Adult Sunday School - Marriage-Definitions

Heavenly Father, thank you for this morning, I pray that you would bless our time of worship later and that you would bless our study of your word now, in Jesus' name, amen.

So what I would like to do at this point, so yeah, we're in a bit of a transition here where Brian just finished teaching a couple of series and handed this over for me to do some

Sunday school and so last week we looked at one topic on worship and from here on out

I'd like to start a series on marriage, just a bunch of topics within the category of marriage and divorce, adultery, and all kinds of things about that and why, why would we do that?

Several reasons, I think there's a lot of, there's a lack of clarity in a lot of things, not just culturally while the world, you know, fumbles to understand what marriage is, but even among Christians, a lot of the more specific questions that are very important and applicable to people's lives don't get answered because there's so much diversity of opinion that there's a fear of offending people.

You know, if you ask about specific situations of divorce or specific situations of whether or not it would be right for someone to marry, right, there's, your chances are you're hitting on particular things that have, that are true of one person or someone they know and so it's very easy to, it's very easy to offend in this topic and so because of that there's generally a lack of clarity because there's an unwillingness to touch it as much.

Also I don't, I can't think of a time when we've ever done a serious teaching on divorce and something that I've mentioned as a concern a few times is that if there were ever a serious contentious issue, you know, we wouldn't have, we wouldn't have taught on it well enough to be able to navigate it, you know, should that, should that come around and I would like for us to all be on the same page about what would constitute a lawful divorce and what wouldn't so that, you know, should there ever be that kind of controversy in our church we would be able to have more of a one mind on what scripture says on that matter.

So these are some of the reasons I think this is an important thing to discuss and today is mostly just going to be an overview of what marriage is but as we go forward we're going to be hitting some of these more, more nuanced subtopics so please do send me any questions that you have.

If there's a question that you want answered, there are really, you know, a near endless number of questions that could be answered in a series on marriage so if you have a particular question that you want answered please do send it to me, either just text it to me or write it down on a piece of paper and hand it to me, any of those work,

I'll be happy to make sure it ends up somewhere in the, in the series. As long as it truly is relevant.

Okay, well let's, let's move forward now. What is a, what is marriage?

Like if you had to define marriage, how would you define it? I want to, I want to get a few definitions, yes,

Christopher, right, yes, okay, yeah it is, it is an image of the gospel and that's, that's fascinating for a number of reasons.

Let me go ahead and read that passage, wives submit to your own husbands as to the Lord for the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body and is himself its savior.

Now as the church submits to Christ so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of the water with the word so that he might present the church to himself in splendor without spot or wrinkle or any such thing that she might be holy and without blemish.

The same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies, he who loves his wife loves himself for no one has ever hated his own flesh but nourishes and cherishes it just as Christ does the church because we are members of his body.

So he keeps, he keeps going back to Christ and the church throughout this whole thing. A lot of people are looking at this passage to just tell them about how to be married which is a lot of instruction there but there's something else that it says, there's several other things it says that I find interesting too.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is profound that I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

However, let each one of you love his wife as himself and let the wife see that she respects her husband's.

So this is called a mystery. This mystery is profound and what, in what sense is it a mystery?

What is a mystery? Could you, could you turn me down a bit? I always feel like I'm too loud and I've like end up, I feel like I end up whispering to make sure.

Thanks. Thank you. What, what is a mystery?

Yeah, right. Something, something that's been hidden, right? So what, what has been hidden here? What's, what's the part that's hidden?

Because you talk to, you talk to some religious folks like Roman Catholics about mysteries and what they use the word mystery for is to mean something that is a logical contradiction, you know, and therefore we're just supposed to accept it on faith even though there's no way it could possibly be true.

So, you know, the, the, the wine turns into blood and, you know, this, this is a repugnant to any sensibility that one might have logically or otherwise, but we just accept it on faith.

That's not, that's not what mystery means in the Bible. It means something hidden. So what is, what is hidden here? Okay. Right.

So he, so he was a mystery and then he was revealed, right? And he's no longer a mystery, right? Or that, that mystery of the gospel is no longer a mystery or sorry, the mystery of Christ.

That's the phrase that Ephesians uses. Yeah. That's no longer a mystery. Yeah. Sorry. We're going to say something. Right. Okay.

Yeah. So what, what is our status with Christ in the church? Like what is, what is the relationship between Christ and the church?

Okay. He's the head in terms of marriage. What's the, what's the status? The bride in Christ is the groom.

Yeah. And that groom is an important word. He's not, not exactly the husband yet. Right. Right. That we are betrothed to Christ.

The church is betrothed to Christ. That marriage has not been consummated. The wedding feast has not happened.

And so this one flesh union that we experience here on earth is a mystery because what it's referring to is something that has not been revealed yet.

