Mark Twain and the Polygamist
There’s a story of a polygamist who argued with Mark Twain about polygamy. The polygamist said, “Polygamy is moral! I defy you, Mr. Twain, to cite any Bible verse that forbids it.” To which Mark Twain replied, “Well, how about Jesus saying, ‘No man can serve two masters?'”
Now I ask; what makes this joke funny? It’s funny because a woman is NOT supposed to be her husband’s master. Yet the monogamist allows his wife to be master by submitting to her demand for monogamy. But today’s discussion is about polygamists who take this idea One Step Beyond what the monogamists do, and yes, their behavior is every bit as surreal as the old television show One Step Beyond. These polygamists actually claim that you must make your wife your master!
They Go by the Name— Love not Force
Worse yet, the “Love Not Force” crowd tells their victims… er… students, that at the moment they mention they’d like an additional wife… or two, their first wife must be given the power of a master. After all, who other than a master, would be handed the keys to a man’s genitalia? Who other than a master would be handed the keys to lock and unlock a man’s procreative super power to reap for the Lord those future generations of Christian men and women who might flow from his loins.
So, What Is Love Not Force?
Love not Force is a destructive doctrine that falsely claims men made a vow to be monogamous during their wedding ceremony. And then, the purveyors of this lie, go on to say to the men they deceive that they must remain monogamous, until they get permission from their master, er, I mean wife, to take an additional wife or two. Let’s discuss all aspects of the destructive doctrine of Love not Force.
God Commands Us to Use Our God-given Resources Wisely
So who other than a tyrant would be given the keys to unlock a man’s God-given ability to invest his resources, his talents. Yes, the parable of the talents applies to a man’s fertility too, which is far more valuable than any coin such as a talent. Just from a material standpoint, a human life has value. That’s why every government seeks to enslave or tax every human life. And a man’s fertility dwarfs the fertility of his woman. His resources, his seed, as the Lord Himself calls them, are given to him by the Lord to sow, that the Lord might reap future generations of His children, created in the image of God. God bestows on men, not their wives, the ability to invest those talents. And Christian men will be expected to give an account when the Lord returns, or when they meet Him in heaven, as to what happened to those talents. Each man receives literally trillions of talents in a lifetime. Do you have 1 child? 2 children? 7 children? dozens? I would hope more than a couple because you’ve been given so many talents. Shouldn’t a Christian man produce at least seven children? That’s what the average man with but one wife produces in Niger, a so-called poor nation?
Below, I’ve translated a Latin paragraph from an obscure Latin book written in the 1600s. It discusses the very topic we’re discussing:
“It is neither contrary to the law of Nature, nor in any way, to that of the Gentiles, but rather, most fitting, that if indeed we see the man by nature, thus established: that he may for extended years, beget children, when, by one woman such is not the case. Let us remember; God and Nature do nothing in vain. It is clear therefore, that this is a talent to be male, therefore entrusted with the task, not for the purpose of storing away in the earth, to make use of the language of Scripture, but in order to gain; and him to that end [begets]; to whom by God and nature, begetting is meant to consecrate.”
Have you allowed your one wife to bury the talent that the Lord gave you, not her, to invest? Has she taken that which was meant to multiply, and through her fear, aided by the misinformation campaign of the Love Not Force crowd, buried it?
To Wax Mighty is a Lofty Christian Goal
Waxed mighty is the phrase used to describe men in the Bible who had many children:
“But Abijah waxed mighty, and married fourteen wives, and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters.” 2 Chronicles 13:21
“And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.” Exodus 1:7
“Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty.” Exodus 1:20
They waxed mighty, they increased mightily!
The Power to Procreate
That precious first command of the Lord to multiply is more than a command, more than a gift, it is a resource, a talent, that we must not bury in the ground or worse, like Onan, spew it outside of the woman.
