Yesterday, someone asked me for advice about someone he knows, that deals with whether a couple should get married if the girlfriend becomes pregnant due to sexual relations. We know what the world says. And many in the body of Christ believes that the couple doesn't necessarily have to get married just because they had sex and the woman got pregnant. I used to believe that too. But is it biblical? I realize that there are a bunch of "ifs" including whether they want to spend the rest of their life together as man and wife, but that is something they should have thought up when performing the "marriage benefits" without being married. There are consequences for sin, and if the sin is premarital sex that especially results in pregnancy, the result should be marriage. Consider the following passages of God's Word: Ex. 22:16-17 "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins." "If a man finds a girl, a virgin not engaged, and lays hold on her, and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife. Because he has humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." This taken in consideration with the responsibity of the father of the child to take are of them, I think shows us that they are to be married. It should not be compounded with the sin of abortion/murder, but since a pregancy would "find them out" they should be married. Pastors, Churches and Christians need to teach what the word of God says regarding the importance of marriage, and that sex is only 'not sin' in marriage between one man and one woman. But if a couple can sin and have sex, then they can get married. No wonder fathers not too long ago (and perhaps still in some areas today) had that shot gun out and ready when it came to young men and their daughters ;-). Help us Lord to stand and speak the truth in love with wisdom and humility.
With all the discussion going on about whether Presbyterians are biblical churches because of infant baptism, I would like to ask if we believe that Arminian Baptist churches are legitimate churches? If a Baptist Church, regardless of their affiliation if any, believes in a universal, insufficient atonement by Christ, issuch Baptist Church really a biblical church? And if so, how can we say that it is when it involves the very heart of the gospel in the atonement. Further, how can we say that those Presbyterian churches that believe in a particular, sufficient atonement yet infant baptism are not biblical, yet those that believe in a universal, insufficient atonement yet believers baptism by immersion are biblical churches. Inquiring mind wants to know ;- ). Thanks..... P.S. Still Baptist and thank the Lord for it!
Comments