Marriage Rejuvenation?

[Sean]

Sounds like a state religion to me.

The state is TK's religion.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

They can if one changes their mind, and the other desires to please them.

But, as I said before, she thought about it and mentioned that it felt disingenuous, and she hasn't brought it up again.

I forgot, you wear a kilt?

[votivesoul]

Aquila,

I'm going to give you the nutshell version/summary of how I see your p.o.v. Please clarify in any areas as needed:

1.) Both you and your current spouse were innocent parties in previously failed marriages.

2.) Those failed marriages led to serious financial and other difficulties in divorce court.

3.) The state of Ohio sanctioned your divorce.

4.) You and your current spouse began dating.

5.) You became serious and moved toward marriage.

6.) There was a marriage proposal, followed by an acceptance.

7.) You both came under the religious conviction that going to the state for a marriage license was something you abhorred.

8.) You hit on the idea of having a "Quaker" wedding, even though you aren't Quakers.

9.) You met with members of your house church fellowship, discussed the proposal, received approval, and planned for the day.

10.) On a certain day, you made your vows one to the other in the presence of witnesses made up of members of your house church fellowship.

11.) You henceforth considered yourselves married to each other.

12.) You began living together and consummated the marriage.

13.) Some time after this, your spouse began to have doubts about the marriage vis a vis not being able to receiving SSI benefits.

14.) In order to make her happy, you promised you'd propose all over again and pretend like you weren't actually married, though you really were, and so, you began calling her your "fiance, and etc.".

15.) Circumstances in life hindered you from seeking a state-recognized marriage license from a Justice of the Peace.

16. However, your spouse intends to change her name and that of her children to yours some time in January 2018.

A few questions come to mind, but please, correct anything 1-16 above.

1.) During the time in which your spouse doubted the marriage and wanted to get a license, did you and she break off from considering yourselves married? I mean, you began to call her your fiance here at AFF. But what else? Did you stop co-habiting? Did you end all conjugal rights?

2.) How hard is it to get to a courthouse and get a marriage license and line up a Justice of the Peace, that it's been over a year since you posted here calling your spouse your fiance? I bet it could be done in an afternoon. What's the hold up?

3.) What is happening in or by January 2018 that's going to allow your spouse to change her legal name, and that of her children, to yours? Secondly, why does she need to wait another almost five months before making the change? She could go to the local SSI office tomorrow and be done with it pretty quick-like, especially if she had a signed marriage license.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'm not saying a licensed marriage is wrong. I'm saying that for many, it is against their religious convictions.

Is state marriage law in agreement with God's law concerning property, divorce, remarriage, going before unbelieving courts, and gay marriage?

No!

If that's fine with you to be contractually bound to that, it is your personal choice. And you agree to the cost of that choice.

It's not fine with us. And we don't agree to the terms of Caesar's contract.

But that is not what YOU believe.

Don't you remember you posted you are now going to be remarried so you can collect Social Security benefits?

Don't you remember that you posted that your decision to be remarried with a civil license is why you went back to calling your "Quaker-married" wife, "Fiancée"?

Aquila, the way you twist your excuses back and forth one would think you're not being truthful.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Sean

What is the greater sin?

A...speeding?

B....being married without a state license?


You see it yet?

Sean, you're like a gnat at a BBQ.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It is better to obey God over man. The current marriage laws are unbiblical.

Then why did you say you're going to be remarried under those marriage laws so you can collect Social Security?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Sad, but true.

I posted the extended comments of a conservative pastor who broke it down. Burk IGNORED his points. I'll post them again:

"By obtaining a marriage license, you place yourself under the jurisdiction of Family Court which is governed by unbiblical and immoral laws. Under these laws, you can divorce for any reason. Often, the courts side with the spouse who is in rebellion to God, and castigates the spouse who remains faithful by ordering him or her not to speak about the Bible or other matters of faith when present with the children.

