we boast over 50% in our divorce rate here in the United States. I say boast, because I don’t see much (if any) remorse or humility with such a standing in the world from us. Even with the cry over the ‘Sanctity of Marriage’, according to The Christian Post, ‘Among all born again Christians, which includes evangelicals, the divorce figure is 32 percent, which is statistically identical to the 33 percent figure among non-born again adults, the research group noted.’

Today, there are many reasons people give to justify divorce. Even as Christians, we tend to bend, twist, and even ignore the very Word of God we claimed to be our source of Truth, just to allow ourselves, family, or friends to escape the feelings of remorse or guilt for desiring to leave their spouse. I am fully aware of the few (and I stress a couple, realizing opinions vary with this topic) Biblical reasons for divorce, but far too often we as Christians are merely grasping at straws trying to pull God into our corner to justify our sinful lusts and covetousness. God is not fooled, nor does/will He excuse our sin.

What this article caused me to ponder is will this be yet a new reason for Christians (or others) to give to try and validate their wish to divorce their spouse? ‘We need to divorce, because my health is being affected.’

I am grateful the article actually posed a positive solution, by stating, ‘To avoid a heart attack—not to mention improve your marriage—consider going for counseling, says Georgiades.’ Now, I am not suggesting every couple that is having problems needs to run out and see a counselor. What I do agree with, is every marriage should seek reconciliation rather than separation, a reason to work at renewing the marriage commitment rather than seeking divorce.

Should We Examine Self Rather Than Chase The Tiger

By now, most everyone has likely heard at least some part of the story(ies) of Tiger Woods, and the numerous allegations of unfaithfulness to his wife Elin Nordegren. I admit, I have not really followed much of this story, but it is quite amazing how quick such articles circulate around the globe in regards to high profile personal lives. There simply seems to be no privacy, no sacred ‘off-limits’ areas, for those who are famed. Even now, it appears that his daily actions, along with those associated with the accusations, are being put under a microscope for all to watch and judge.

I am not saying that break downs in character from one who has become a role model for our children should be simply pushed under the rug, as if to insinuate or ensure an image that they are somehow perfect without fault (sin). Though, if such claims are true, the person would first owe repentance to God, then an apology to his wife and kids, and all without the help or advice of the media and population. And, though as parents, we would like to see an acknowledgment of any wrong doing and the acceptance of responsibility to work at restoration to positively influence our children to do the same, it is neither our right nor our privilege to demand we know everything surrounding the issue within all the personal lives touched by it.

Rather than jump on the bandwagon of chasing down the Tiger, why don’t we take a moment to examine our own hearts and lives? Are we quick to call him a cheat, while we lust and flirt after persons other than our spouse [boyfriend/girlfriend] at work, church, and elsewhere? Do we desire to look upon him as a poor father figure, while we take no time out of our busy lives to spend quality moments with our children? Have we now made him a disgrace of a role model, while we have never done anything to positively influence the next generation? Can we hold ourselves to the same standards we desire to place on others, or do we merely point out their faults to try and justify ourselves?

We should all desire to be a positive role model to those around us. Part of that is striving to live up to the principles we profess to believe, and the other is accepting responsibility and repenting of our actions when we fail to meet those values.

Keeping Proposition 8 Alive

Last week, a video circulated by the pro-gay marriage group Courage Campaign was circulated heavily on the Internet. The group asked same-sex "couples" who had been married in California to send in their video pleas to allow this immoral practice to continue in the state. It is in response to the legal brief former prosecutor Ken Starr filed on behalf of the "Yes on 8" Campaign. If you would like to see the video here, you can visit the Courage Campaign web site but there is really no need as it is the same propaganda we have been seeing on this issue for years and offers no new insight into why this should suddenly be legal and acceptable.

In the video the happy "couples" and their adopted or artificially-conceived children hold up signs that read "Don't Divorce Us," which is interesting if we think about the fact that these people were never married in the eyes of God and the state of California's political grandstanding is not being well received by the majority. After all, Proposition 8 would not have passed if the majority of the state's voters had felt the way these few liberals feel. They are demanding understanding for something that is not natural or reasonable and is not accepted by most of the rest of the country. California was not the only state where we saw a ban on gay marriage proposed and the bans passed elsewhere too.

