No marriage license here.
"And the servant told Isaac all the things that he had done there. And Isaac brought her into his mother’s Sarah tent, and took Rebecca, and she became his wife” Genesis 25:17
So what is a marriage license and where does it come from. Research will reveal that until the 1600s, or later (I no longer have my original notes), there were no marriage licenses.
At this time, the majority of marriages were “common law”. “Common law” here gives no bad connotations, for it was just the normal thing. It was an exchange of vows before parents and the local community into which you were born and where you most likely died and except, in the most rare cases, did you go outside.
However today, there are two main forms of law - STATUTE and COMMON LAW. The latter is just the received law by the local custom or “common law”. STATUTE LAW, however, is law passed by the government.
A marriage certificate, required by STATUTE law or government, is only a license by the government to allow you to marry. It is exactly analogous to a driver’s license, a shooter’s license or a fishing license.
But ask yourself. If the state takes away your drivers’ license, I think, the Christian perception would be, that you should not drive. If the state takes away your shooter’s license, you should not shoot. If the state takes away your fishing license, you should not fish.
But what if the state, by Act of Parliament, were to take away all marriage licenses (this is to say revoke them). This is not a question of power or law – only a question of politics. Would, at this point, you be unmarried?? I think not.
Marriage licenses are thus not Christian. Marriages, of course, are Christian and marriage ceremonies are Christian and marriage in a church is Christian but the license, from the government, is not Christian – the license is from SATAN.
Biblically, not even the Church can marry people; this is to say it does not have the power to marry people.
A church or a denomination can only provide a place for two people to make public, their private vows. The scriptures do not say, “What the state has joined together, or what the Church has joined together” but “what GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER LET NO MAN PUT ASSUNDER”. It God that does the joining, not the Church or State.
Now it is axiomatic that today we live in a promiscuous generation. If a man wants, a man can have three girl friends and sleep with them all. The state will fully sanction this, there is no law against it - but the government agencies will recommend that you have an AIDS test and use a condom.
A man can live with these three girls for as long as he wants and the State will do nothing. There is no law against being promiscuous. It is however an interesting legal question as to when such promiscuous relationships become illegal by being polygamous.
So, at what point does the above promiscuity become a case of polygamy for the State? This is not easy to answer, but from the prospective of the State it would definitely be the case when one seeks a marriage license for all three concubines.
At what point does this promiscuity become a case of polygamy for God? God will look on this and condone it, based not on circumstance, nor outward ceremony, but on intention - for God is a “discerner of the hearts of men”.
So if a man is going to have more than one wife it would seem the best route, and the truly Christian route, is too just have them after a simple exchange of vows. The vows may be exchanged before parents, friends, community and if you like even before a priest in a Church.
The seeking of a marriage license however is only a invitation for Satan, both spiritually and corporally (as the State), to enter into your life.
The legal point of all this is presumption of guilt. If you seek licenses for your wives, it is up to you to prove that it is legal for you do have such relationship(s). The license is the nexus for Satan, in the form of the State, to enter into your life.
However, if you do not have license(s) it up to Satan to prove that your relationship(s) are illegal based on acquired evidence and against State (Statute) law. And this he can only do in a courtroom and here the onus of proof is on the State and not on you.
So, the final deduction of this is that if one is to contemplate polygamy, the last thing one should do is to get married with approval by any State sanctioned process or procedure.
A Church ceremony is not recommended either. This is only because most major Churches will not marry you without a State license or their certificate will act as a license binding you to the State.
The best way is simply to exchange vows before friends and community and allow God to be your silent witness.
An Objector writes:
I agree for the most part with what you have to say but you lose me where you say that the marriage license from the state is from Satan. Really what you've shown is that a marriage license from the state is in no way equivalent to a biblical interpretation of the definition of marriage or for that matter a 'Church' (whatever the denomination) definition of marriage which might be different yet.
Your example of the revoking of the marriage license is excellent but you miss the point somewhat. If Parliament wakes up and revokes all marriage licenses then indeed according to the laws of the land nobody would be married. Does that mean nobody is married? According to the state, no (since they revoked all licenses in your example) according to a biblical interpretation, yes. Does that mean that the state license is from Satan? I'm missing how that would be, biblical definition and state definitions of ANYthing do not need to agree. Labelling state things that differ from biblical things as being from Satan only inflames things and really contributes nothing and if asked to justify the position that it truly is from Satan I think you'll come up short. Instead one should just accept that in many instances, that the Bible and the state use different definitions for the same word. In this case, they are just different since they are used for different purposes (i.e. the state for their reasons, God for his own).
