# Legal vs Christian marriages



## MichaelNZ (Apr 24, 2013)

I'm curious to know if it's possible for a Christian to marry someone (particularly a non-Christian) in a legal ceremony but with the intention that it not be a Christian marriage. 

Based on a scenario I heard about on a TV programme, say you (a Christian believer) strike up a friendship with an illegal immigrant/refugee of the opposite sex from somewhere like Burma or Somalia (in your own country). They apply to the department of Immigration for residency, but they are denied. They are in danger of being deported back to their home country where they will face persecution. The only way for this person to remain in the country is for them to marry a citizen. You are not attracted to this person (e.g. age difference) and don't fancy spending the rest of your life with them. Would it therefore be permissible (within Christianity) for you to enter into a legal marriage with that person while specifically intending NOT to marry in a Christian sense (in God's eyes)? You will not be living together and once this person has been in the country enough to get permanent residency you will obtain a civil divorce.

If neither party has any impediments to marriage, would such a thing be possible? Or are all civil marriages automatically recognised by God as Christian marriages, binding until death? Would it make any difference if the other party was also a Christian believer?


----------



## Christopher88 (Apr 24, 2013)

So, basically this Christian is ignoring the process of marriage designed by God, so he can later divorce this person another thing God is against, just to have this person become free? It's playing with fire and personally it might be sin but I will not say for the sake of conversation and lack of knowledge. 

I believe with a deep study of scripture it would point to sin even while the intent appears to be for the good.


----------



## nick (Apr 24, 2013)

This is a good question. My initial response is no. It does make me think though. Very similar to the Nazi's coming to a house where Jews are hidden and being asked if they are hiding Jews. If you answer "yes" the Jews (and possibly your family) will die, so to uphold the 6th commandment we would answer "no".

If this person was going back to possibly be killed, why wouldn't you help them? But why stop at it having to be to someone of the opposite sex? If you don't intend to "really" marry and you can save someone's life, and you were in a country that allowed that type of marriage. Seems like a slippery slope.

While it does seem similar to the Nazi situation, what would happen if you did find someone to marry prior to this person's citizenship arriving? What if in the middle of your fake marriage the government changed the length to 10 years? 20 years? to become a citizen.


----------



## au5t1n (Apr 24, 2013)

No. There is only one kind of marriage. Marriage is not a sacrament. When unbelievers get married, it is a valid marriage in God's sight. Furthermore this is lying.


----------



## nick (Apr 24, 2013)

Ok, so when you travel away from your house for an extended period do you deceive people by leaving the porch light or light in the house on? This gives people the impression you are home, but you only want the criminal to believe it. Just as you only want the Nazi to believe it. Though I do see how we are now on a slippery slope. Just how far can we manipulate God's commands in hoping it leads to good?


----------



## Skyler (Apr 24, 2013)

au5t1n said:


> No. There is only one kind of marriage. Marriage is not a sacrament. When unbelievers get married, it is a valid marriage in God's sight.



This. There is no difference (in this context) between a "civil marriage" and a "Christian marriage." Both are instances of the ordinance of "marriage," which predates the development of both the church and government as institutions.


----------



## earl40 (Apr 24, 2013)

How about using deception in football? We try to make the defense think we are going one way by deliberate actions (lying), but go the other way.


----------



## nick (Apr 24, 2013)

Realizing I haven't been consistent in my thinking. I don't agree with the "lesser of two evils" approach to voting, because it "might" lead to good.

Most Christians voted for a Mormon who violated the first table of the law (the greatest commandment), because they thought it was best. God put President Obama in power, because he knew it was best.

So you're thought process - Josh - is actually what I've been arguing for in other places. Interesting when you get down to the nuts and bolts.

And the football question thrown out is another good one.

This thread may need to be retitled. ;-)


----------



## Paul1976 (Apr 24, 2013)

I can see how Christians might honestly differ on either the issues related to marriage or deception. I'm certainly not comfortable with either. 

To me, the arrangement you describe is fundamentally trying to circumvent the immigration laws of whatever nation you're trying to help this person remain in. In the US (and I suspect most other countries), it is illegal to marry for such purposes. The scripture seems quite clear to me that Christians are only permitted to disobey a nation's laws when they prevent us from being faithful to God. I do not see an acceptable way to justify breaking U.S. law as you describe, even if you could convince yourself you were not in the wrong on the other issues.


----------



## nick (Apr 24, 2013)

I think that is what the OP was getting at. Would letting someone go back to a country that would murder the person for being Christian be being faithful to God?

Since someone dying for the faith is about as faithful as you can get, but lying is being unfaithful, I think the conclusion is "no".

Still thinking through this...


----------



## earl40 (Apr 24, 2013)

nick said:


> I think that is what the OP was getting at. Would letting someone go back to a country that would murder the person for being Christian be being faithful to God?
> 
> Since someone dying for the faith is about as faithful as you can get, but lying is being unfaithful, I think the conclusion is "no".
> 
> Still thinking through this...



I think no matter what side you come to, do not make a habit of doing evil so good will come of it.


----------



## BarryR (Apr 24, 2013)

We should never do evil so good can come about....

I think everyone on this forum will or should agree with this.

Looking forward to seeing you this Lords Day Josh! Nick will be there as well - unless he was lying to me


----------



## Edward (Apr 24, 2013)

I don't know what the laws are in New Zealand, but such a sham marriage in order to perpetrate a fraud would be illegal in the US. 

The better question might be 'How many of the 10 Commandments would be violated by engaging in this conduct?'


----------



## Cymro (Apr 25, 2013)

As the Anglican service sets out, "marriage is an honourable estate ordained of God,
and is not to be entered into lightly or ill- advisably." And consider, "what therefore God hath
joined together, let no man put asunder."----" Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh."
And again, "What? know ye not that he that is joined to a harlot is one flesh." So if there is a physical
consummation then the marriage stands, one flesh.
But the serious obstacle is the symbolism of marriage. " they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery:
but I speak concerning Christ and the Church." Should we mar this divine institution for our convenience!


----------



## JoannaV (Apr 25, 2013)

I do think there are certain times when there may be a time lapse or other incontinuity between a marriage being legal *and *Christian *and *consummated. For example, a couple may be legally married, but in essence betrothed, until a later date when they, err, marry. A difference of a day or two is quite common in the UK in cases when the church wedding cannot be registered. I also know a couple who had their civil marriage, then went through the immigration process, and then had a church wedding and I assume consummated the marriage at that point.
However this scenario is not one of them. It is deception in not just one but two regards.
If someone really wants to stop the deportation of the refugee then they may marry them for real and make a real marriage of it, though


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 25, 2013)

If an immigrant were going to be deported back to a situation where they would surely be killed unjustly, hiding them or appealing or even forging documents would seem like options that would be considered before marriage. 

But would they surely be killed? How can we be sure? I cannot think of many scenarios like that. 

Maybe a regime like Nazi Germany trying to round up Jews to kill...in those cases many solid Christians lied to the government, forged documents or hid the refugees to safeguard them. If marrying one would save them, and you married such a refugee for real (i.e. not forged or faked) then you would be married and would need to make it work. But marrying a Jew in Nazi Germany would not have saved them for long, and I simply cannot think of a scenario where marrying a refugee would be the best option.


----------



## MarieP (Apr 25, 2013)

MichaelNZ said:


> I'm curious to know if it's possible for a Christian to marry someone (particularly a non-Christian) in a legal ceremony but with the intention that it not be a Christian marriage.



How is there any such thing as a marriage without reference to Christ? Either it's a true illustration of Christ and the Church or it's a false illustration of Christ and the Church.


----------