We don't know what it will be like for, we know what it's like to be betrothed. We as a church are betrothed to Christ.

We don't know what it's like for the church to actually be married to Christ. So yeah, there's, it is, it is pretty profound as Paul says here.

And then in addition, what, something else this tells you, okay, marriage existed when, when in human history did marriage begin existing?

Yeah. From the very beginning before the fall, right? Before the fall. And if this refers to Christ in the church, if this refers to some revelation about salvation, what does that say about God's intentions when he created the world and his, his purposes and his plans?

He did not, a lot of people consider this, what we're experiencing now is plan B, right?

After, after Adam and Eve screwed everything up, now God's, you know, like fixing everything and trying to figure out how to, you know, well, okay, we can do this other thing now that we can, we can save them through Christ.

That's, that's what we'll do. No, this was, this was actually part of the original plan. Even before the fall was for Christ to be the

Redeemer, right? And that is indicated, yeah, that's indicated right here in this passage that, that marriage, this is not just some analogy that Paul is making.

He said, not just, oh, this is an appropriate analogy, like you would use, you know, animals or plants or whatever as some kind of analogy or farming.

You see all the parables that Jesus makes, right? No, marriage is given as a, marriage is given as a representation of this, and so it shows

God's intentions were there from the beginning, and it gives a high place to marriage as being something that both, while withholding some knowledge, reveals much about that relationship of love between Christ and the church.

Yes. Sorry, what

I'm saying is intended in the beginning is salvation. Salvation was intended from the beginning as revealed by marriage, right?

But you're, but if you're asking a different question that's just kind of come up, yeah. Right, so, okay, so God has given marriage for three purposes that we'll talk about.

One of those is legitimate offspring, right? He said, let us create man in our own image, and he made man, and then he wanted them to be fruitful and multiply.

So it is necessary for at least a season that this happens in order that there would be a populace that bears his image, right?

Now, does that need to continue on forever for God's purposes to be accomplished? I don't believe so. And then, furthermore, if its purpose finds its telos in Christ and the church, right, and it's to reveal that and to prepare us for that in some sense, then its purpose is accomplished when a legitimate offspring has been produced, a godly offspring, according to Malachi 2 .14.

And then on top of that, when that, what it is revealing and yet simultaneously hiding details of, you know, that wedding between Christ and the church, once that is revealed, it has fulfilled its purposes at that point.

Yeah. I don't believe so, no.

Yeah, they're never, neither given the marriage nor married, right? Yeah, and it's still the case that it's not good for man to be alone, right?

It's still the case it's not good for man to be alone. But once we are dwelling together with Christ and we're together with each other in that way, in that special way that hasn't existed yet, like, that will satisfy that need of humanity to not be alone, that is currently not completely satisfied by, you know, just being single, right?

God has called some people to singleness, but it's still, there's still like a lack of idealness with the state of being single, right?

Even if it might be a blessing in some ways for God's purposes here in this, you know, fallen world for a temporary period.

All right. So, okay, so we're talking about what is marriage, said it's a representation of Christ and the church.

How else might you define what marriage is? Any other definitions people want to throw out there?

It's a covenant, right? It's a covenant. Yeah. And, you know, if you don't spend a lot of time thinking about covenants, it's hard to understand.

And I think this is part of why marriage seems so optional to people now, right? It's like, well, we're already living together.

We're already doing this thing, you know? What is, you know, there's not a, yeah, if there's nothing special about a covenant, but that's what it is.

And, yeah, I was confused when I was young because I understood, you know, that adultery is wrong and that you shouldn't have premarital sex.

And I thought that, well, maybe sex constitutes marriage. And so, like, if someone does not marry the person they sleep with, then that itself is wrong.

But Jesus ends up telling the woman at the well that she speaks correctly because the one she's with now, she's not married to, right?

So it's not the case that sex itself on its own constitutes a marriage, which is what

I thought when I was, you know, a youth. And, yeah, so it is a covenant.

It's a covenant. A few verses on that. Proverbs 2 .17 says, speaking of the strange woman, right, the adulterous woman, that she forsakes the friend of her youth and forgets the covenant of her

God. Speaking of the friend of her youth being her husband and forgetting the covenant being the covenant she had made with God about this.

And then Malachi 2 .14 says, yet you say, why? Because Jehovah has been witness between you and the wife of your youth against whom you have dealt treacherously.

Though she is your companion and the wife of your covenant. So, once again, it speaks of marriage as a covenant.

So some of the implications of a covenant are not just that, you know, there's this, like, locking in of some contract, which is part of it, but also that there are blessings and curses that come with it, right?

The one who does something under a covenant receives additional blessings, receives additional strength in order to do that.

You know, if you make a...you see in the Bible where people make vows to God to do something, what their trust...why

would they kind of voluntarily put themselves on the hook in that way, right?