A man’s fertility is his, and his only, and only he will answer to the Lord for his refusal to wisely invest the talents God has given him. And only he will be rewarded for accepting his responsibility to produce many children for the Lord, children who are raised up in the fear of the Lord, men and women who are literally referred to as children of God. Do not deceive yourselves like the wicked servant in the parable of the talents. There is nothing safe or loving about refusing to multiply! It is tantamount to burying God’s image! There is nothing loving about refusing to raise up generations of Christian men and women. A man’s fertility is his most precious resource that God has given to him. The Lord gave seed to men. Had the Lord wanted women to control man’s fertility, the Lord would have made women to be the masters of men. Christian men must invest wisely and not bury their talents like the wicked servant.
“For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.“ Matthew 25:29-30
Forsaking All Others
The primary way that the Love Not Force crowd tries to confuse you into thinking they’re right, is to claim that your marriage ceremony included the phrase, “forsaking all others.” However, many, if not most of today’s marriages in Christian Churches, do not include those words! You can view a link to many suggested wedding ceremony scripts on Bible.org’s website and none of their samples contain the words: “forsaking all others.”
Before all, let’s clarify. Nowhere in the “Solemnization of Matrimony” is the word VOW included. Nowhere! What the man recites are the words of an oral agreement, not a vow, and the words spoken are between him and the woman, not between him and God. And in the laws of every state of the United States, there is a clause that goes something like this:
“Any agreement, contract, or promise SHALL BE VOID, unless such agreement, contract, or promise, or some note or memorandum thereof, BE IN WRITING.”
These statutes specify that only the written and signed portion of contracts are enforceable, furthermore, they specify that this includes marriage contracts. The only exception to oral statements being void is Breach of Promise (to marry.) But Breach of Promise is no longer a crime. And in the 8 states where it still applies, it is for the recovery of wedding expenses that are owed or have already been spent on a wedding that has been cancelled.
A promise that is void ab initio (void from inception) is not even a promise, let alone, a vow. And since the phrase “forsaking all others” is not written in the marriage contract, it is indeed void ab initio. Now consider, our legal system is based on the legal system in the Bible, and ignorance of the law is no excuse. And that’s not merely a Western concept.
Leviticus 5:17 And if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord; though he know it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity.
Are you are guilty as charged of renouncing your lordship over the woman you call wife? If you persist in following a law you have created only in your mind, a law that exists neither on the paper of men’s law books nor on the pages of the Bible. Then you are guilty as charged, not your wife, for you are her lord.
Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
How bitter must it be to be relegated to nothing more than a provider to a woman who cares nothing for your needs nor your duty to God to obey his command and multiply.
What a dreadful thing to move from the joy of receiving a bride from the hands of the Lord to falling into the slough of bondage to a woman who fears neither losing you nor disobeying you. Even the rapist of a virgin does not face such a fate. He can never divorce the virgin he must marry but he may take additional wives. But according to the Love not Force crowd, you can do neither. You are worse than a rapist to them.
But for argument’s sake, let’s accept the straw dog argument that the Love Not Force crowd puts forth and pretend that our wedding vows did include the term, “forsaking all others” and let’s pretend that those spoken words are not VOID as the law states they are. Most men, not for the slightest moment, would think that those three words were meant to be a ban on polygamy. They would think that the line forsaking all others referred to not letting in-laws, parents, siblings, or society intrude into that most awesome relationship called marriage. Most men would not even think about the words they were saying. After all, they were simply pronouncing what they thought were the standard recitations of a marriage, words so unfamiliar, that some men actually mispronounce them, and if the man is a Christian, he would not for the slightest moment think that his church was asking him to do something against God’s Word, that they were inserting words that were dreamed up by popish ministers as a ban on polygamy hundreds of years ago. How many know the history of wedding vows? So the words that a man repeats in a marriage ceremony mean nothing more than what he understands them to mean at that moment. And again, we just pretended that they were not void for the sake of argument, but they are VOID and they are not “Wedding Vows.”