Your conclusion about seeking licenses is right on, but not because it is an invitation from Satan but since marriage is not something given from the state but from God.
Anyway, excellent article I agree completely with your premise, examples and conclusion even if we don't on all the details.
I don’t think I’ll be short because you answer the question when you state,
“Labelling state things that differ from biblical things as being from Satan only inflames things and really contributes nothing and if asked to justify the position that it truly is from Satan I think you'll come up short.”
So we are instructed to “render to Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s but to God that which is of God.” (This is fundamental to the reasoning of separation of Church and State.)
“Your conclusion about seeking licenses is right on, but not because it is an invitation from Satan but since marriage is NOT SOMETHING GIVEN FROM THE STATE BUT FROM GOD.”
So if marriage is of God, why then will you render it to Ceasar? I am sure you would not, if you thought that you were. But what you fail to see is that a license, any license, is not just a matter of labeling or a matter of definitions. Rather, a license passes usage and control rights across to the person or instrument that issues the license. Law will show that ‘usage and control’ rights, properly framed, are equivalent to ownership. History will show if you give the inch, a mile will be taken.
You're right to defend yourself and your right to eat are also from God; given as basic freedoms. But in taking out a license for guns and fishing, that freedom is passed across to the State.
Now when the New World Order (or Mystery Babylon) is finally in place we are told that no man will buy or sell without the Mark of the Beast. Let us say that, at that future time, the State revokes all fishing licenses. Thus it will be illegal to get fish even from a country stream (even if the stream is on your own land).
Where does the power of the State come from to do this: from your acquiescence in the first instance of giving then the right to place a license or restriction on it. In this example, what was at first a license has expanded to effective ownership.
A marriage license, however innocent it looks, is the first step in passing ownership of marriage across to the State. The license is not a “definition” but a nexus for further control of the institution and hence the people under it.
Let us image that I am the government of a future society for moment. It has got quite barbaric and paganish in 2020. I mean the social fabric has broken down. Most of the youth are on drugs, crime is rampant and most people are just ‘living in sin’.
Looking out I see that 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce. I think it entirely reasonable that marriage should be preserved. Therefore I will pass a law that each year all married people will undergo a physiological test to determine the state of the marriage and if needed they will be forced to take counseling from the Marriage Preservation Department. Additionally a tax will be levied on all married people for the upkeep of the Marriage Preservation Department.
There is absolutely nothing unreasonable with the above. AND ALL THIS BECAUSE YOU GOT A MARRIAGE LICENSE THAT WAS ONLY A MATTER, IN YOUR MIND, OF LABELING OR A DEFINITION. No, it is a matter of real control. Passing the above law is, as I said in my previous e-mail, only a question of politics, not of law or power.
Now, let us go to polygamous marriages, in such a future state. I will pass a law that where there is polygamy, all marriages after the first marriage are void. The Marriage Preservation Department, in such instances, shall take children of subsequence marriage and ensure suitable homes for them.
Now I restate what I said in the last article,
The simple test for the State for entering your life is whether a man has more than a single marriage license.
“The license is the nexus for Satan, in the form of the State, to enter into your life.”
Now it is true that you can frame law to do anything. I could frame a law like,
Now I restate what I said in the last article,
“When a man has lived with a women for over a year he is deemed to be married. If he lives with more than one women he shall release all children that are not from the first women to the Marriage Preservation Department”.
Here, the State has to collect evidence that the man is actually living with these women. That he has lived with them for over a year. The the chrildren are his (his 'wife' might had a lover! DNA testing needed here). The State has to prove that he is not just a good friend ‘staying over’. It must assemble all this information and get a court verdict to act. Now, much simpler then is it just to look up the record book and find the three marriage certificates.
“However, if you do not have license(s) it up to Satan to prove that your relationship(s) are illegal based on acquired evidence and against State (Statute) law. And this he can only do in a courtroom and here the onus of proof is on the State and not on you.”
All licenses and certificates pass control across to the State. Effective control and ownership are the same thing. It is one thing for the State to license your car, it is another for it to license you.
Upon this analysis I expand on my remark of the last email,
“So, the final deduction of this is that if one is to contemplate MARRIAGE, the last thing one should do is to get married with approval by any State sanctioned process or procedure.