The reason why you do that in these situations where it wouldn't be required, for example, for sexual union, something like this, right?

Why do you say, well, if you give me this thing, I will do this, you know? Or if...yeah,

the idea is that, well, God gives people the strength to fulfill their covenant.

He gives them the blessings in being faithful to a covenant and their likewise curses for those who do not.

So it heightens the stakes on either end, not just the negatives, but also the positives.

One of these days, you know, I've only preached one wedding, but one of these days, I'd like to preach as a wedding sermon about Joshua and the

Gibeonites. You know, the sun stands still to protect the Gibeonites. Why? Because the people had foolishly...they

had foolishly made a covenant to protect the Gibeonites. And God gives them the strength to fulfill this by making the sun stand still.

And if you think about his willingness to do that for them in that covenant they made, what will he do for, you know, you and your marriage as you're trying to keep it together, as you've made vows that you will do this?

If he's made the sun stand still for a covenant, certainly, he will give you whatever strength is needed in order to fulfill your vows.

And that is a...so that is another question. Is a covenant a vow? You know, I'm using that word interchangeably with covenant right now.

Or is it an oath? Does anyone know the difference in the...in our confession it makes a difference? I've kind of struggled to find that distinction made elsewhere.

But is anyone familiar with the distinction the covenant or our confession makes between oaths and vows?

So an oath is to man in the presence of God, right? And a vow is directly to God, right, as opposed to man in the presence of God.

And so I've...ever since studying, you know, our church's confession, the 1689

Baptist confession, I've wondered, well, is it marriage and oath then? Because you're making it to another in the presence of God as opposed to making it to God.

But the more I've thought about it, the more I think, no, it really is a vow. Because in an oath, someone can release you from it.

If you pledge something to someone else in the sight of God, they can release you from that. They can forgive you and say, no, you don't have to do this anymore.

That's not the case in a marriage, right? In a marriage, you can't just release someone of their bond voluntarily, right?

So in that sense, it really is a vow. It really is something higher than just something you're pledging to another person horizontally on the level.

Yeah, and of course, it is important to keep the vows.

Psalm 15, for speaking messianically of Christ, but it holds up the man who swears to his own hurt and does not change, you know, for better or for worse as it goes, right?

A lot of people only want the for better. They don't want the for worse. Another thought there is, and one of these sessions,

I think I'll dedicate just to weddings, just to the ceremony itself. But just as a thought here,

I think it is a good idea to stick with traditional vows instead of couples writing their own vows. A lot of times when they write their own vows, it's not a, it doesn't even constitute what you would expect a vow to say, right?

It's just a bunch of statements about how they love them, and it's not necessarily encapsulating the commitment that's being made because people don't necessarily know what a, you know, they don't really know what a vow is.

They just, you know, want something more poetic than what they traditionally hear or something like that. So I would caution against,

I'm not saying that it's wrong to use anything other than traditional vows, but I would caution against that and to really know what you're doing if you're going to do that.

And I would say also that don't be surprised if the pastor doing your wedding is not willing to use whatever vows you pick.

So, yeah. All right. Also, it's a covenant that's established for life.

This is indicated first by direct statements about death. Romans 7 .2

says, For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law, the husband.

First Corinthians 7 .39 says, A wife is bound for so long time as her husband lives, but if the husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she will, only in the

Lord. Okay, so these two statements about death says that someone is free after death.

You know, a lot of times there's this, people have this sort of jealousy over their spouse such that they want to hold on to their spouse after death, you know, and they resent the idea that their spouse might move on after they die.

That's very, not only is it not fitting with what a marriage is, but yeah, it's very selfish in not understanding some of the purposes of marriage.

If you read, now, I haven't personally read a lot of these, but I know my wife has different quotes from Puritans where a dying spouse would recommend a few candidates to the other, you know?

Like, they really were concerned, you know, for the happiness of their spouse.

All right, and then it's also indicated by statements about the afterlife.

In Matthew 22, 30, which we've already talked about, for in the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.

And I think it's worth sitting on the context of that one for a minute. Who is Jesus talking to when he says that?

You all know. Somebody knows. What's that?

Not quite. Sadducees, yeah, that's important. And what's the difference between the Pharisees and the

Sadducees? Right, they don't believe in the resurrection, they don't believe in the angels.

Yeah, exactly, they're the liberals, right? They're the naturalists, they're the materialists who, and so you think about how confused they are about, you know, they're mocking some of these things, and they don't really understand marriage, they don't understand the afterlife, etc.,

and it's all related, you know, it's all related. Boy, that speaks to today, you know, why are people so confused about marriage and what it is and what, you know, what

God's purposes are in these things when they are materialists who don't believe in, you know, don't believe in angels or spirits or whatever, right?