Wedding Vows
The term “Wedding Vows” is just a three syllable term that is commonly used to replace the ten syllable term Solemnization of Matrimony. Try saying Solemnization of Matrimony 3 times as fast as you can. Ease of use has always trumped preciseness of meaning in the English language. The man in the wedding ceremony did not agree to the false teachings of the Love Not Force crowd who claim that he just made vows. They are neither vows nor are the oral statements in the wedding ceremony anything but wind. Those words did not come out of the Bible. If anywhere, they came out of Satan’s mouth. They do not mean what the wife thinks they mean and they do not mean what society thinks they mean but they mean exactly what the man thought they meant at the moment he uttered them as God witnessed his thoughts. And most men aren’t thinking ANYTHING when they utter those words. But listen, we are not speaking of a subjective morality here. The man simply has no reference that would place for one moment in his mind the thought that he was making an anti-polygamy vow. Not to mention, the word vow was not even used in the entire ceremony. So that brings us back to one fact. Most men do not even know what marriage is (ask any Christian to define it) and yet he is agreeing to marriage. If he is a strong believer then he at least knows that he is agreeing to Biblical Marriage, nothing more and nothing less. The fact is, popish ministers began inserting the words, “forsaking all others”, a few hundred years ago, to clarify that they were against polygamy. This is because some of the most famous Christians of their era, including Martin Luther, Bernardino Ochino, Martin Bucer, John Milton, and others, taught that polygamy is an option.
It is of note that many, if not most of the ceremonies that include the phrase “forsaking all others,” follow it with a question to those attending the wedding. The question goes as follows:
“All of you who have witnessed these promises, (notice, promises, not vows) will you do everything in your power to support and uphold these two people in their marriage?”
Doesn’t this sound to you like the “forsaking all others” clause has come to mean forsaking the intrusion by those in attendance at the wedding, those in-laws, friends, and family that might try to wreck the marriage? Gossip is a terrible thing. That was the way I always understood it. I witnessed marriages with those words long before I had an interest in the study of polygamy and the idea that polygamy was being spoken of in those words never entered my mind. BE HONEST! You’re telling me that whenever you heard the “forsaking all others” clause at a wedding that you thought to yourself, “now there’s the anti-polygamy clause” and whenever you heard the woman’s “forsaking all others” clause you thought to yourself, “now there’s the anti-polyandry clause?” C’mon! Whoever would guess that in a monogamous society there would be an anti-polygamy clause, let alone an anti-polyandry clause in a wedding ceremony? Does that make sense?
A Promise is Not a Vow
Let’s review the words of the minister who officiated the marriage in the scenario above: “All of you who have witnessed these promises…” Did I hear vow anywhere? So the question comes up; what if you think you were knowingly making a vow not to take other wives and you want to get out of that vow so that you can have an additional wife. First of all, get it straight, you never vowed! Get that through your head. A vow is between you and God. A promise is between you and a person. Never in that ceremony is such a vow mentioned, not the word vow and not an act of making a vow. That said, is that promise you made binding, considering the Bible allows a man to have more than one wife? Look at the words that precede the words you spoke:
“For be ye well assured, that so many as are coupled together otherwise than God’s Word doth allow are not joined together by God; neither is their Matrimony lawful.”
Translated to modern English:
“For be fully assured, that those joined together in a way other than God’s Word allows, are not joined together by God; neither is their marriage lawful.”
If you promise someone that you will be at their father’s funeral and see an accident on the side of the road, does that mean you do not stop to give help to the injured, does that mean you leave those people on the side of the road to possibly die? God forbid! There are promises that must be broken. And if you deliberately prevent the birth of generations of Christians by not taking additional wives, is that more righteous than a promise made to a woman who is so ignorant of the Bible that she doesn’t know that not only does the Lord bless such unions but He said, “Let the children come to me and do not stop them, because the Kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Do I need to say more?
Monogamists Have Weak Relationships
Monogamist men are joined in a way that makes them weaker. They can’t be the man God called them to be because they’ve forfeited the most powerful tool a man has to keep his woman in check, the possibility of competition. He sins by discarding this tool. And the wife’s sins becomes his sins for he has weakened her motivation to follow his guidance. Women are the weaker vessel. They can be easily led into all kinds of sins without a strong man. As a man with the right to have several wives, your wife will know that she cannot assume you will give a nod to all her requests. She knows there may be others. This keeps the woman’s natural urge to rule her man in check. It was Adam’s hearkening unto the woman (Eve) that brought death. But the Love not Force crowd tells you directly; “Hearken unto the voice of thy wife!”