And, it is offensive to any reasonable person that a federal judge declared (in early February) that it was lawful for those against proposition 8 to divulge the names of donors to the cause. Because this is such a hot-button issue, it could be dangerous for these names to be made public. The backlash has already started as one donor experienced picketing and boycotts of the store he owns.

This is going too far. These people keep pushing even after the voters have spoken and voted the ban into law. I can't help but wonder what would be the response if Barack Obama had won the popular vote and not been allowed to take office. It is a similar situation and those who realize gay marriage is against the laws of God must continue to stay true to their beliefs and hold their ground on the issue. If there is not a unified voice, there is a very real danger of this ban being overturned and the gay population will be free to flaunt their sexuality and make a mockery of a sacred institution.

By-line:
This post was contributed by Holly McCarthy, who writes on the subject of a Bible college [http://www.christiancolleges.com/]. She invites your feedback at hollymccarthy12 at gmail dot com

Woe Unto Them That Call Evil Good

Well, those who oppose Biblical Truth to embrace the transgression thereof are at it again. It simply amazes me at the lengths some persons will go to in trying to justify their depravity. It is one thing to do what one will claiming Scripture holds no rule over them, but quite another for one to try to use God and Scripture to support their iniquity.

Lisa Miller of Newsweek has apparently written an article entitled, ‘Our Mutual Joy’, stating, ‘Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side.’

R. Albert Mohler Jr. of Baptist Press gives a lengthy, but worthy rebuttal entitled, ‘Newsweek turns Bible on its head.’

Mrs. Miller is not the first to attempt such, for there have been others such as Ray Boltz, Peggy Campolo, President Elect Obama, the writers/authors of For the Bible Tells Me So, and even the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America which have tried to justify the immorality of homosexuality by use of Scripture.

Yet, this misuse of Scripture to try and justify ones sin is not limited to just homosexuality, the same thing has been done regarding abortion also. It can also be found in ones desire to leave their family and turn their backs to their wedding vows even in the marriage of Christians.

Why must we as Christians or non try to corrupt the very Word of God to seemingly justify our degenerate minds and actions? This will in no way make us less guilty before the One True Holy God. Sin is sin, whether we accept it, repent, and receive forgiveness from it, or merely try to rationalize it, embrace it, and die lost in it.

Isaiah declared, ‘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!’

Fireproof

This past Friday night, some of us from church decided to go see Fireproof. I would recommend the movie to young people and couples, those whose marriages are fine and those which are not. I believe the principles laid out in the movie are good, even for those who may not believe their marriage needs God.

This is not just some silly ‘chick flick.’ There is both action and comedy, but the storyline is very much serious. But, if you are looking for some high definition special effects, you will easily miss the importance of the message. The purpose of this film is not merely to have one veg-out watching a meaningless movie, but to consider ones own lifestyle and marriage by the time they walk out the theater.

Before making the showing, I had heard some discontent that the movie did not have more of a church scene, meaning the couple attending church or finding help from a particular local church. Although, that may be the case, the plan of salvation and Christian testimonies from co-workers and family members were clearly displayed throughout. And, without giving much away, the end gives reference to attendance at a local church if one would pay close attention.

It was also noted that some had made mention that Kirk Cameron will not kiss anyone besides his wife, so she stood in for the kissing scenes at the end. If such is the case, I would highly commend Kirk Cameron, for why would a husband wish to make a movie about ‘fireproofing your marriage’ while kissing another woman on screen?

Overall I enjoyed the movie, and believe anyone that would take pleasure in watching a good clean movie would also enjoy it. I also believe any young person or couple could benefit from watching such a film.

Submission to a Dictator

At a group I often visit, while we were discussing the qualifications of a deacon – namely ‘ruling one’s own house well’ - I keep seeing the word 'dictator' stating the husband should not be one. So, here is my question:

I believe most Christian Bible readers will agree that Christ and the church are the examples set for us concerning the husband and wife. I would also assume that we agree that Christ rules over the church, as the church is to be in full submission to Christ. [Ephesians 5:22-33]

I looked up the word 'dictator' - 'a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.'

