Marriage

The legal foundation for the original 13 states at the time of our federal Constitution’s ratification – the entire Mosaic Decalogue (Ten Commandments) – was codified into law, but it has been clearly discarded by our present American federal and state governments. That is a grievous error that we, as a nation, are atoning for at this hour. If the atonement is to be acceptable to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Creator of the Universe, then we must change course and correct our error as a nation – reasserting the Ten Commandments as the template of good government for our nation and the nations of the world.

I know, I know…people like me (and apparently our founders) are “liberty-crushing scoundrels who, if left to our devices, will turn America into a theocracy like Iran.” May I say up front that if you are guilty of actually believing this kind of lemming drivel, this article is not meant for you. Your time will be better spent reading something else. In our culture, it is a custom to say “goodbye.” Both parts of the word, “good” and “bye”, have meanings. When I say “goodbye,” I don’t secretly wish to say “bad-bye”, even though your thoughts are obscene and disrespectful. I hope that your departure from this article is as good for you as it will be for me.

Goodbye.

With that said, for whom is this article written? Well, I’m here to reason with those who sincerely believe they are Christians and that the Bible is a good thing to carefully heed and fearfully obey. Based upon the evidence I’m prepared to present to you, I think it’s safe to say I probably just narrowed my audience a second time. Having winnowed my readership again, let’s have a heart-to-heart about God’s immutable laws. Neither the leftists nor neo-atheist boogeymen are our primary problem in America at this dark hour. On the contrary, they are easily defeated in a battle of truth, because they never come to the skirmish with any ammunition. No, they are not our real threat. Annoying white noise? Yes. Insolent? Yes. Destructive and murderous when allowed the reins of power? Certainly. The source of our peril as a nation? Not so much.

The anemic church is the theological source of America’s great problem. The fledgling church is the cradle of the American return to tyranny. Sadly, and long before the federal court ordered a righteously defiant Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court to remove the Ten Commandments from both his intellectual rulings and his courthouse displays (primarily the former was the goal), the Ten Commandments were first sweepingly discarded by most American churches who began to teach a curiously too-convenient-to-be-true version of “grace,” irreconcilable with carefully studied scriptures. It seems grace and love has “replaced” the law…or so they claim. As one poor soul, trying to be an effective antagonist, wrote to me recently (I paraphrase), “The Old Testament equals death, plagues, and vengeance! The New Testament equals forgiveness, love, and ‘Dad’ wants you to call home. I guess having a kid really mellowed God out.”

Don’t be too angry with the silly man who wrote that pithy jab; he was, after all, only summing up the logical conclusion of what is essentially preached across America every Sunday. Of course, to claim that “grace and love replaced law” makes as much sense as claiming that “fairness replaced the strict rules” of any board game brought to you by Milton Bradley. Try selling that line to my siblings growing up, and you’d get what you deserved, too. Did Jesus end the need for the Mosaic sacrifice of animals and other ceremonial issues regarding the priesthood? Yes. Did Jesus do away with the need for the command, “Thou shalt not steal”? Do I really have to explain that? Say it ain’t so!

The good news is that a growing number of churches have begun to realize the extraordinary error of jettisoning God’s law from our pulpits, and incidentally, the hearts of those listening in the pews on Sunday morning, who, on occasion, contribute to our statist terrors by running for political office and winning their elections…in Jesus’ name.

The textbook definition of “limited government” once found in 18th Century America was a much different definition than that of our 21st Century. For example, some folks champion limited government by hollering, “I believe in LIMITED government!” Pry a little, and you’ll find out what they actually mean is, “The government has no right to tell me I can’t kill my baby if it suits my [selfish, cruel, and materialistic] preference to do so!” It could also be described as, “The government has no right to ram religion down my throat by unfairly outlawing my enjoyment of government-sanctioned prostitution!” Or how about these government-limiting ideas: “The government has no right to say I can’t marry my friend’s parakeet,” and “The government has no right to limit my freedom to enjoy four wives of either the opposite or same-sex?” (Oh, and don’t forget…these particular forms of “sexual freedom” are perfectly healthy for all children involved, and anyone who says differently is an “intolerant, religious bigot and hate-monger!”)

