CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE

A.J.Gardiner

1 Corinthians 7: 39; Numbers 36: 5-7; Amos 3: 3

It is abundantly clear that a believer marrying an unbeliever, is not to be contemplated for a moment. The second epistle to the Corinthians says, What part has a believer with an unbeliever; what communion has light with darkness? When God first brought light into this scene, He saw the light that it was good, and He divided the light from the darkness, and called the light Day and the darkness Night. Believers are sons of light and sons of day, unbelievers are of night and darkness. There cannot possibly be any community between the two. One not having the Holy Spirit has no capacity to enter into the things of God.

It is most important to recognise that a believer is the Lord's absolutely. Scripture says, "whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore or whether we die, we are the Lord's" (Rom 14: 8), and it is an affront to the Lord's right over us that, for instance, a believing woman should enter into marriage with an unbeliever and thus place herself under the authority of an unbeliever, and it is unthinkable that a believing man who is intended to hold himself and his house for the Lord, as having been baptised to the Lord's name, should enter into partnership with, and bring into the matter of influencing and ruling his house, one not subject to the Lord. Hence, there should be no question that for a believer to enter into marriage with an unbeliever is absolutely contrary to the mind of God. It brings in an unholy link which ought never to be contemplated by a Christian.

But the matter is sometimes more subtle when the thought is for one who has the light which has been recovered by the Lord for His people, to enter into the marriage bond with a Christian who is not practically walking in that light, and it is in that connection I have read the three scriptures.

The first brings in the point of view of the rights of the Lord in the matter, the second how it affects the saints, and the third how it affects the two concerned. In the first passage the apostle is dealing with the case of a sister who has been widowed; but the principle holds good whether for a sister who has been widowed, or a sister who has never been married, or a brother - they are free to be married to whom they will, only in the Lord. He stresses that the matter must be regulated by this consideration, "only in the Lord". "In the Lord," as I understand it, involves more than being merely a believer, it means that there is the practical recognition in what is being done, of the rights of the Lord. The Lord Jesus has a sphere here on earth where His name is owned and His rights are practically recognised, and that sphere is described in Scripture as "in the Lord". In these days in which we live, the Lord has intervened sovereignly by the assertion of what is due to His name, saying to the saints, "let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity". He has brought in by this means a sphere of recovered truth, and maintains it by virtue of the authority of His name, and some, through grace, have part in it, to the end that God should not be robbed of what is due to Him from the assembly, and that the Lord should have the portion due to Him from His assembly. How can it be said that a believer is marrying in the Lord if he deliberately links himself with one who, whether it be in ignorance or not, is not in fact practically moving in relation to what the Lord has brought in and established on earth?

As we withdraw from iniquity, and follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart, we find ourselves in a position where the truth has been recovered, and where there is the maintenance on earth of all that God is looking for from the assembly, and the Lord is preserving that by means of the power and authority attaching to His name. How can it be said that the marriage is in the Lord if one who is outwardly in that sphere, who by the position taken up has acknowledged that he recognises what is due to the Lord's name links himself with one outside that position, one who identified himself or herself with features of the religious world, which definitely flout the rights of the Lord Jesus, and definitely displays the Holy Spirit? We need to bear in mind that this injunction "only in the Lord", is part of the epistle at the end of which the apostle says the things he writes are "the commandments of the Lord". It is not an optional matter. In the verse following the one read the apostle give something which does not rank as a "commandment", he gives his own judgment as a spiritual man, but in the verse read he is laying down the great principle that marriage must be "in the Lord" When we come to the passage in Numbers, the point raised there was as to the marriage of certain sisters, daughters of Zelophehad, who belonged to the tribe of Manasseh, and the chief fathers of the tribe were concerned that they should not marry outside their tribe, because if they did so their inheritance would be lost to the tribe, it would become merged in the inheritance of another tribe, and I believe we need to take account of that fact also. There is an element of sovereignty in the position occupied by those who have obeyed the injunctions in 2 Timothy 2: 19-22, and are in consequence separated from what is inconsistent with the Lord's name. All believers, alas, have not done so, and as a result all are not in this position. Such have, however, some portion in the inheritance, they enjoy the knowledge of God in the way of piety, they have their interest in the gospel, there are certain features of the inheritance which they enjoy, but there are those to whom it has been given, in the grace of God, to enjoy the greatest privileges that belong to the assembly, and that is our inheritance to be prized, and if anyone having a part in that inheritance links himself or herself with one who has no part in that particular feature of the inheritance, they will find the inevitable result is that what they have that is distinctively theirs becomes merged in something less. The truth cannot be maintained at its height and in purity where there is an unequal link, but what is greater will tend to sink down to the level of what is lower, and the Lord does not want that. Moses said, "The tribe of the sons of Joseph hath said well ... Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry". That is to say, if we have part in the choicest features of the truth and the greatest privileges of Christianity, let us see to it that we hold it dear and cherish it. If we enter into any link, especially marriage, with one who has not a part in these things, the inevitable tendency will be for that which is best to be hindered and for such a one to drop to the level of that which is inferior.

In the third passage the Spirit of God raises this important issue: "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” What is marriage but a walking together of two? What is there in it for the two concerned if they are not really together in it? As Peter says, "heirs together of the grace of life". If a brother or sister who has the light and privilege already referred to, enters into a link with one who has not this light, the only basis of agreement will be that of surrendering the truth. I would urge that brethren should bear this constantly in mind, and as opportunity occurs, seek to present these things to those younger, for it is impossible for two to be agreed and walk together in an unequal yoke of this sort, except on the serious basis of surrendering that which is most precious. Think what it would mean for one who was in the enjoyment of Christian fellowship, to enter into this link with a partner with little or no real interest in these things. It would result in the most precious things being excluded from the home as regards any joint participation in them; the prayers together could not possibly take account of the divine interests as rightly known; the saints could not happily be received to the home, for there would be no basis of communion with them. Hence the Spirit of God would leave the word with us: "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"

It may be that someone here might think the seventh chapter of 1 Corinthians warrants unequal yokes, where it says, "what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?" That is not the case at all; the sixth chapter of the second epistle makes that clear. The scripture in the first epistle contemplates the case of those who were married before conversion, and one of the two gets converted, and then there is grace from the Lord to go on in the position if the one unconverted is content to remain with the one converted. It is brought in to urge the husband or the wife who has been converted after marriage not to leave the wife or husband, as the case may be, but in no way warrants a believer entering into an unequal yoke at any time.

(Reprinted)