According to this definition, is Christ a 'dictator?' If so, and if the man is to be as Christ in the marriage relationship, what does that make him biblically? Is it not possible to be a 'dictator' (exercising absolute power) while also showing 'love, care, and thought for those following?' This does not mean one cannot listen to his wife's thoughts, but biblically (as Christ is to the church) the husband has the responsibility before God as to making the final decision in all matters. Even if he decides to let the wife make all decisions, he is responsible to God for such. For, would not Christ be yet responsible to God if He were to let the church do as it chooses?

Is it just that the word 'dictator' leaves a bad taste in our mouth, or do we just dislike the idea of one having 'absolute rule over us' kind of like when we rebel against the things of God in our own personal lives?

As one has said, Christ rules perfectly and the church still rebels against Him. It is not always the one ruling who is at fault, often it is us who wish to rebel against the rules.

In asking this question, it was said, ‘you cannot press the analogy completely in the relationships of Christ to the church and the husband to the wife.’ So, I ask, how ‘incompletely’ do we press it?

It has also been said, a husband ‘EARNS her submission by his leadership.' To me, this is like asking, 'Which comes first, the wife submitting or the husband loving?' I mean 1 Peter 3:1-6 speaks of 'ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives,' so it is possible for a wife to be married to one she may not really 'respect' as a leader of the home, but she is still called upon to submit to him. I believe the same is true to loving a wife that 'obeys not the word.'

Question: If a man must EARN his wife's submission, how does the wife EARN his love? Isn't this where we find ourselves in today's society. The husband will not love because his wife will not submit the way he believes she should, and the wife will not submit because her husband doesn't love her the way she believes he should? I do not find 'EARN' in the verses, I only find 'DO IT.'

Wives are commanded to ‘submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.’
Husbands are commanded to ‘love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.’

Quite possibility we spend too much time thinking ‘she isn’t worth loving’ and ‘he isn’t worth submitting to’ all the while failing to see that it is us rebelling against the very Word of God. For the wife is not commanded to submit if her husband loves her correctly, nor is the husband commanded to love his wife if she submits to him correctly, we are simply told to obey God which has told us to submit and love. No, we husbands and wives are not perfect, but does that really give us justification in disobeying God?

Considerable Questions BEFORE Saying I DO

A person I know is considering the thoughts of marriage with someone they have been dating for a while now. They asked me to present them any questions or thoughts I might think would help them consider things they should be pondering before they say "I do."

I figured I would just share what I am sending them, and maybe it could help others who are wishing to get married or are aready married. Please add any insight and other thoughts that you the reader may have that we may all be better persons!

---

The number 1 question to keep in the forefront of your mind is:

Have I accepted this person for who they are, or do I believe I can or need to change them to conform to what I really want/need?

If the answer is “I believe I need them to change” then one needs to either just break it off now, or simply put off any ideas of marriage until either you or they change (by God) to where each of you can be accepted by each other as-is (realizing there is always room for improvements on each behalf).

If the answer is “Yes, I accept them” then let’s move on to the other questions of importance.

1. Are they (Am I) saved? If one of you is not saved, should a Christian even consider dating them, for can we be unequally yoke with nonbelievers? We cannot go into a relationship expecting to change someone, for only the Spirit of God can move a person to repentance and ultimately salvation. Share one another’s testimonies. Beware of false conversions to justify relationships!

2. If they are (I am) saved, how is their (my) relationship with God? Do they (I) act like it? We are known by our fruits, and the broken or lack of relationship with God will truly hinder a good relationship with one another. Be aware of false godly relationships, and be honest with yourself to acknowledge if such a false relationship exist in either you or them. Repent and get it right when the Spirit reveals such things to you.

3. Are we of similar Christian beliefs? We may not see exactly eye-to-eye in every detail, but on major points concerning salvation and doctrines, great differences can cause problems down the line; not to mention in the raising of children. Again, don’t think “I can change the person” for that is God’s job. Realize that you and/or they may change ideas and convictions over time as you both mature and grow closer to God becoming better Christians, and more comfortable with one another.

4. Are our ideals of modesty similar, or do they (I) dress differently around me (them) or others? Keeping the lifestyle of Christianity in the forefront of our mind (meaning not to be conformed to this world), realizing that not all dress “codes” are expounded upon in Scripture, do we pretty much agree on what is acceptable and non acceptable attire between ourselves? The reason is two fold: [1] to not later be ashamed or embarrassed as to the attire of the other and [2] we must agree to give stability to the learning of correct attire for the children. Though we may not personally “like” all the attire the other chooses to wear, yet if it is not immodest, can we accept them and their attire for whom and what they are without trying to change them?