Let’s define secularism in a way that is hard to misunderstand, since it seems so en vogue to be a “Christian secularist” (a pure contradiction) these days. All forms of so-called American (or western) secularism are little more than a willful rejection of the Ten Commandments as a basis for proper civil governance in the modern world. By this simple definition, we are able to particularly expose any confused Christians and even pastors who are little more than church-attending secularists, right along with their atheistic counterparts. [i]

What is the present result – the fruit – of secularism both inside and outside of the present American paradox permitted by a disorderly church world? Well, for starters, look no further than Biblical illiteracy. In an October 2010 publication of Students Living a Mission (SLAM), columnist Ben Reese laments, “In 2007, Kelton Research polled Americans on their knowledge of the Ten Commandments. Most of the participants couldn’t name a single commandment. More people knew the ingredients of a Big Mac than what the 6th Commandment was. Surely Christians know more about the Bible than hamburgers. Unfortunately, this is not the case.”[ii]

I’m certain it was from a member of this particular demographic now residing in Iowa, who sent me a rude message encouraging me to not only leave the Republican Party, but while I was at it, the state of Iowa, too. Why? Because I strongly objected to Iowa District 1 Republicans removing the plank in their Republican platform that stated marriage was only between one man and one woman.

It is an illogical contradiction for the same man (or party) who says, “I believe my rights come from God”, to also just as firmly declare, “I believe civil government must be a secular institution.” The popular attempt to argue both at the same time by overemphasizing valuable things like personal choice, the importance of local control in government, and “private” matters of faith, is a confusion of sound and sense. Pretending that a God-honoring religion-sanctioned state is equal to or worse than Iran is unpatriotic insolence of the highest order. The great Christian, William Penn, namesake of the state of Pennsylvania, is rolling in his grave that any American citizen would actually think so depravedly of his own founding origins. It is illogical smoke and mirrors commonly used by – wait for it – wait – for – it – self-described Christians, and it denies the reality of how the Ten Commandments actually worked as a civil code (not merely a religious code as so many errantly suggest) under Moses’ world-shaping personal leadership.

According to both God’s divine law and that pesky thing some still call “reality,” the state does not create or grant life, but it is called upon by God to defend it, criminalize the tampering of it, and punish those who take it unlawfully. Said God to Moses, “Thou shalt do no murder.” God informed the entire world, according to Deuteronomy chapter 4 (not only Israel) that a state was required to criminalize murder. Murder was wisely criminalized. Simple so far, right? That supposed Iranian theocracy predicted to materialize as a result of Biblical theists asserting themselves in politics hasn’t yet destroyed anyone’s alleged “liberties”, so let’s build further upon this line of thinking.

According to both God’s divine law and that pesky thing some refer to as “biology,” the state does not create or authorize the institution of marriage (where life is created), but is called upon by God to defend it, criminalize the tampering of it, and punish those who unlawfully violate it. It is bizarrely, nay, embarrassingly difficult, it seems, for our American legal world to deal properly with the CRIME of adultery. Adulterers are treated with more leniency in America than drivers who receive traffic tickets by mail. (Thanks to the unconstitutional traffic-cams.) All this, despite the fact that the adulterer’s crime is a far more serious offense and causes much greater suffering to society at home and at large.

Now that “love and grace replaced law” in the church, I suppose it was only a matter of time before Caesar (who faithfully attends your local antinomian church of hyper-grace) announced he was smarter than God. It is no wonder to me that with all this “grace” and “love” saturating the airwaves of our pulpits, Christian TV, and the local Christian bookstores, we penalize drivers more harshly for not plugging their parking meter, than we do those responsible for causing a divorce. Divorce is, without any doubt in my mind as a pastor of nearly 20 years in one Midwestern church, American’s most popular and socially acceptable form of child abuse. The last time I got a parking ticket, I was punished by the State of Iowa with a $15.00 fine (SHAME ON ME!), but if you commit adultery, the state declares it’s not your fault. In 2013, when Iowa State Representative Tedd Gassman proposed a bill to undo the folly of “no-fault-divorce” law, the slanderous ridicule came like a tsunami from the “judge not” crowd, screaming, “SHAME ON HIM!” I digress.