Genesis 3:17 And unto Adam He said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
The Monogamists’ Dilemma
And for the monogamists listening to or reading this. If you think Adam’s having only one wife taken from his side limited men to one wife, then do you also believe that widowers may not remarry? For if Adam’s wife taken from his side was the only wife he was allowed, it would also apply after she was gone. So, if Eve predeceased Adam, you’re proposing that he must have lived the rest of his 930 year life alone. What happened to God’s Word? Does it have no meaning? Do the monogamists now disagree with God and say it IS good for man to be alone?
Genesis 2:18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet (suitable) for him.
By the time Adam was a hundred years old, hundreds of women, if not tens of thousands, had already been born through Adam and his unnamed sons? If Adam could have married them as a widower, then he could have married them while Eve yet lived. It was not until the law given to Moses, that a man’s choice in a wife was limited based on the closeness of her relationship to the man. And consider, Eve was more closely related to Adam than any woman ever could be.
Does God Allow Role Swapping?
Does God actually allow the husband to take the position of the wife? Does He allow the man to be limited in the same way that the woman is? If the Lord does not allow a woman to wear that which pertains to a man, nor a man to wear that which pertains to a woman, how much more is man forbidden from wearing within his being, that which pertains to a woman, submission to the spouse.
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertains unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.
Your Civil Marriage is Defined by a Fill-In-The-Blank
One-Size-Fits-All Bureaucratic Form. Not Your Words
You signed a civil document that stated the terms. There are laws on the books in every state, as we’ve already discussed, that make void the oral promises made during the wedding ceremony. Furthermore, government licenses and certificates have no place to write any promises that were made during the ceremony. The license and certificate are merely fill-in-the-blank, one-size-fits-all documents. In other words, YOUR WORDS DO NOT DEFINE THE RELATIONSHIP. And neither do the words of your pastor, priest, or any other officiant present at your wedding.
You Signed A Divorce & Harlotry License
In fact, the document you signed is for divorce and licensed harlotry, for by the precedents under which the marriage contract will be adjudicated in case of divorce, it allows your woman to put you away! Yet there is no Bible basis for a wife divorcing her husband… EVER. And if the contract gives you both the power to do the exact opposite of your spoken promises, those promises are nothing more than wind. And worse than that, if there could be anything worse, the contract absolves your wife from any fault if she fornicates or commits adultery, even in front of your face! It is not a document for marriage for there are no injunctions for behavior such as the Bible contains. Neither is there a requirement either in the license, laws regarding the license, or court cases regarding the license that give the man power to rule the woman nor do they give the woman the right to bear his children. It is not in the least manner a marriage license. It is a divorce license.
AND YOU SIGNED IT!
Now you may ask, what if my church has special counseling where they claim authority over my marriage, such as the Roman Catholic church. If that is the case, then you are giving man (your church) power to put asunder what God has joined. Not only that, you are placing another man as head of your wife instead of yourself! On earth, there has only been one authority to dissolve a marriage, and that is the husband. And yet these so-called ministers of God seek to insert themselves between you and your wife. And there is nothing in this world that is none of anyone else’s business more than a man’s woman!
Mark 10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man (other than the husband) put asunder.
In the following I’m giving you the proof verses that not only can a man divorce but only a man can divorce.
Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. 3And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
Notice first, it is only the husband who sent her away “because he has found some uncleanness in her” that may not take her back. And nothing is said about the man who sent his woman away without cause, taking her back. In the second marriage, the woman is not said to have any uncleanness nor is the man who sent her away without cause said to have committed any wrong. Joseph sought to divorce Mary privately being a just man. He did not want to accuse her publicly of what he believed was adultery but for which he had no evidence other than his personal knowledge that he had not had relations with Mary.
Matthew 1:19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
Righteous husbands can divorce their wives as Joseph considered doing. It is only the rapist of a virgin and the man who bears false witness against his virgin bride, who cannot divorce their wife.