5. Do our families mesh? There can be countless reasons as to why there may be opposition between families, but everyone should try to work out the differences to get to a point of accepting (not necessarily agreeing with) each other enough to where all can get a long at least when together. Problems between you (them) and their (your) parents can hinder your relationship, even more so when children come. If there is a known problem between families, you both need to work together to do your best to resolve the issue sooner than later. This will build unity between you and them, allows the families to see that you two will stand by one another (make sure your stance is grounded in Scripture), and will hopefully move the families to dwell in harmony for your sakes if nothing else.

6. What are my flaws, how do they affect them, and am I working on them? To know and acknowledge our flaws (and our sins) is a good thing, but only when we are ready to do something about it. Even though the other person may accept us for who we are, our own flaws and sins can/will hinder our relationship with them and God. Don’t judge yourself against them or others, judge yourself against the standard Jesus Christ, and make a conscious choice to obey the Spirit of Wisdom, repent of sin, and pray that God will move in you to change those things that are wrong.

7. What are their flaws, how do they affect me, and are they working on them? Remember, you cannot change them; it must be done by the Spirit (as with you). Some flaws are petty and just need to be accepted, whereas some flaws may need correcting and all sin needs correcting. How do you handle their flaws and sins, with grace, mercy, longsuffering, and godly words of encouragement, or do you become angry, bitter, quick to judge, and harsh with your words toward them? These things either unite or destroy a relationship. If they are working on their flaws and repenting of sin, then walk with them instead of beating them down. If they are not, consider this may not be the relationship you need to be in (at least not at the present), pray that the Spirit would move them to repentance, and be an example of Christianity to them; for, the tables may indeed be turned one day, and it may be you that needs that soul to help lead you back to the way of righteousness.

---

A. Make a list of your own flaws, and how you plan to go about changing them. If you don’t think you have any, you are only lying to yourself. But, also make a list of your good qualities, and how you can expound on them.

B. Make a list of their flaws, and if they are working on improving upon them. If you don’t think they have any, you are just in “goo-goo” land and need to acknowledge them – but not by being legalistic or overly judgmental – some things you will just have to accept (as will they). But, also make a list of their good qualities, and what you like most about them.

---

Ø By flaws, I mean something that can be changed by the way we think or act, that may be wrong (sin) or simply just could be better. I am not talking about vanity such as surgery, or what others may consider flaws but are not.

Ø By good qualities, I mean how they talk, act, and carry themselves. Saying they “look good” is not considered here, because you may think they don’t “look good” tomorrow.

Ø BE REAL! IF YOU ARE DOING THINGS SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU THINK IT WILL MAKE THE OTHER PERSON LIKE YOU, YOU MAY ONE DAY STOP AND THEN WONDER WHY THEY DON’T LIKE YOU ANYMORE AND THEY WILL WONDER WHY YOU STOPPED.

Ø YOU’VE GOT TO GET PAST SURFACE QUALITIES! OUTWARD LUST WILL NOT KEEP A COUPLE OR FAMILY! DESIRE THAT INWARD SPIRIT AND GODLY PART OF THE PERSON!

---

8. Can they (I) accept constructive criticism from me (them)? How are you (they) with constructive criticism from others? What about from them (you)? Do you (they) feel comfortable sharing encouraging (not demeaning) words where you (they) believe they (you) could do better? There must be trust and honesty between one another so that the words we share are understood as wanting each of us to be the best we can, not that the other is looking down upon us. Pride will keep us from listening to the voice of others when we think we are perfect, and pride will cause us to hurt others when we speak to them as if we are perfect.

9. (LADIES) Can you submit to him as a godly wife? No, I don’t mean what the women’s lib is trying to say regarding this matter. A godly submissive wife, a stay-at-home mom, IS NOT a door mat to her husband, lesser than her husband, or not worth as much as her husband. God has ordain the structure of the home (Christ, Husband, Wife, Children), but that does not diminish the qualities and great things the wife indeed brings to the home, not to mention the support a husband needs to stay close to God and his family. Realize that by submitting to your husband, you are ultimately submitting to God (His Word), so if you believe you are unable to submit to him now, rebellion is the only option left which will not help either of you as a couple.

