The REAL Reason Marriage Is Sacred. . .That You've Probably Never Heard

I'm taking a little break from blogging my study through Mark to tell you about the best and most powerful explanation for the sanctity of marriage that I've ever heard.

A few months ago, I attended the Gateway Conference 2015 and Pastor Jimmy Evans gave this teaching. If you don't know Jimmy Evans, Google "Marriage Today." He and his wife started this ministry years ago, and so you'd expect him to have all the answers about marriage. However. . .

He explained that one morning, as he was getting ready for the day, God hit him with a question: "Jimmy, do you know the real meaning of marriage?" This was such a weird question to ask Jimmy--a man whose entire career has been teaching literally thousands of people about marriage--but Jimmy stopped and said, "Well. . .I thought I did, but. . .if You have to ask me, then. . .I'm guessing I don't?"

God then proceeded to show Him three pictures, for which I am so thankful. For the first time, marriage made clear and honest sense to me on a deep and sacred level. After hearing this teaching, my mind flooded with clarifications and ramifications, and I will try to summarize and explain them as well as I can for you now. (This is going to go deep, so please don't speed-read through it.)

The first picture was the Trinity: The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. When we think about the Trinity--although we cannot fully grasp how one Being can exist in three Persons--probably the greatest "take-away" we can gain is that the Trinity is the truest, purest manifestation of Love. . .ever. If we think about human love, the highest level of human love is "laying down life for friends." As humans, we can't get any more ultimate than that. Life is our most precious gift, so in giving that up, we cannot show anything greater when it comes to love. (Incidentally, this is why Jesus' death on our behalf should break our hearts.) 

However, the Trinity exists in a state of far greater love than human love. Why or how is this possible? Simply this: None of the Persons of the Trinity will EVER NEED to die for each other. Think about that. They are truly free to love with reckless abandon, knowing that this love will never be betrayed, second-guessed, nor unrequited. They love Each Other to such an extent we cannot fathom because, even in the purest of human relationships, betrayal and distrust are still within the realm of possibility. We may not want to think about this fact, but if we are honest with each other, we will admit that our love is very very dependent on how the "other person" behaves. The Trinity is not bound by any of that nonsense.

Okay. . .So the Trinity is the truest form of Love.

Second picture: Christ and the church. In Ephesians 5:22-32, Paul gives us a picture of how husbands and wives are to love each other. He explains that the attitudes of husbands and wives are to mirror the relationship between Jesus and the church. The picture of Jesus is what the man should pattern his love after--that he is willing to lay his life down for his wife, that he protects his wife, that he cares for her every need, etc. The picture of the church is what the woman should pattern her love after--that she allows the husband to lead, that she trusts the husband, that she accepts his love, etc. This shouldn't be a new concept to anyone who has read the Bible. So. . .moving on. Just keep in mind that "Christ and the Church" is simply a picture of what the marriage relationship should look like. Also, keep in mind that God is first in this relationship at all times--if either the husband or wife try to be "first" the whole thing falls out of balance. I Cor 11:12 says, "For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. (NIV)" Neither the man nor the woman actually has dominion over the other, but God has ultimate dominion since everything comes from Him.

Make sure to get this point from the second picture: There is a trinitarian balance between Christ and the church, because God is the one who gives the church to Christ (Eph 1:22). God is still in the picture. It's a trinity.

Now, here comes the third and final picture: Adam and Eve. If we look in Genesis, we find that God created man out of the dust of the ground, but then he created woman from Adam's rib, right? This is where Jimmy read this verse:

Genesis 1:27 "So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them."

So then he asked us the question, "Was man created in the image of God?" The congregation said, "Yes." Then he asked, "Was woman created in the image of God. . .or in the image of the church?" There was a little confusion, so he asked again, "Can we all agree that woman was also created in the image of God?" The congregation said, "Yes." I think this is a point that a lot of pastors miss or forget about. Woman was also created in the image of God. The "Christ and the church" thing is merely a relational pattern from which to learn. But woman was NOT created in the image of the church. Important to remember.