The, yeah, you can't really understand these things if you don't know the scriptures or the power of God, which is the phrase

Jesus uses when he speaks to the Sadducees and tells them that they don't understand these things. And then also, as indicated by his hatred of divorce, if it's not, if it's not for life, why would there be the continuing commitment?

And by the way, if anyone hears me as arguing for a permanent view or anything like that, that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that under, yeah, that it, it can be broken prior to death, but that it is not ideal circumstances that would lead it to be broken prior to death.

Malachi 2 .16. For I hate putting away, says Jehovah, the God of hosts, and him that covers his garment with violence, says

Jehovah of hosts. Therefore, take heed to your spirit that you deal not treacherously, all right?

And then Matthew 19 .6. So that they are no longer two but one flesh, what therefore

God has joined together. Let no man put apart. So it, okay, so it's a covenant that is a vow that is made for life, and it is not, it's not a sacrament.

Does anyone know why the Roman Catholic Church, I think this is the reasoning, or I think this is the historical reason why this came about, why the

Roman Catholic Church speaks of marriage as a sacrament. So when

Jerome translated the Latin Vulgate, which is the book the church used for many, many years, and many

Roman Catholic churches still use, that translation of the

Bible. In Ephesians 5 .32, instead of mystery, mysterium, or whatever the

Latin word would be, he used the word sacramentum, right? And so if you're reading your

Latin Bible, and that's all you're working with, and you're not working with Greek and Hebrew, as many people weren't for a long time, you know, you see, oh, it's a sacrament.

But yeah, it's, a sacrament is something that is ordained. We use it to refer to something that is specifically ordained by Christ as a means of grace.

And this is, you know, as a blessing for the church. And this is not, this does not meet the definition of marriage.

And I've talked to, I've talked to Roman Catholics about this, like Roman Catholic teachers about this, and you know, they'll usually say something along the lines of, well, you know,

Christ is, he's, Jesus is part of the Trinity. So, God instituted marriage, therefore,

Christ instituted it. Yeah, but that's not really how we use the term. We're using, you know, we're talking about Christ and his earthly ministry, ordaining, you know, communion, ordaining baptism.

And it's also not something particularly for the church, it is for everyone, right? Marriage is a creation ordinance, marriage is blessed for people of all, yeah, of all,

I don't want to just say all faiths, because that sounds weird. But basically, even people have never heard the truth, right?

That marriage is still good for them. It's just part of the, it's part of the natural order. It's part of what God created. When I was young, because I grew up in a church where I always heard, you know,

God has to be at the center of your marriage. He has to be the center of your marriage. I heard that so many times, which is, it's true.

Like, if you want a happy marriage, he should be. But I heard that so many times, I thought that marriage without God at the center of it was an illegitimate marriage, and that unbelievers shouldn't marry.

Marriage is only for Christians. No, that's not the case. A marriage between unbelievers is still a legitimate marriage.

And not only is it legitimate, it is something that is good for them and those societies to pursue. Let's see,

I have a quote from Zwingli that I thought was pretty good. He says, Marriage is a most holy thing.

It is not made any more holy or any clearer by it being called a sacrament, but darker and less clear.

For everybody knows what wedlock is, but hardly anybody knows what a sacrament is. Yes. Right.

Our marriages are going to be more God -honoring. Right. There's a way that we're representing

Christ in the church better if we are living godly lives that are truly loving and truly submitting, etc.

And then, also Malachi 2 .14 says that one of the purposes of marriage is godly offspring.

Right. You cannot produce godly offspring if you're not raising them up in the faith.

So there are senses in which a Christian marriage is more God -honoring. That's very important.

But no, yeah, I would disagree with that. That marriage is given to all, like I said, it's part of creation.

I'll get you in a second. It's part of creation. And then on top of that, it's part of the Noahic covenant.

And this is something that I think that, you know, just over the past few years, I've just realized the importance of the

Noahic covenant and understanding things. So the Noahic covenant is given to all of creation. This is after the fall.

We're re -establishing the rules of engagement. It's going to work a little bit similar to how creation did originally, but there's going to be some new things.

And if you think about some things that would be difficult to explain apart from God -giving, like a new set of, you know, a new covenant with creation.

For example, you know, incest, right? Like incest, marriage between brother and sister.

Scripture forbids that. Our confession forbids it. And it's pretty clear from nature that that's not going to work out well for you, right, if you marry your brother or sister.

But then, you know, in Genesis 1 and 2, who are Adam's and Eve's children marrying, right?

They're marrying brothers and sisters. There's nothing wrong with that at the time. There's something, there's a new order that's established in Genesis 9 as the people walk out of the ark.

And so that's just one thought that Scripture doesn't speak a whole lot to, but it lets you know how there really did need to be, like, kind of a new order established after the ark.