Said God to Moses, “Honor thy FATHER and thy MOTHER.” First, notice that God mentions the genders of male and female, and Moses wisely responded to the implicit meaning of this particular command by criminalizing the perversion of all non-matrimonial sex. God informed the entire world, according to Deuteronomy Chapter 4 (not only Israel), that a state was required to outlaw all forms of sexual promiscuity be they incest, pedophilia, necrophilia, prostitution, or sodomy.

Said God to Moses, “Thou shalt NOT commit adultery.” Notice that God told Moses the state was required to criminalize adultery, and therefore, tampering with the marriage institution was wisely criminalized. God informed the entire world, according to Deuteronomy Chapter 4 (not only Israel), that a state was required to outlaw all forms of sexual sin aligned against His divine definition of marriage.

The theological flaw of the secularist argument to get the state out of marriage is the same as recklessly arguing, “Get the state out of murder!” Oh, and we Americans are guilty of both acts of barbaric and uncivilized rebellion against sane civics! How truly pathetic we must appear to God. No wonder He has clearly removed his hand from our nation and left us in our well-earned mess! By promoting such barbaric ideas, one ignores the God-authorized role of a government according to the divine revelation given to Moses in 1534 B.C. at the top of Mt. Sinai. Ignoring God NEVER improves the world in which we live. It CANNOT increase liberty! It certainly WILL NOT fix America!

Now let’s weave everything together that I’ve explained so far. By authorizing government to punish murderers, we do not legitimately risk having a government that suddenly believes itself to be the mystical “giver of life.” By authorizing government to punish adultery, fornication, sodomy, etc. (and to restrict uncles from marrying their under-age nieces), we do not risk having a government that suddenly believes itself to be “the final arbiter of the definition of marriage.”

In both cases (a state that stupidly begins to believe itself to be a “giver of life” and a state that stupidly believes itself to be the “final authority on marriage”), the cause could not have been requiring the government to fulfill its duty before God, as authorized by our Bible. To say that Caesar rendering to God what is God’s (obeying Jesus) is the cause of tyranny is a personal indictment against God’s integrity – it is to accuse Him of trampling human freedom with some kind of divine fascism whilst He dishonestly declares Himself to be the source of all human liberty in our world. (See Galatians 5:1.) No, in these cases of laughable political hubris, the problem is theological, and the population damaged by that bad theology (love and grace replaced law) was finally given over to a depraved mind of secular humanist lunacy.

Fear of allowing government to do its Biblical job “because it might abuse its power someday” is the intellectually flawed line of thinking that leads to pure anarchy. Anarchy is neither Biblical nor “Christian”, so to those self-described Christians making this argument, I adjure you to stop borrowing your worldview from pagans and usurping Biblical authority.

When one says, “Get the state out of marriage,” they are on solid ground if, by saying so, they mean the government has no right to redefine an institution created by God. However, they are in rebellion against God if, by saying it, they mean government should completely retreat from defending the Divine natural law aback true marriage. This abandonment leaves a vacuum for an ongoing perverted sexual laissez faire and will continue by harming impressionable children, ruining our late great civilization.

[i] Barna Research Source: http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/325-barna-studies-the-research-offers-a-year-in-review-perspective
[ii] http://slamweb.org/SLAM/2010/10/biblical-illiteracy-2

22 comments
  1. How do you reconcile Matthew 19?

    “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is
    given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are
    eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who
    have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
    Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

    In the ancient world, including ancient Jewish culture, “natural” or “born”
    eunuchs were not associated with missing testicles. Rather, they were
    associated with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior
    (just like modern gay men)

    Jesus would have been aware of this common view of eunuchs. Yet he very
    matter-of-factly asserts that some people are simply born that way.
    The implication of his statement is profound — God created gay people
    the way they are! Jesus says so.

    Shouldn’t the Eunichs (homosexuals) be allowed to marry too?

    Jesus feels no need to “cure” these born eunuchs. He speaks no words
    of condemnation. Rather he lists people born gay alongside another
    honored class (eunuchs for the kingdom), and accepts them as a natural
    part of God’s creation order.

    Thus, when Matthew 19 is read as a whole, we see Jesus teaches that
    most people are created for heterosexual marriage. But, unlike some modern
    Christians, Jesus does not see this as the only honorable way to live.
    He acknowledges that some human beings have been created by God to
    follow a less common, but equally legitimate path. There are some who
    have been eunuchs from birth — made that way by God.