So then, this is where it really got interesting.

He read Genesis 2:18 "The Lord God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.'" Then he read the verses in John where Jesus tells the disciples that He would send His "Comforter" after He left the earth. Jimmy made the point that the words "helper" and "Comforter" are one and the same. . .Interesting.

So Jimmy asked again, "Do we believe that man and woman were both created in the image of God?"...."Yes."

He proceeded to explain the similarities between Jesus and man: Man was created first (Gen 1 & 2) and Jesus is referred to as the "first fruits" (I Cor. 15:20,23). Man is the head of the home just as Jesus is the head of the church (Eph 5:23). Man was held responsible for sin (I Cor. 15:21), just as Jesus is given responsibility over all humanity (John 6:37; 10:29). He asked, "Can we agree that man was created in the image of God, but more specifically in the image of Christ?"

Then he proceeded to explain the similarities between the Holy Spirit and woman. Woman was created second (I Cor. 11:8), just as the Holy Spirit came after Christ (Acts 1:8). The word "helper" in Genesis 2:18 and "Comforter" in John 14:16,26 is the same word. In a healthy marriage, the wife carries out the plans of the partnership (Proverbs 31), just as the Holy Spirit carries out God's will in our lives (John 14:26; I Jn. 2:27). Then he asked, "Can we agree that woman was created in the image of God, but more specifically in the image of the Holy Spirit?"

Now. . .BE CAREFUL. If you disagree with this, make sure you aren't assuming what isn't being said. This DOESN'T mean that the Holy Spirit is feminine. Technically, God isn't either gender because He is a Spirit (John 4:24). He is called "Father" so we can relate to Him personally, but He is not technically a "He" at all. . .But God also isn't a "She." And also. . .if you want to go there, God isn't an "It" either. Remember Genesis 1:27 above? "Male and female He created them." God created gender. God doesn't have a gender.

Secondly, this isn't perpetuating some non-Biblical nonsense about "God the Mother" or goddess beliefs. Again, God transcends gender. He created gender for reproduction of humanity and for a way that humans could experience romantic love. Speaking of this love, we are now coming full-circle.

In all of these pictures, you will see that there is a trinity of sorts. In the Trinity Himself, in "Christ and the church" with God also present, and also in the creation of man and woman as the images of God: If man is in the image of Jesus and woman is in the image of the Holy Spirit, then the Father must be present. 

I have always been taught that God has to be present in our marriages, but I had never before thought of why. I have seen Republican politicians and equally militant conservative pastors fiercely debate talking-heads and furiously pound pulpits for the "sanctity of marriage," but whenever it came down to it, all they could say is that "Only a man and woman!. . .It's Adam and Eve! Not Adam and STEVE!" But no one really said why. With this trinitarian picture of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I can clearly understand why marriage must (1) include God, (2) be between a man and a woman, and (3) be considered sacred. 

This picture is so powerful because it clearly opens our eyes as to why the following situations are wrong:

POLYGAMY: You can't have more than two humans in a true marriage, because even if God didn't explicitly say "Don't take more than one wife/husband," in a polygamous situation, God inevitably would make the fourth. . .or fifth. . .or sixth, etc. entity. Not a trinity.

THREESOME: Similar to polygamy. A threesome is a totally human, mortal, fallible trinity; not a blessed one. In order to be blessed, one of the people would have to be omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and holy as God is. That's a tall order for any of us sinners!

BESTIALITY (or like one of those situations where some crazy lady wants to marry a building.): Animals (and buildings) are not created in God's image, so therefore cannot represent Christ or the Holy Spirit.

INCEST: Jesus and the Holy Spirit, while part of the same God-head, are somehow also completely separate entities and are not blood-related. (Technically, neither are the Father and Son. The terms "Father" and "Son" are purely relational terms for us, to help us understand what God the Father and God the Son are like, but. . .again, God is a Spirit. Jesus didn't come from the Father. He was with the Father from the beginning of time [Jn 1:1].)