And these are some of the things he says. And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

So we have that statement said again. Like, this is still the case. This is good. The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon a bird of heavens, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish in the sea.

Into your hand they are delivered. So slightly different phrasing on that. Maybe a little more hostility set up between man and animals than was before.

And then he gives animals as food, whereas before he had only given plants as food. But then he makes some restrictions on that.

You can't eat flesh with its life, that is its blood. And then on top of that, I'm establishing the death penalty from whoever sheds blood by man, his blood shall be shed.

So, you know, now we're going to have rules about when it is permissible to, for man to take another man's life in retribution.

And so that's establishing, you know, like an authority for government. Whereas before, you didn't have any kind of establishing that sort of authority.

Except for perhaps, Klein has a really excellent paper on Genesis, is it 4?

Yeah, Genesis 4. And the statement made to Cain about, you know, the retribution coming on anyone who takes his hand to Cain and takes his life.

So there's some kind of provision made before, it's not as clear. But yeah, in Genesis 9, there's this new order established.

And marriage is still part of that new order. And who is this for? You know, it's right for all kinds of peoples to eat meat, not just Christians, right?

Not just believers. It's right for all kinds of people to have governments that establish justice, right?

Not just us. And the same thing for marriage. It's right for all kinds of people to have marriage. And you be fruitful, multiply, increase greatly on the earth and multiply in it.

Charles, right? Yeah, that is a really good question. So several things.

First of all, I don't know what they do. Like, I agree with you, I don't know what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if they do have a traditional vow to God.

And they ask people to put their hand on the Bible. And then the people have the opportunity to decline. It wouldn't surprise me if that were still the case.

Let's see, what else do I want to say about that? The, yeah, so sometimes they'll, you know, people will opt for other things.

There are some groups like Quakers that won't take any vow, right?

And I don't know what formula they have to say to show that they're serious about it. But yeah, and then there's those people who will put their hands on the

Quran or on a science book or whatever, you know. And then, yes? Is that a science book?

That was, someone was recently sworn into some high office by putting their hand on a science book, yeah.

There might have been that too. I think there was a science book recently. Yeah, yeah.

Yes? Okay, yeah, let me answer that in just a second.

So just one more thing about whether or not that would constitute a real marriage, you know, if they're making vows but not to the true

God, right? So Jesus answers that in Matthew 5. He says,

So this is where Quakers get the idea that you shouldn't swear at all.

Later on in 2 Corinthians 1, Paul says that his yes was yes and his no was no. And then he says,

And so he, like, goes on to swear right after saying that his yes was yes and his no was no. So what

Jesus is talking about here is a practice of swearing by something other than God. Okay, so this is the answer is, you know, is it, what is the case of one who swears by the temple, you know?

Are they a little less bound to that, et cetera, right? The answer is that, no, it's the case when someone swears by these other things.

They're still swearing by God. They're still swearing by his footstool. Everything on earth is his, and so they are still bound to keep that covenant, even if they are swearing by something false or something less and think that they can get away with it.

So no, I believe that those are still legitimate marriages, even those who are swearing by some unknown

God. And I think that would be, I think you would see that in scripture if, because, you know, these people are swearing to Zeus or whatever, you know,

I think you would encounter them resisting these illegitimate marriages, but the

Bible seems to treat these marriages of unbelievers as legitimate. Yes, well, sorry, there's a lot of queued up things here.

So your question was about renewing. Yeah, so with renewing your vows, there could be cause for it.

I would hesitate to do that in any way that would suggest that the original was not legitimate, right?

And I think that's what a lot of people are doing when they do it is they're ending up denigrating the original one.

No, there's nothing wrong with renewing vows in general.

You know, I do believe that's what communion is. Each week you make a vow in baptism, and then you renew it each week in communion.

So there's nothing wrong with renewing an oath or a vow. However, you would want there to be good cause.

You know, I could see if there was a case of adultery or something, and the couple wanted to stay together instead of getting divorced, and they decided to solemnize that by renewing their vows.

That would make sense to me, but I wouldn't, yeah, I wouldn't do that kind of thing rationally.

Looks like Solomon's got a question over there. Christopher? Right, yeah.

So only a Christian marriage is going to produce godly offspring, like I said, right? The Christian marriage is honoring

God. The thing is, like, I guess one way of asking what you're asking, I think, would be if there's two unbelievers and they're thinking about marrying, would it be more in line with God's law or more pleasing if they didn't get married?

Is that, is that kind of what you're asking? No, I guess it's just an odd thing.

Oh, okay, it is. I think,

I think marriage is still a blessing to others. I think that it can produce good things, but not, but yeah, as opposed, but as far as something that would be of any eternal benefit for them, no.

Yeah, yeah, none of that can be had apart from Christ. Yeah, yeah, common grace, that's a good, that's a good term here.