    1. If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument would you provide to show the importance of logic?
      Sam Harris

    2. This is an absurd abuse of interpretive laws. Jesus agreed with and defended Mosaic law. He also obeyed it perfectly. Mosaic law gives a death penalty for sodomy.

      1. All sexual crimes should have a maximum sentance of death available (not mandatory) with Judicial discretion on a case by case basis. Adultery is the first crime that should be given measurable consequences, because if we do not protect the standard of true marriage we have no credibility to criminalize pederasty, incest, rape, necrophilia, sodomy, etc. Incidentally, no homosexual person was ever executed in Israel. I want what Jesus and Moses wanted – repentance from sin and salvation of individuals and redemption of civilization.

      2. If we don’t penalize adultery, we have no credibility to punish rape? Seriously, you are a frightening person. We have religious freedom in this country, and not everyone wants to live under your Christian law, just as you probably don’t want to live under Sharia. Gay people are living their lives and marrying their partners, and you are not going to turn back the clock.

      3. Sure… the ability to cheat on a spouse and damage children mentally and emotionally without any fear of consequence is really important to bettering America. You aren’t at all frightening, and have nothing to be embarrased about. No need to correct your worldview at all.

  2. Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a
    God-breathed mystery. It is among His greatest gifts to mankind, the
    nexus of His eternal plan and all true, lasting, earthly riches. It is
    the foundational building block of all decent civic, governmental
    institutions. It is the basis of all true economics. It breeds peace and
    prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations. It is the
    well-spring and nursery of posterity. It must be protected, or America
    will fail and fall.

    “No human law can abolish the natural and original
    right of marriage, nor in any way limit the chief and principal
    purpose of marriage ordained by God’s authority from the beginning:
    “Increase and multiply.” Hence we have the family,
    the “society” of a man’s house — a society very small, one must admit,
    but none the less a true society, and one older than any State.
    Consequently, it has rights and duties peculiar to itself which are
    quite independent of the State.”

    — Leo XII Rerum Novarum, (12), MAY 15, 1891

  3. Of course, in other publications (not necessarily in this particular thread) of this response to the abandonment of marriage where the hyperlinks were removed, the author has been challenged by secularists who believe he is lying about the 10 Commandments having been codified in all 13 original states. They have demanded primary source documentation, (yet offer none to disprove him, as usual).

    Here’s his response to them all this morning, with some primary source documentation and necessary homework assignments:

    “All 13 States codified the entire Decalogue of Moses, except Rhode Island, who codifed the final six of the 10 Commandments, referred to by James Madison as the “second table” (2nd stone tablet) of the Mosaic law.. [Publisher’s Note] Biblical Law, H.B. Clark, American Vision Press, Copyright 1944, 2010, page XXV, Publisher’s Introduction.

    Further, I offer one example of more than 1100 cataloged examples from America’s legal archives, cited in American case law. (See Historical and Theological Foundations of Law Volume I Telle Lege Press Eidsmoe, pages 442-465.) Consider the finding of the West Virginia Supreme Court in the 1899 case of Moore v. Strickling noting the adultery commandment of the Mosaic Decalogue: “These commandments, which, like a collection of diamonds, bear testimony to their own intrinsic worth, in themselves appeal to us as coming from a superhuman or divine source, and no conscientious or reasonable man has yet been able to find a flaw in them. Absolutely flawless, negative in terms, but positive in meaning, they easily stand at the head of our whole moral system, and no nation or people can long continue a happy existence in open violation of them.”

    If you want to learn accurate American history, skip Barnes and Nobles and pick up the 700 page circa 1853 American Classic “Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews with An Introductory Essay on Civil Society and Government” published by E.C. Wines. D.D., LL.D., You’ll have a more accurate view of early American Jurisprudence.

    Mosaic law had two divisions, one was the priesthood, which was top-down and “extraordinary law” theocratic, the other was the civil government, which was “ordinary law” bottom-up and republican.

    Delaware Constitution of 1776 “Every person appointed to public office shall say, “I do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration.”

    And the Vermont Constitution of 1776

    “Each member [of the legislature], before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration: “I do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good, and the punisher of the wicked.”