FORNICATION AND ADULTERY: The Trinity is the picture of pure, committed love. Neither fornication nor adultery show commitment.

HOMOSEXUALITY: You can't have a Trinity with two Holy Spirits. Nor can you have a Trinity with two Jesuses. However, Christians, listen up! This picture also voids all the hateful "because it's gross and unnatural" answers perpetuated by ignorant Christians. "Gross and unnatural" are opinion-generated words. Opinion is always weaker and more emotionally triggering than fact. The fact is, marriage is the image of the Trinity because man and woman are created in God's image--with God as the Father of the union.

UNBELIEVING HETEROSEXUALITY (Don't miss this!): Even if a man and a woman get married, the marriage is NOT a true marriage if God isn't Father over it. If a marriage is only between the image of Jesus and the image of the Holy Spirit, the trinity is not complete. This also counts if only one person is an unbeliever. Unless both parties believe, God will not be Father over the union. THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT ISN'T STILL BINDING! All marriages count and are binding in God's eyes because God is everywhere and holds us accountable for all promises we make (Matt. 5:33-37; James 5:7-12), whether we are believers or non-believers. However, a marriage between ONLY a man and a woman--with God missing--will not be blessed because it has no trinitarian power. 

Don't miss this point: An unbelieving marriage is binding; but not blessed! (Allowances for divorce: Matt 5:32; 19:9; I Cor. 7:15, don't make divorce any easier and shouldn't be taken as loopholes for making a stupid marriage decision. If blessing is the goal, make blessed choices.)

[Side point: This concept makes passages come alive like II Cor 6:14 - "14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. . .(NIV)" The passages continues in verse 16 to say, "I will live with them and walk among them. . ." God wants your marriage to be a trinity with Himself at the forefront. . .Or  Psalm 127:1a, "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it: (KJV)". . .Why are the workers laboring in vain if God isn't there to build the house? Because there is no trinity without God there.]

CHRISTIAN HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE FAILURES (Read with humility): What about those Christian marriages that end in divorce? If both people are Christian, their marriage should last, right? No. And this is a big manifestation to the point that Christianity is NOT a religion. If Christianity were a religion, than going through the motions and traditions of marriage should be enough for marriage to last. Instead, Christianity is rather a faith-based relationship. Hear this: ALL MARRIAGES WILL FALL APART IF GOD IS NOT FIRST. That means, even in Christian marriages, when a husband or wife becomes selfish, the trinity is dissolved. When a husband or wife wanders, becomes addicted to porn, or takes another lover, the trinity is dissolved. When a husband or wife loses respect for the other, the trinity is dissolved. This is why marriages should be bathed in prayer. God is part of your marriage. If you ignore Him, your marriage will fall apart. If you trust Him and put Him first, you will stay married and you will gain a deeper respect and love for your partner every day.

Think about it. I hope other verses pop into your mind in a whole new way, now that you have read this. I hope this opens your eyes as much as it did mine. When I heard these three pictures, I thought, "Now why don't more pastors preach this? This answers every question about marriage that I've ever had!!" Hopefully, more people will realize this perspective and we can have deeper, fuller marriages than ever before.

Anyway, I believe marriage should be between a man, a woman, and God.

. . .and now you know why I believe it (I Peter 3:15).



One final thought: Do I believe that man is created in only the image of Jesus, and woman only the image of the Holy Spirit? No. I believe that humankind's stamp of the Creator goes far deeper than we can imagine or know in this life. However, for the purpose of marriage, a trinitarian concept gives me deeper insight into interpreting marriage-related verses in the Bible and helps me understand the relationships I encounter in day-to-day life.