(MEN) If she is rebellious in nature toward her parents, family, and/or friends now, that should be a clear sign to you that she is not spiritually mature and ready for marriage; nor are you spiritually mature enough to change her. God must work in her life, and rebellion against parents is simply against authority, and in marriage it will most likely convert to rebelling against you as she assumes you will “try” and take over as her authority. Remember you should want a help meet, not a slave or lesser.

(SUBMISSIVE) “Unresistingly or humbly obedient.” Again, this is not the wife making herself a slave to the husband, for no husband that truly loves his wife wants her to be his slave. Being submissive is not an easy thing to do. If you think it is, you probably don’t realize what it means.

10. (MEN) Can you love her as Christ loves the church? If you immediately say, “Yes” you are simply lying to yourself and her. Yes, we are to strive to be obedient to the Word of God, but at this point we are most likely still in “goo-goo” land where everything seems perfect. What about when she makes you mad, or does the opposite of what you think she should do? Are you merely happy because she seems to desire to do whatever you want, and doesn’t contradict you in any way? Have you asked her about what she wants or had her desire something opposite than you, and you happily embraced it over your own thoughts and desires? Do you protect her, her purity, her spiritual and physical well being over yourself for her sake or your own – meaning is it selfish or selfless motivation on your part? God knows, don’t lie to yourself or her.

(WOMEN) What do you think? Does this guy really love you? Are you experiencing love by his words and deeds or by things and his easy obedience to all that you ask or require? You should not start your sentences with “If you love me…” and neither should he, for this is simply just a tactic that we use to get what we want by making the other person feel like if they refuse they don’t really love us – when in all actuality it is us who are exposing our own selfish desires and not true love for the other person.

(LOVE) Do not mistake lust for love. Love is not based on emotions, attractiveness, or hormones. It should be based on a choice of commitment to care for the spiritual, physical, and emotional well-being of the other person regardless of how they treat us. True love is harder to do than we think. It just seems easy when we are in “goo-goo” land.


As a couple, realize that ideals and convictions can/do change over time (hopefully conforming closer to the Scriptures), so show mercy and longsuffering if your ideals (or theirs) mature/change faster/different than theirs (or yours). Both should have a desire for the entire family to draw closer to Christ, so respect each others opinions without simply disregarding them because they are different than your own. Weigh all against Scripture, be humble enough to admit fault, repent of sin, and be gracious enough to give the other credit for good sound advice.


This is by no way an expounded list, and each of these topics could be expressed in numerous pages of writings alone. Hopefully, they will just get your minds to ponder the importance of knowing yourself and the other person in an honest, deeper spiritual and mental connection, than simply just a superficial skin deep attraction called lust.

“God Doesn’t Want Me To Be Unhappy”

I have heard this statement more than once, and largely in the context of a wife desiring to leave (divorce) her husband. Where exactly does such a thought arise? I find it not within the writings of Scripture, so who then is the author of such?

First, I would like to take a look at the central word, which is interestingly “Me”. Now, I may be going out on a limb here, but usually when a person centralizes their thoughts upon self they are considered to be self-centered. A synonym for self-centered is selfish, meaning “devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.”

Now, I am not going to assume that everyone (or anyone) that claims this line of reasoning, when considering the idea of divorce, may not have a legitimate reason for separation from their spouse (though Biblical justification is very limited and seldom adhered to), but I do believe this says more about their spiritual condition than it does of the marital condition of why they feel justified in leaving.

If by chance, there were such a teaching as “God Doesn’t Want Me To Be Unhappy”, how exactly would that work toward a family? For a moment, let us consider this analogy a bit:

Husband + Wife + Children = Family

Wife (or Husband) wants out and claims “God Doesn’t Want Me To Be Unhappy”. They are finally awarded a divorce, and apparently (but probably not) find happiness in it.

Has the Husband (or Wife) and Children found happiness also, given only the desires of the other to leave the Family has been granted? Does not God want the other spouse and children to be happy also? What child is ever happy at the divorce of their parents? The logic simple does not add up.