Yeah, there's one more passage in Matthew that I think is really important to this idea of oaths still being, or vows still being binding, even if they are not by the true

God. Woe to you blind guides, this is Matthew 23, woe to you blind guides who say, if anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound to his oath.

You blind fools, for which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? And if you say, if anyone swears by the altar, he is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift on the altar, he is bound by his oath.

You blind men, for which is greater, the gift on the altar, that which makes the gift sacred. So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and everything on it, and whoever swears by the temple swears by it and him who dwells in it, and whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it.

Yeah, and then if you swear by something on earth, you're swearing by his footstool. So you're still swearing to God.

So these, those oaths are all, they're all still binding. Okay, is there any other?

Oh, yes. Yes. Yeah, so I've been citing two different things.

One is our confession, which speaks of legitimate offspring, right? And the other is Malachi 2, which speaks of godly offspring.

And so those are talking about different things. So yes, legitimate offspring is talking about children that have parents, right?

It's not talking about, like, them not being real children if they, you know, they're not all

Pinocchios if they don't have two parents, but that it is not good for a child to not have parents, right?

That's what it means when it's talking about legitimate offspring. So, yeah,

I'll just skip that. But the, yeah, the idea being that God could have created this world without establishing marriage, still having, you know, sex as a means of reproduction, etc.

But what would happen to those children, you know? So one of the, one of the reasons that marriage has been given is for children with parents, for children to have parents.

That's what I believe our confession means when it talks about legitimate offspring. Both the offspring itself being good, and then should the offspring exist, that they have parents.

Are there any other questions? All right, let's talk about the purposes of marriage.

All right, so let me go ahead and read what our confession says in 25 .2. Marriage was ordained for the mutual help of husband and wife for the increase of mankind with a legitimate issue, right?

A legitimate issue being a legitimate offspring I spoke of. And the preventing of uncleanness. Okay, so those are the, those are the, yeah, several ends of marriage.

And I have a lot on this, and so part of me is thinking, and maybe we could save some of it for later. But I will add that this is, this is different than what you see in the world.

Where there's been a shift to personal fulfillment being the, being the primary goal of marriage, right?

Just like, you know, personal satisfaction. Not some, not some purpose greater than itself.

Marriage has a purpose greater than you as the individual, because there's a couple. But then on top of that, it's even a purpose that's greater than the couple.

That is a benefit to, to all and a benefit to God that is really in mind here.

And so this shifting focus to the individual is not, it's not good.

So a couple years ago, I read, there's a book by Karl, Karl Truman called

Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. Actually, it's interesting that Mark's here, because he and I did this book club together with some other people online.

I went through the book. But one of the things he, one of the things he's talking about is, what is the, how did we get where we are?

Where some things are, some biblical morals are despised and others are upheld.

Like, why is it that, you know, transgenderism is acceptable, but polygamy is not?

When you would think that, you know, if there's just a degradation of morals, that one would be more likely to come than the other, you know?

What's going on? And basically, it's this, it's a shifting focus to identity and fulfillment that is, that things like transgenderism are attempting to accomplish, that polygamy is not really as related to.

And so that's part of the answer that he gave. There's a lot of historical details about how we got here. But yeah, there's been a shift away from these things.

And a lot of this, a lot of this honestly comes from Darwinism. I mean, if you look at a lot of false ideas, a lot of them come from Darwinism.

You know, this idea that things are all evolving and we are, you know, if you think of yourself in that very animalistic sense, it leads to a lot of these ideas.

Because then also, like, what is the purpose of marriage? Like, is the purpose of marriage what God created it for?

Or if it's just a human institution, right? If it's just a human institution, then, you know, it can evolve to fit our purposes, you know, whatever purposes are best.

And so it is evolving, and people are kind of happy with how it's evolving because they think that, oh, you know, we have different needs now.

And so as we evolve, marriage evolves. But that's not the case if the one who created it is eternal as opposed to ever -changing.

Actually, that would be a good thing to talk about right now, is just the institution of marriage.

First of all, it was instituted on the consultation of the Trinity. Genesis 126, and God said, let us make man in our image.

That's us, let us make man in our image. After our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

And this is just before marriage is given. So why—yeah, there are different takes on what us means here.

There are some people who say that this is referring to all the angels with God.

I do not think that we are made in the image of angels. Let us make man in our image. Whose image are we made in?

We are made in God's image, and we're being made into the image of Christ, not the image of angels. And I think that's the most problematic thing, was saying that it's angels here.

The other thing is that people say that this is just the royal we. Scripture uses this royal we, you know.

But that's not some common historical practice. You see that kind of thing occasionally, but there's always some very intentional purpose in it.

It's not till, I don't know, what, like, after the year 1000 that you see that kind of thing in English society, is, you know, using the royal we.