As a minister, I cannot in good conscience perform a marriage which would place people under this immoral body of laws. I also cannot marry someone with a marriage license because to do so I have to act as an agent of the State. I would have to sign the marriage license, and I would have to mail it into the State. Given the State’s demand to usurp the place of God and family regarding marriage, and given it’s unbiblical, immoral laws to govern marriage, it would be an act of treason for me to do so.

When you read the Bible, you see that God intended for children to have their father’s blessing regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers (Dt. 22:16; Ex. 22:17; I Cor. 7:38). We have a vestige of this in our culture today in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, "Who gives this woman to be married to this man?"

Historically, there was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.

Notice you had to obtain your parents permission. Back then you saw godly government displayed in that the State recognized the parents authority by demanding that the parents permission be obtained. Today, the all-encompassing ungodly State demands that their permission be obtained to marry.

By issuing marriage licenses, the State is saying, "You don’t need your parents permission, you need our permission." If parents are opposed to their child’s marrying a certain person and refuse to give their permission, the child can do an end run around the parents authority by obtaining the State’s permission, and marry anyway. This is an invasion and removal of God-given parental authority by the State.

From the State’s point of view, when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, but you are also marrying the State.

The most blatant declaration of this fact that I have ever found is a brochure entitled "With This Ring I Thee Wed." It is found in county courthouses across Ohio where people go to obtain their marriage licenses. It is published by the Ohio State Bar Association. The opening paragraph under the subtitle "Marriage Vows" states, "Actually, when you repeat your marriage vows you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to that contract. 1.You; 2. Your husband or wife, as the case may be; and 3. the State of Ohio."

See, the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State! You are like a polygamist! You are not just making a vow to your spouse, but you are making a vow to the State and your spouse. You are also giving undue jurisdiction to the State.

George Washington was married without a marriage license. Abraham Lincoln was married without a marriage license. So, how did we come to this place in America where marriage licenses are issued?

Historically, all the states in America had laws outlawing the marriage of blacks and whites. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages or miscegenation as long as those marrying received a license from the state. In other words they had to receive permission to do an act which without such permission would have been illegal.

Blacks Law Dictionary points to this historical fact when it defines "marriage license" as, "A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry." "Intermarry" is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as, "Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages."

Give the State an inch and they will take a 100 miles (or as one elderly woman once said to me "10,000 miles.") Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage license laws.

What Should We Do?

Christian couples should not be marrying with State marriage licenses, nor should ministers be marrying people with State marriage licenses. Some have said to me, "If someone is married without a marriage license, then they aren’t really married." Given the fact that states may soon legalize same-sex marriages, we need to ask ourselves, "If a man and a man marry with a State marriage license, and a man and woman marry without a State marriage license - who’s really married? Is it the two men with a marriage license, or the man and woman without a marriage license?" In reality, this contention that people are not really married unless they obtain a marriage license simply reveals how Statist we are in our thinking. We need to think biblically.

You should not have to obtain a license from the State to marry someone anymore than you should have to obtain a license from the State to be a parent, which some in academic and legislative circles are currently pushing to be made law.

When I marry a couple, I always buy them a Family Bible which contains birth and death records, and a marriage certificate. We record the marriage in the Family Bible. Both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were married without a marriage license. They simply recorded their marriages in their Family Bibles. So should we.
" ~ Pastor Matt Trewhella

This conservative pastor would eat Burks' lunch for accusing a couple of sin in defence of the state on account of that couples convictions against state marriage licensing and the unbiblical laws that govern marriage.

No--YOU ignored this when you posted YOU were going to be remarried with a civil license so you could collect Government Social Security money.

That remarriage YOU SAID was your excuse for calling your Quaker-married wife "fiancée" during your naked Cheerios incident.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The problem is, though, a person cannot claim a conscientious objection to a civil marriage, and THEN obtain a civil marriage for financial benefits.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Sean

Sounds like a state religion to me.

The state is TK's religion.

And yet I keep appealing to God's commands to obey civil law and civil authority...a point you either cannot grasp or cannot accept.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Sean, you're like a gnat at a BBQ.

LOL....Good one TK.