    And the Maryland Constitution 1776

    “That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State, and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the CHRISTIAN religion.”
    Finally, when you consider that this was the required oath of office in the state of Virginia, it’s actually difficult to understand how authors who say otherwise sleep at night.

    George Mason “Father of the Bill of Rights” wrote this for the 1776 Constitution of Virginia:

    “That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice CHRISTIAN forbearance, love, and charity
    towards each other.”

    A good read of the preambles of the first 48 states will also astound as they deliberately and unapologetically each thank God Almighty for bestowing upon mankind all “rights” and liberties. In short, the preambles of 48 states make secularists look to be depraved and dishonest abusers of American history, with an agenda to systematically lie to our children during their re-education camp experience known as “government education.”

    I’ve gone beyond the call of duty, here. I don’t think it’s fair for me to do your homework for you any further.” – Rev. Cary K. Gordon

    1. Well, the U.S. Constitution prohibits religious tests for office, so those early state constitutional provisions are invalid.

      1. What part of “… but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States” do you not understand? (US Constitution, Article VI)

        Based on the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the Supreme Court in Torcaso v. Watkins struck down religious requirements for state offices.

      2. Again, a quote from this article’s first paragraph you must have either missed, or you just insist upon stating the obvious? “..the entire Mosaic Decalogue (Ten Commandments) – was codified into law, but it has been clearly discarded by our present American federal and state governments.”

      3. And the religious test for public office of the United States was discarded with the ratification of US Constitution.

        So you really want the entire Decalogue codified into law? Since the penalty for violating the Sabbath was death (Numbers 15:32-36), do you want to put people to death for picking up sticks from Friday sundown till Saturday sundown?

  4. So, when are Christians going to get serious about what Jesus said about divorce and remarriage? I don’t see any laws or constitutional amendments trying to ban or limit divorced people from entering a new marriage.

  5. Kudos to 1st District Republicans for getting rid of the plank calling for marriage to be only between a man and a woman. I mean, same-sex couples have been getting married in Iowa for the last five year.

    Still, calling for government to get out of marriage will bring a host of problems. Would your spouse no longer be your legal next of kin?

    1. How much pain and hardship have people who believe as Cary Gordon caused throughout history? This is not the Jesus I learned about during Bible School.

  6. Shane Vander Hart, since you did post Mr. Gordon’s article here, do you agree with his version of Biblical Law, i.e. God’s Law? Of course, I am assuming Mr. Gordon is Moderator in the comments. If not, I would assume he would clear that up for us, especially if he does not agree with it.

    I find his statement scary :
    “All sexual crimes should have a maximum sentance of death available (not mandatory) with Judicial discretion on a case by case basis.” He includes homosexuality which is not a crime.

    Moderator’s view is what most non-social conservatives think of when politicians talk about Biblical Law.

    1. I agree that the law has not passed away. I also agree that we are held accountable to it by a holy God, but I also believe that God so loved the world that He sent Jesus to pay the penalty for our sin, and if you invite Him to be your Lord and Savior you can have forgiveness of sin. The law points to our need for the Gospel. I can sympathize with the view of no-fault divorce. Criminal penalties for sexual sin???? I’m not in favor of that. God’s the arbiter and judge. I don’t want a Government so big that it regulates what goes on in my bedroom. I think there is a way to apply this to no-fault divorce… in civil court. Some states have introduced covenant marriage licenses, that’s a good step. Re. death penalty, I’m not a fan of the death penalty except in the most stringent of circumstances. Anyway, I don’t always have to agree with an author 100% (and I don’t know who moderator is) to publish their articles.

      1. I am sure they had good intentions with the no-fault divorce, but I agree that it is bad.

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Five Legislative Priorities for the Iowa Senate Republicans

Iowa Senate Republicans prioritized five bills in 2017 that are consistent with their push for fiscal responsibility and smaller government.

Ernst Raises $6 Million During 3rd Quarter in Iowa U.S. Senate Race

The Joni Ernst for Senate campaign announced that it raised approximately $6 million in the 3rd quarter, more than doubling the total raised by her opponent.

Life is Always the Right Choice

Live Action profiled a video that has become viral about a young…

Branstad’s Private Blackberry

Iowa Governor Terry Branstad’s use of a private smartphone for reading news and his schedule is not equivalent to conducting state business on it.