And then you also have— there's some examples of royal wes, but they're not—they're accomplishing something different.

So, like, the Pope, for example, when he writes his encyclicals, he says us and we. He's talking about him and the

Holy Spirit consulting each other, which is really blasphemous. But anyway, the idea being that this is— this is not just a common thing that you can appeal to.

It's like, oh yeah, royal we, really common. People do it all the time, you know, different societies, etc.

It's not actually that common. So I don't believe that when God says, let us make man in our image, that he's just using the royal we.

This is an allusion to the Trinity. And so, anyway, something worth considering when we're thinking about the institution of marriage.

Genesis 2 .18, in Jehovah God said, it is not good that man should be alone. I will make him a help suitable for him.

All right, so he makes him a helper. And let me clue you in on one of my pet peeves.

Some people know this about me. It's really common where people say help mate to describe a wife, right?

Okay, first of all, it's in the King James. It's help meat, not help mate. But then on top of that, these are two different words.

And the word meat is similar to our English word suitable. Well, for something to be meat for something, is it for it to be suitable for something, right?

And so to make meat a noun is really weird because meat is actually an adjective.

It's like if I were to say, yeah, my help suitable. My help suitable and I decided that we would, it's like, no, you just started a phrase there.

You need suitable for something, you know. Anyway, so I think it's funny when people say help meat.

Although I do appreciate the desire to appeal to biblical language. Genesis 2 .23.

And the man said, this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.

She will be called a woman because she was taken out of man. Therefore, will a man leave his father and his mother and will be joined to his wife and they will be one flesh.

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. So there's a lot of things in these first pages of Genesis that aren't very explicitly described.

You know, where is the vow being made? Where is the, you know, if you're a Sabbatarian and believe the

Sabbath is part of the creation, you know, is part of how God has ordered creation.

You know, where is that? You only see it just come up later in, you know, when he's talking about gathering manna.

And it's just something that's assumed that people already know about. It's like, where was it? Not all the details are always given.

But this phrase where he receives the wife and acknowledges her as his own.

This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She will be called a woman for she was taken out of man and naming her.

Naming her distinctly from how he names her later, by the way, names her Eve in Genesis 3.

This all seems to be an acknowledgment of that covenant and that relationship, that sense of responsibility for her.

And Jesus appealing to this passage says, so they are no longer two but one flesh, but therefore

God has joined together. Do not let man put apart. And so he appeals to this passage as that establishing of marriage, that ceasing of there being two and becoming one.

All right, so this is a divine creation ordinance. There are several things that it's not, right?

It's not a government institution. Okay, you can have a legitimate marriage without the stamp of the government on it.

Same is true of divorce. I believe you can have a legitimate divorce without the stamp of the government on it. Now, the government does have, it is within its realm of authority and priorities to know who is married and to acknowledge marriage so that they can do right by people when there are either domestic conflicts or death or something, right?

These are all good to know, so I do think it's good for government to acknowledge marriage and to have a way of establishing it.

At the same time, a marriage is not made legitimate or illegitimate by any statement of the government.

Similarly, it's not a church ordinance, right? Marriage has existed since the beginning of creation. It's not something that's established by the church.

You can have a legitimate marriage apart from a church making a legitimate marriage or a church, you know, same thing with divorce.

A church saying this is no longer a legitimate marriage. Now, given that we want to honor God and churches are centers of interpreting

God's word, certainly you would be unwise to go about your domestic life, you know, marriage and things like that without, you know, seeking the blessing of some of these institutions, right?

The government, the church. But I'm just saying that these things are not what make it legitimate. And so if it's not a human institution, right?

It's not a human ordinance, but rather a divine ordinance, right? And not even a government ordinance, not even a church ordinance.

Then, yeah, it is not to evolve, rather it is to meet God's purposes and those purposes are standing, lasting purposes.

Any questions? And if you don't have questions, I've been kind of going through, I've been using a lot of material, but I'm kind of going through Jim Neuhauser's book on marriage and divorce.

And he has discussion questions, which if nobody has questions, I will ask those. But yes, Charles. Like a divorce ceremony.

No, but if you were to get a divorce, you would definitely want your church's approval of that.

Otherwise, I mean, you could be subject to excommunication, right? Someone who wrongly divorces their wife, that's a very serious sin.

And so you would want to make sure you're on the same page. John, was that?

Sure. Right, right.

Yeah, we're all individual people. We're all individually accountable to God. And we are not held liable for the sins of another, even though blood might be on our hands, if we did not do our part and our role in that relationship.

So yeah, this one, flesh does not make us one person. In the same way, you know, it's interesting, we were talking about how this mirrors

Christ in the church. In the same way, we are not made one person with Christ.