Mark 1:1-3...Jesus is God. . .and. . .A Picture of Repentance

I attended the Priscilla Shirer Simulcast 2016 a few weekends ago, and one point that she made is that Bible study really doesn't have to be all that difficult. She encouraged us to get in the Word even if it is just a few minutes a day. She also encouraged us to get a journal Bible. (A journal Bible is like what you see above. It has extra wide margins for taking notes, writing thoughts, and organizing ideas. Some people even use them to draw very ornate embellishments of key verses.)

She had a list of five "P's" that were supposed to help you when you study.

I will tell you, I have forgotten all of them. . .

But! I do remember the basic gist, and that is to go verse by verse and paraphrase each verse (or sentence) in your own words, and then either explain what that verse means to you personally, or point out something you've never noticed before about the passage. Of course it helps to read the verses in context first, take your time (it's not a race!), and come to study time prayerfully.

Okay, with that said, I have just purchased an NIV Journal Bible, and I will be blogging about what I find. I am starting with Mark because most people believe that was the first gospel written. (I want to go through the gospels chronologically.)

Some background into today's post: I recently watched a debate between a Muslim and a Christian. The Muslim scholar pointed out that since Mark was the first gospel written, and that the book of Mark never claims that Jesus was God, that Jesus' divinity was actually added later in subsequent gospels.

I found something really interesting in the first three verses of Mark that pretty much cancels that claim.

So without further ado. . .
-------------------------------------------------------------

Mark 1:1-3

1 The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah,[a] the Son of God,[b] 2 as it is written in Isaiah the prophet:

“I will send my messenger ahead of you,
    who will prepare your way”—
3 “a voice of one calling in the wilderness,
‘Prepare the way for the Lord,
    make straight paths for him.’”

My paraphrase - 

Vs. 1-2 "The gospel started with the fulfillment of Isaiah's (and Malachi's) prophecy: "My messenger will come first, preparing Your way.

3. "His sign will be 'One calling in the wilderness,' and saying, 'Repent!'"

My explanations - 

1. Jesus is God.

Mark has a heart to tell the gospel. Muslims criticize that Mark never called Jesus, "God"--that this idea came later from the other gospel writers. However, the actual wording of Isaiah's and Malachi's prophecies state: 

"I will send my messenger before ME. . .[emphasis added]." (Mal. 3:1)

Obviously, God is speaking. 

"Prepare. . .for the LORD; make straight. . .for our GOD [e.a.]" (Is. 40:3)

Mark knew what he was quoting! 

Mark uses the pronouns, "I will send my messenger before YOU," and, 

"Prepare. . .for the LORD; make straight. . .for HIM [e.a.]," 

Notice the difference in pronouns. In Malachi God says, "I. . .Me," but Mark says, "I . . .You." Isaiah says, "Lord. . .God" and Mark says, "Lord. . .You!" Interestingly, not only is Mark calling Jesus "God" by doing this, but he is also alluding to the Trinitarian concept that Jesus is both "I, Me" and "I, You." He is both God and the person of Jesus Christ!

2. A Picture of Repentance.

The wording "Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him" is a great way to describe true repentance, as repentance does not mean "feeling guilty," but rather, "a change of mind." How does one prepare the way for the Lord to enter one's heart? He makes straight paths. There is a sense of urgency here. A sense that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and that the line needs to be made now. There is only one way to heaven--faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ. True repentance is allowing that simple, straight, non-embellished, non-additive fact into one's head and heart! God's way is straight and narrow. It is pure simplicity: Jesus. His yoke is easy and His burden is light! 

Jesus Messiah: The True Meaning of Christmas

On the plane after a great mission trip to Montana at the end of this past October, I started humming the tune of Bach's "Ave Maria," but the words "Jesus Messiah" kept replacing the first phrase. I started playing with names of Jesus and fitting them into the tune and then realized that I could tell the whole story of the Bible using only the names of Jesus beginning with Creation and ending with Revelation.

I thought about doing it for church or something, but the music doesn't really fit our style at church, so I decided to make a YouTube video instead.

