The Age of Reason is a free Bible study/Christian history that shows how and why modern Christianity became apostate. |
View/save chapter in PDF format. |
Marriage is an exchange or acquisition of property.
As Christ’s brides we are possessions He bought (1 Co 6:20; 7:23; 2 Pe 2:1), which is also
a method of acquiring slaves (Le
25:44-46). Christ made us His wives expecting – nay, demanding – that we prove ourselves to be helpers meet for Him. When we were purchased by Christ, we and all we have became His
property, part of His household (Ac 4:32).
A wife owns nothing (which was one of covetous Lucifer’s main objections to
life under God’s rule). She subsists on the providence of her man. Her
responsibilities can be extensive, including the use and management of all His
resources for the good of his household (ruling and reigning under his lordship
in accordance with his will). (I have deliberately blurred the distinction
between Christ/bride and man/wife because there is no difference.) And even
though it is extremely offensive to everything the “free world” holds sacred,
we learn in Dt 5:21
and Le 25:39-46 that God considers
women and slaves to be chattel.
When two men get together to discuss the
acquisition of a helper, a wife, the terms of the agreement depend on the value
they assign to the woman involved. Sometimes the potential husband will need to
pay for the woman. Sometimes the father or other guardian will need to sweeten
the deal by including additional assets (a dowry). A man may give his daughters
to another man as a wage (Ge 29:15). In
fact, in that example Jacob felt cheated when he got Leah, but he agreed to
work longer so he could have her sister, too. And Laban,
perhaps not wanting his daughters to have too much of a change in lifestyle,
took a couple of his handmaids and threw them into the deal as well (Ge 29:24,29).
Once the men agree to the terms of the deal a future date may be set for the
actual property exchange. Often a public event (usually a meal) is arranged in
order to formally publicize the exchange (Ge 29:22; Re 19:9).
Marriage is a general word so you have to be
careful about its meaning. It can refer to the initial agreement between the
two men because, unless a later date is set, that is when the exchange of
property takes place. It can also mean the “ceremony”, such as a marriage
supper, at which the exchange is made public and official. And it can mean the
act of consummation because that is when the two become united. For example,
the legal exchange of property part of marriage in Ge 24:51 took place between Bethuel (Rebekah’s father) and Abraham’s servant who was acting on
the behalf of Isaac in accordance with Abraham’s instructions. And then the
consummation part of marriage took place in Ge 24:67. This important distinction among the legal
contract/agreement part of marriage, and the finalizing/consummation part of
marriage, and the evaluation/judgment part of marriage (this judgment part of
marriage takes place between the other two parts and will be covered shortly)
is missed or ignored by “eternal security” advocates who fail to realize
spiritual realities must agree with the physical patterns established in the
Bible.
Some Christians think a man who has sex with an
unmarried woman is automatically making her his wife because he has
“consummated”…well, I don’t know what they think he might have
consummated. Maybe their problem is they don’t know what consummate
means. It is not a union; it’s the completion, perfection, or finalizing
of something that happened before. Therefore it is not true that casual sex
makes two people husband and wife. Why? Because the woman still belongs to another if her owner hasn’t
agreed to give her away and if there
is no intent to acquire a wife. In
other words, if there is no legal transaction there is no deal to consummate. If the man and woman are Christians,
however, the man has defamed her and disgraced her father. Therefore he is not
only required to pay a fine to the father, he also has an obligation to marry
the daughter because most men wouldn’t be interested in a woman humbled (Dt 22:28,29).
Even before the consummation occurs, however, a
woman legally becomes a man’s wife at
the property exchange agreement. Joseph’s wife Mary is a perfect example. We
know Mary was a virgin until after Christ was born because Joseph “knew her
not” until then (Mt 1:25). Now note
that even though the marriage was not consummated, Mary is called Joseph’s
“wife” (Mt 1:20,24).
Should we think the use of the word “wife” always means “finalized wife”
and therefore the consummation is not required for two to become inseparably one? No, because Lk 2:5 tells us
even though Mary was already legally Joseph’s wife, which
meant he could take her with him to other towns like Bethlehem and get a room
at an inn with her, she was technically and specifically only his “espoused
wife.” Another good example is Dt 22:23,24. Here we find that a woman who is only “betrothed”
and is still a “virgin” is legally the man’s “wife” even though the union has
not been consummated. (Legally enough to authorize the death
penalty for disregarding that fact!) That means the word “wife” in the
context of Mt 1:20,24 and Dt
22:24 only refers to the initial, legal process part and meaning of marriage.