Deuteronomy 22:29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.
Deuteronomy 22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
With the exception of being divorced by a husband as noted above, the following applies:
1 Corinthians 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
So the exception is that if she was divorced, she could marry who she pleased because as we see in Deuteronomy 24:2 above, “she may go and be another man’s wife.”
No verses such as 1 Corinthians 7:39 above, limit a man, either in the number of current wives nor in his ability to divorce. They only limit the woman.
So What Actually is Marriage?
So how does God join a man and his wife? There are several ways.
In the case of a virgin who has been found laying with the man who seduced her, they are joined already by God. The only thing remaining, the lack of which does not dissolve the union, is the payment to the bride’s father of the bride’s price. The father’s acceptance of the situation is not required, the man already has possession of the bride, the only part left to do is pay the bride’s price, whether immediately or over time, it must be paid.
Exodus 22:16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
And there is the planned scenario where the man first offers to take the man’s daughter for the bride’s price, pays the price, then goes home with the man’s daughter as his wife. There are many scenarios other than this but they follow the same pattern. It is not an officiant that makes a man and woman wed. It is God through the consummation, which having once taken place, cannot be undone without a bill of divorce given by the husband.
In the case of a woman who was formerly married. The woman first provides evidence that her first man has divorced her or died. If she is not worthy of a Bride’s price, anything of any value must be given to her in order for it to be a completed contract. If she is worthy of a bride’s price then a worthy bride’s price will be given to her. Then she may do with it as she pleases. Finally, the marriage is consummated. The father would have no right to a bride’s price with this marriage, since he received the bride’s price at the time of the first marriage. She is no longer his to give away. She is her own to give away.
The purpose for a Bride’s Price is that in every marital agreement, there is an offer, an acceptance of the payment, and the delivery of the goods. It is a unilateral contract, just like the purchase of a home. Once the money is paid and the home is occupied, it is a done deal. The seller cannot change their mind nor can the home unsell itself. The home has no power, nor does the wife. She cannot unsell herself any more than the father can unsell her. She has been placed, hopefully with her consent, under the authority of the husband. We see in the case of Rebekah that Rebekah gave consent. As for the other women, just because the Bible does not mention their giving consent, doesn’t mean they didn’t. The Bible does not list every detail of every event.
Genesis 24:58 And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go.
Further details on marriages will be available in another article that addresses that specific topic.
The Love Not Force crowd uses invective
Instead of stepping up and entering into an honest discussion of how to gently bring a second wife into the marriage, the Love Not Force crowd has introduced invective. To them, love is for wives to whom they’ve given authority, but invective is for those who remain lords in their own households. And their invective is misandrist. (man hating.)
This cruel invective does three things:
1.) It denounces men who would dare to disagree.
2.) It abuses men who disagree by insinuating they are forcing their wives to do something.
3.) It silences discourse by the use of invective.
4.) The term Love not Force insinuates that the man scolded is not loving and that he is forcing something on somebody.
The names we call our doctrines should not be invectives. I call upon all the “Love not Forcers” to call it what it is: Permission Slip Polygamy. And yes, I am most certainly questioning the motives for selecting an invective for the name of a doctrine and moreover, the motives for retaining it.
I’ve listed below some other well known invectives that will demonstrate that the use of invectives does nothing to further an honest dialog. Have you ever been accused with one of these invectives?
Love not Intolerance – against biblical morals
Love not Bondage – against traditional marriage
Love not Legalism – against those who observe the Sabbath
Love not Guns – against self defense
Love not War – against a nation’s responsibility to defend itself
Love not Greed – against private property rights
Love not Religion – against Christianity
Invectives such as “Love Not Force” have no place in Christian dialog. The affect is to bring out the misandrist* in the reader by planting the thought: “Those beasts! How could they teach force instead of love!” We urge those who teach that you must get a Permission Slip from your wife in order to take additional wives, to simply call it what it is: Permission Slip Polygamy. It is a belief system that has delayed or completely stopped fertile men from obeying God’s first command, a command given thousands of years before the Ten Commandments, to multiply.