Honestly, I don’t find the teaching “God Doesn’t Want Me To Be Unhappy” anywhere in Scripture. What I do find is God telling us that we will find joy in obedience to Him. To look and desire joy outside of the Word of God is to enjoy the pleasures of sin but for a season. Remember sin is any transgression against the law of God (both internal and external acts).

When one entertains the thought of divorce (or any other act) one must first examine their personal relationship with God. Are we in tune with the Spirit and adhering to the Word of God, or have we simply placed “ME” in the center of all that is and have just become selfish in our thinking?

Though we may think we are making our future happy by putting asunder what God has joined together, happiness for ourselves, our spouse, and our children is not what will be found.

As I once heard a pastor say, “If one would put as much work into the marriage as they do to get out of the marriage, most likely the marriage and happiness could be restored to the entire family.”

There is one truth to “God Doesn’t Want Me To Be Unhappy” and that is God has given us Scripture whereby to live our lives, and has sent His Son Jesus Christ that we might be forgiven of sin and be given eternal life. When we reject His Word and/or His Son, there is no true happiness to be found.

Heterosexual Titles Terminated

The Terminator has apparently terminated “from California schools” the use of “"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife"” according to a recent article from http://www.worldnetdaily.com/.

The article proclaims:

“Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.

The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.

There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.

Also signed was AB394, which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through "anti-harassment" training, CCF said.

Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" – the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as "sexual orientation."

"Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school," CCF noted.

Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.”

---

To note some hostility, and to whom it is from:

“As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.

The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.

"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," said England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools." ”

Trying Marriage On For Size, and Canceling at Any Time

“"I think marriage is the new dating and having kids is the new marriage," she proclaims loudly, as yet another woman dining with her partner turns to stare. "It's true. I wouldn't have married him if I didn't think I could get out of it."”

A woman, named Andi in the article, somewhat seems to gloat about how she decided to get married at 27, and decided to get a divorce at 28. She decided, “Within months of promising to love and honor and cherish Tucker forever, she knew she had made a huge mistake. The problem? He was boring.” I can’t help but wonder if Tucker actually changed, or was it merely Andi that despised the ‘C’ word: commitment. As the writer notes, “I know there have been days in my own five-year marriage when I've dreamed of reclaiming my freedom.” “Reclaiming my freedom”, is pure selfishness, in direct conflict with what your commitment to God, your vows, your husband, and your family stands for.

Given statistics: “While newly-marrieds everywhere fear the one-in-two-marriages-fail statistic, the more relevant stat is that while the median age at which a woman first marries is 25, the median age at which she first divorces is 29. In fact, 20 percent of marriages fail within five years, and of those, one in four end within two years. So much for until death do us part.”

Given reasons: “Of course, our generation can afford to chuck the Cinderella story when the glass slipper doesn't fit. While our grandmothers were forced to remain shackled to unhappy unions for monetary reasons, most women today have the financial wherewithal to cry uncle and bolt whenever we get uncomfortable.”

Given ideas: “Pamela Paul, author of the book The Starter Marriage, who herself was divorced less than a year after taking her vows at age 27. "Ours is an H&M culture, where you go out and buy 10 cheap items for the season, then toss them, rather than investing in one beautiful coat you'll wear for another 10 seasons. More and more women have that throwaway mentality with their first marriage — the 'I want it now' attitude." Until, of course, you don't.”

This Andi, has apparently remarried. We ask why? Is this new guy, not boring? She notes, “Then she met David. He was supposed to be her rebound relationship. Three years later, she realized that she wanted to have kids with him — and that was the clincher.” So, are we to gather, that she will stay committed to this relationship? I guess there is no guarantee, in that she says, “"I'm happy, but I try not to think about it," she says. "It's like, if I thought I had to have my hair the same way for the rest of my life, I'd freak out."”

Commitment folks. If you don’t think you will be able to honor your commitment to God and your potential spouse, don’t make it. Maybe if we would adhere to more wisdom before dating and committing ourselves to a person (for marriage is “till death do you part”), and once we have freely done so, to earnestly contend to do that which is right, in the sight of God, we may not have so many Trying Marriage On For Size, and Canceling at Any Time.

With this lack of respect for the institution of marriage, given by God, even among professing Christians, I can’t help but wonder why homosexuals are fighting so hard to be a part of it.