Please remember the true meaning of Christmas is not just nice feelings with those you love, nor is it all about just a poor little baby being born in terrible circumstances. Those things are part of it, but they come from something much, much bigger. The true meaning of Christmas is the whole beautiful story, beginning to end, of God's Love--even the messy parts, even the nice parts...even you.




Jesus, Messiah,
Author and Creator,
Guardian and Provider,
Counsellor, Emmanuel,
The Everlasting Father,
Glory in the Highest,
Bright and Morning Star
Bringing Peace to all the earth,
King of Kings,
Lord of Lords,
The Way,
The Truth,
The Life,
Lamb of God,
Salvation,
Resurrection,
Great I Am,
The Alpha and Omega.
Amen.

The Highest Form of Non-Theist Love: Love of Body

Dennis McCallum, in a sermon on Thessalonians, said, "The ultimate statement of love that a non-theist can make is 'I love your body.'" I believe that statement is true, and I believe there is much at stake in the reality of that statement.

If a person is a non-theist (atheist, agnostic, or other variety), he or she must believe that there is no reason for anyone to exist, that everyone is the result of a mistake, that nothing in anyone is eternal, and that existence ends when a person dies. There is no soul because there is no evolutionary reason to have one. Period. Any wavering on that fact and the believer is not a true non-theist. Therefore, the concept of love can be only for the here and now. "I love your body" at its most shallow means casual sexuality and at its deepest means, "I love your existence." Even if an atheist loves someone for who he/she is on the inside, it is still just the body. Even if an atheist loves someone for the kindness he/she shows, it's still just the body. Even loving someone for being "as messed up as I am" is still loving him/her for the body.  A person's mind, personality, viewpoints. To an atheist, these can only be connected to the body. There is no sacrifice to this love except masochism. There is no commitment without ulterior motive. There is no security except Stockholm syndrome. To acknowledge the soul is to acknowledge an existence that is higher and deeper than this plane on which we live. A non-theist cannot love anything more than the flesh and blood of another person. 

I hope that breaks your heart as it does mine.

I hope every human, theist or not, can see what is at stake with this kind of love. There is something in all our hearts that yearns to be loved for more than just our mortal coil. We may have no problem giving that kind of shallow love, but we definitely hate receiving it. We may accept and commit with liberality every sin and form of debauchery this world has to offer, but we always hate betrayal. Loving someone for his/her mere present existence is the very epitome of betrayal because it is love that doesn't last. Our bodies decay. Our minds change. Our kindness is inconsistent. Our messy lives will eventually repel the ones who were attracted. If these are the only reasons for which we are loved, then we will not be loved forever. 

If love isn't meant to last, then why do we want so badly for it to last?

There is a God and He loves you. Forever.

Are Modern Christian Songs Shallow?

When I was little, pastors used to preach against modern Christian music because the lyrics in them were too "lovey-dovey." The argument was that the words in them were too shallow, words that you would sing to your girlfriend or boyfriend, and certainly not something you should be singing to God.

As an adult, I have come to think differently on this subject, primarily because a short dissection of modern secular love songs proves to show exactly the opposite.

Think of popular lyrics in love songs: "You are my destiny." "You are the air I breathe." "You mean everything to me." "I'd die without you." Actually, those words seem shallow because they are words of worship. When the subject of those words is a human being, the philosophies behind them seem trite because they are suspect.

Early in our marriage, my husband and I agreed that we love each other dearly, but never in any sense of the word are either of us the other's "destiny." That is too high a burden to put on another person, because neither of us can handle being worshiped. In order to receive worship, one has to be incapable of failure, otherwise he will eventually betray the worshiper. When I understand that I should worship God but give my husband a break for being fallible, I can actually love my husband more. That's called "freedom."

Now if we apply those quotations above to God, they make all the sense in the world. God is the air I breathe. God does mean everything to me. These words are no longer trite because they now can be sustained by a non-failing Subject that is worthy of them.

Humans in love can and should sing love songs to each other. I'm not saying they shouldn't. However, the problem is not that Christian music has become shallow. The problem is that modern secular music has become worship.