How many children have not been born
Because of so-called Love Not Force!
The Love Not Force crowd appears to be oblivious to the fact that they are using a false claim to enFORCE monogamy, thereby limiting the number of children born and defying God’s command to multiply. They are quite literally asking men to sin for a lie!
If we Don’t Need Permission – What Do We Need?
We need submission from godly women in a format that is closer to a Power of Attorney than either a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial. As with a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial agreement, the husband is seeking to protect his family by protecting himself first. As the protector of his family he must not be weakened either financially, spiritually, or legally. The difference between what he needs and what Love Not Force requests is that he is not asking for permission from his wife. He is requiring submission from his wife. The submission is to his will concerning whether and how many wives he will have. If she doesn’t sign, depending on the jurisdiction, and whether he is civilly married to her, or not, he may have to divorce her civilly to protect himself from harm. And even if he is in a jurisdiction where there’s no penalty for having additional wives and children, there may be financial repercussions in community property states where an amount equal to the money he uses for another family, must be paid to his civil wife if she comes after him later. There are also some states where adultery can technically be prosecuted. It’s best just not to be civilly married, and even when not civilly married, it’s best to have a signed document clarifying the nature of the relationship. Remember, civil marriage is licensed harlotry, and a license to steal in community property states. Unless you will reap a huge gain by marrying civilly, it’s better not to do it at all. Remember, a civil marriage is not required for you to be married and a civil divorce does not affect your marital status one way or the other if you, the man, have not stated that it is to be construed as a divorce.
In Closing – How Do We Deal With These False Teachers?
So what should we do when a clearly feminist group wishes to impose their interpretation, not just of Scripture, but of two substitute words that contain the word vow but have never been seen as vows by anyone who knows the meaning of vows and has read the Solemnization of Matrimony found in the Common Book of Prayer?
First: Define – Use everything in your arsenal to define the terms they are using in a Biblical manner. For example, in the Bible, vows are always made to God. Nowhere in the wedding ceremony is a vow made to God.
Second: Context – See what those who use the terms used by a false teacher consider them to mean. In the case of the Solemnization of Matrimony, the text itself refers to the man’s words as a promise, not a vow, as follows:
“All of you who have witnessed these promises…”
Finally: Current culture and laws. Consider how the current culture and laws would interpret the terms used by the False Teacher. In the case we’re discussing, not only does the law not honor oral promises but the script for the officiant contains the following:
“For be ye well assured, that so many as are coupled together otherwise than God’s Word doth allow are not joined together by God; neither is their Matrimony lawful.”
Whether intended or not, this phrase placed within the wedding ceremony nearly half a millennia ago, gave polygamists an out. How does a man’s placing himself below his wife by giving her total power over his reproductive rights, jive with the Bible? It clearly does not, and it is; “otherwise than God’s Word doth allow” and therefore the two are “not joined together by God; neither is their Matrimony lawful.”
So there you have it. If your ceremony included the phrase forsaking all others, then your marriage is not only unlawful, but it is an abomination, for it requires you to clothe yourself in the wedding garments of a woman, adorning yourself with what God designates for a woman, exclusivity to one spouse.
In closing, I’d like to point out that matrimony is not a Bible word. No wonder, it literally means mother support. Those officiating wedding celebrations should stick to words straight from the Bible. Better yet, there should be no officiants; for marriage is a transaction between the groom and the father of the bride, and finally between the groom and the bride as they consummate their marriage. The groom offers a bride’s payment, the bride’s father accepts the bride’s payment, and the consummation of the marriage takes place wherever the groom so chooses. If a civil marriage provides monetary benefits such as Social Security Benefits, that is entirely another topic for another time.
Until then, I love you guys, God bless you. I’m praying for you.
Sample Marriage License & Contract for New York State:
https://www.geneseeny.gov/files/sharedassets/county/v/1/history/marriage/marriage_certificate_sample.pdf
Note: Definitions:
“Love Not Force” – Permission Slip Polygamy
misogynist – woman hater
misandrist – man hater