Mary was Joseph’s wife legally, and
Joseph was her legal husband. It is
imperative that we understand this topic because, while we are legally Christ’s
brides, His wives, we are, like Mary, merely unconsummated espoused
wives (2 Co 11:2). Why is that an
important point? Because of what the “that I may present you as a chaste virgin
to Christ” part of 2 Co 11:2 refers to. The outcome of an espousal is dependent
upon the groom’s being satisfied when he inspects his
bride. This is a type of Judgment.
The judgment part of
marriage has been forgotten. It takes place after the “legal” or “espousal”
part of marriage (salvation), and before the “finalization” or “consummation”
part of marriage. When Joseph found out, before the
consummation, that Mary was (as he supposed) a fornicator rather than a chaste
virgin he decided to put her away (Mt
1:19). This pre-consummation judgment is supposed to prevent a man
from being fooled into ending up with a wife he doesn’t really want. Because
Jacob foolishly got drunk at his wedding feast he not only skipped the judgment
process and went straight to the consummation part, he didn’t even know whom he
was consummating (Ge 29:22,23,25)! But after the
consummation has occurred, putting away/divorce is not
possible because consummation is when the legal part of marriage (when two are merely “reckoned” to be one flesh) is superseded by reality. (The
legal prerequisite to consummation, which is the legal exchange of property, is
absent in cases of rape and consensual premarital and extramarital sex.) So it
would be fair to say the legal part
of marriage is a human transaction represented in Mt 19:5, and the post-judgment consummation
represents the divine procedure mentioned in Mt 19:6b.
An excellent description of this judgment (that
is such an important part of marriage) as well as the potential outcome of this
judgment is Dt 22:13-21.
In it we learn that after the legal part of marriage, the giving and the taking
part in verses 13 and 16, a man takes his new, legal bride to the bedroom in
order to examine her so he can make a judgment as to whether or not he will
consummate the union. If he finds she is not pure he may decide to return the
property to the man who gave her to him, as is his legal right. That is what
putting away is: It is legally
severing the legal bonds of marriage
for cause. (God has provided no means or cause to put asunder the consummated marriage because it can’t be done.) The reason
Joseph was going to put away his bride, Mary (Mt 1:19), was he’d discovered, in
the period between the legal giving and taking part of marriage and the
consummating part, that she was (as he supposed) impure.
---------- page
2 ----------
When the husband goes to the father with his
finding that the damsel is not a virgin, the parents have an opportunity to
bring forth, for example, the bloody tokens of her virginity (that they’ve
carefully preserved just in case this would become an issue) in order to prove
her virtue (Dt 22:17). Notice that when Mary’s
parents had absolutely no evidence that could establish – to Joseph’s or to
anybody else’s satisfaction – the virtue of their obviously pregnant daughter (which made old bloody
tokens irrelevant), God the Father in effect saved her honor and her marriage
by presenting to Joseph the tokens of her virginity in accordance with His
rules (cp. Dt 22:17 and Mt 1:20).
But if, during the pre-consummation
examination/judgment, the bride is found to be impure, she will be put away and
executed (Dt 22:20,21)!
Thus the Scriptures make it clear that the part of the marriage process that
has been ignored and forgotten today is the
most important part – Judgment! How did that happen? Western civilization
is built upon philosophy and its doctrinal offspring, the Enlightenment, the
independence and sovereignty of the individual, the liberation of women from
their God-ordained role as servants, the proscription of human chattel, and the
love affair with equality. Because those ideas are so
instinctive and appealing to the Reason of the Natural carnal mind (because
their veracity is universally self-evident)
they were allowed to overrule the words in (any version of) the Bible because Reason has replaced revelation. With our lips we claim to believe the Bible, but
in practice we reveal ourselves to be unbelieving fornicators who have
squandered our Christian virginal purity. We then either shamelessly ignore the
judgment part of marriage that comes before
the consummation part, or convince ourselves Judgment is really a joyful
occasion at which Christ’s espoused brides receive varying numbers of rewards
based on their service. But the purpose of the judgment part of marriage is to
determine if the consummation will
even take place. Handing out rewards, duties, and responsibilities to wives in
God’s household has nothing to do with marriage; that happens later.
The
Judgment part of marriage emphasizes the headship/rulership
of the husband, and the membership/servanthood of the
wife. Let’s apply that to our relationship with God: At Judgment He’ll be
deciding which of His espoused wives that took His name upon themselves are
meet to serve Him, and which of His espoused wives took His name in vain by not
pleasing Him. In other words, God is the Judge – the only Judge.