Our confession says, all saints are united to Jesus Christ, their head by his spirit and faith. Although they're not made there by one person with him, right?

I think this is talking against the idea of theosis, but it's funny because I actually interact with a cult pretty frequently called the

Iglesia Ni Cristo, and they do believe that salvation happens by us becoming one person with Christ.

That's actually the language they use, which is weird. But yeah, just like, okay, so if marriage is a reflection of Christ in the church, and it's not the case that we become one person with Christ, and it's also not the case that we become one person with the other, and so there's a lot of, independence might not be the best word, but distinction that is still allowed for, that yeah, we don't cease to be our own person, even if we cease to have some of the independence and priorities that we used to have.

Yeah, I know you and I have discussed some of this, so I think I know what you're getting at, but yeah, our contentment, our satisfaction can be had regardless of the other, right?

That shouldn't be dependent on the other. So if our spouses, for example, our spouse's happiness does not have to be our happiness, or our spouse's honoring to God does not have to be our honoring to God.

These are things that we have a relationship and a responsibility for in some sense, but it is not the case that we, yeah, that we are so interlocked as a single person that we can't have satisfaction and contentment in all circumstances, right?

If you're, let's say you married before you became a believer, and your spouse didn't convert with you, and so they're just hostile to the gospel, they make your life miserable, you know, there are various different women that Proverbs talk about that you're supposed to avoid, you know, they're just that dripping nagging, et cetera.

Like, you can still have the fruit of the spirit even apart from your spouse, right?

So this does not change who you are in that way so that you can, so that, oh, well, now

I don't have the same obligation to be joyful and have the fruit of the spirit. Now I don't have the same obligation to be satisfied in Christ.

No, we still do. God has given us marriage as a benefit, but even when it's not a benefit, it's still, you know, we still have everything that God gives us, yeah.

Mark, do you have something? Taxes or something,

I don't know. Usually you get a benefit from taxes, yeah. Right, yeah, so like I said,

I'm preparing one section on the wedding ceremony itself, and part of that is whether or not it's okay for it to be private versus, you know, public.

And yeah, I think that part of what you're doing when you're making vows is making them in a way that others are holding you accountable.

And there is a societal accountability that's supposed to be established by this event. And yeah, it does seem that you're avoiding that when you, yeah, when you bypass those means.

Um, would it still be a legitimate marriage? Uh, yeah,

I suppose you could remove so many elements of what a vow is that it ceases to be a vow, but yeah.

Right, yeah, and so in those circumstances where you don't have a functioning government, maybe it's in the middle of a war and it's not, you know, that doesn't mean you gotta wait a year until the war's over to get married, right?

Like, I guess those are the kind of circumstances where this information becomes useful. Um, yeah, you know, if there's, or if there's so much bureaucracy in your government that like, oh, well, you gotta get in the waiting list for five months to get a license or whatever.

Yeah, that'd be weird. Okay, yes, right, yeah.

Yeah, well, that sounds like it's not just that there weren't witnesses. It sounds like there wasn't a vow at all, right?

Yeah, so yeah, if there's no vow, that's not a, not a married, you're living as a married couple.

Like the woman at the well, right? The one you're with now is not your husband, right?

And so, yeah, that doesn't, that's not a legitimate marriage, and they need to, they need to seal that.

Now, there's another question of, well, if you've been living this way for such time, would it be right to abandon that person, you know, if you were deciding that that would be superior to marrying?

And I think you have established that there is some kind of duty or some sense of obligation to marry someone who you've affected in this way.

You know, in the Old Testament, and unbelievers criticize the Bible for this all the time, but it seems like a clear act of mercy in the law that if someone rapes a woman, that he is commanded to marry her, right?

The idea being not that, oh, she's forced into this marriage. The assumption is that this would be the only, if he has taken away her virginity such that no one would want to marry her, he is now obligated to fulfill the role of that man that he's deprived her of.

So this doesn't force her into a marriage. Presumably, she would be able to deny this if she wanted to, but anyway, all that to say that if you are living that situation while you aren't married, you have established some level of obligation to fulfill commitments by getting married.

And I get that these can be complicated by whether or not one's a believer and one's a non -believer, and there are other scriptural statements that are forbidding things and allowing others, but yeah, that does add to obligation.

So it's not absolutely nothing, but it's not marriage. Yeah, well, we're just past time.

Okay, well, I did not know whether or not we'd have enough material to fill the time, but we did, that was great.

And I've got leftover too. So next time we probably are going to look specifically at the purposes of marriage, probably.

I reserve the right to change my mind and sort things. Well, let's pray.

Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for your kindness to us and sending us Jesus Christ. We thank you for your kindness to us and even giving us marriage as a reflection of his relationship with the church.

And we pray that we would emulate that well in our marriages and even for those of us who aren't married and are upholding of marriages and are honoring them in society.