Therefore, our mission as His espoused wives is simply to please Him. Because God’s decision at Judgment is completely arbitrary, we must convince Him with our loving, eager,
happy, wholehearted, selfless, dedicated service that we’re the kind of servant
He wants in His kingdom. Ps 2:11,12 is
a good example because it emphasizes the fear
of servanthood, and the “arrogance” of authority – especially this part: “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish…when his wrath is kindled but a little.”
That means He’ll cast us out if we serve Him halfheartedly, undermine His glory
and authority by twisting His Written Instructions into what we think He actually meant to say…but didn’t, or in any way
fail to impress, please, and satisfy Him. We are His servants, and He can and will do with us whatever He wants. Because He really is
God Almighty He doesn’t need to settle for half-assed servants that don’t make
Him happy. Therefore we need to fearfully and humbly remember our sole purpose
in life is His happiness.
Many Christians are unaware that the New
Testament not only drops the Old
Commission’s exhortation to marry and have physical sex in order to be
fruitful and multiply, but that along with the new Great Commission’s exhortation to spiritually feed Christ’s sheep,
the New Testament actually exhorts us to never marry anyone (unless
uncontrollable sexual lust might cause us to commit fornication – as defined in
chapter D15). Tradition has effectively removed 1 Co 7:1,2,7-9,32-35 from the Bible. The
sad truth is today’s preachers never advise their congregations not to marry. Why did God decide to
advise us New Testament saints to – unlike His Old Testament saints – remain
unmarried? I believe there is more to it than just 1 Co 7:23-35. Let’s compare God’s advising His Old Testament era
saints (who were under the physical Old Commission’s mandate to be fruitful and
multiply) to not marry pagans and to only marry daughters of Israel…with His
advising us New Testament era saints (who are under the spiritual Great
Commission’s mandate to preach the gospel to every creature) not to marry anyone.
We know God created laws in response to our
transgressions (Ga 3:19) because He wanted to help us
avoid some of the problems we’ve had in the past – as well as some of the
problems He foresaw in our future. God advised His Hebrews to only marry
Hebrews – for the good of the church. We saw in chapter H3, The Whoredom of Peor, that Balaam told
King Balak God’s people could be defeated from within
if they would just marry enough pagan women. Even a brilliant Christian like
King Solomon was leavened by his pagan wives (ignoring the modern temptation to
blame his leaven on God’s policy of polygamy) because through marriage he
brought the subtle dangers of pagan traditions and humanistic ways of thinking
directly into the church. Men are supposed to be heads and leaders; wives are
supposed to be servants who follow the lead of their husband. But in the Old
Testament it wasn’t just pagan wives that were problematic: The very first wife in the Bible hurt the
church by getting Adam to participate in sin. And Job’s Christian wife advised
him to curse God and die. Therefore, could it be that God saw how much trouble
marriage caused His church back in the Old Testament days when women weren’t
“liberated”, looked ahead into our New Testament times and saw how much worse
marriage was going to be for Christian men in the era of women’s liberation and
equality, and therefore lovingly and wisely advised us to remain unmarried? I
don’t know. But I have seen a number of Christian husbands who recognized the
Scriptural truth of The Age of Reason’s
message, later be forced by their Enlightened wives to abandon the way of the
Sword and re-embrace modern tradition’s way of peace (Mt 10:34-39; 1 Co 7:33). It was agonizing (and in some cases frightening) to witness. If those men
had never married, would they have
continued to serve the Lord without distraction?
On page H4-1 under “Return To
Jerusalem” we talked about Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi rebuking God’s people
for ignoring His word by getting married to pagans. They said God’s
people wearied Him by claiming the evil of their
disobedient marriages was good in His eyes. Today God would have
them rebuke His New Testament Christians for ignoring His word by getting
married, and He’d have them point out that today’s Christians weary
Him by claiming the evil of their disobedient marriages is actually good.
It is never good to sin against God; therefore, marriage is doing more harm to
the church than good. To think otherwise is to believe God Almighty screwed up
when He advised us for our own good not
to marry. It is good not to marry.
God’s advice to not marry is good advice, and it
applies to most Christians. Be advised by the word of God, brother: Gird your
loins with the truth, pick up the cross and the Sword, and fight for the
doctrinal purity of the church.
Let’s now take a closer look at divorce.