Is it wrong to live together as spouses but not get married?

[Radagast]

Lived with my now wife for 15ish years before getting officially married.

I think that would count as a de facto relationship under Section 4AA of the Family Law Act 1975, so semi-official even without the certificate.

 

[Armoured]

I think that would count as a de facto relationship under Section 4AA of the Family Law Act 1975, so semi-official even without the certificate.

Yes

 

[Radagast]

Yes

Of course, being blessed by the Federal government is not quite the same as being blessed by the Church.

 

[~Anastasia~]

By the way, are you SURE of the wording of what you're considering?

I know a lot of income-based government programs are based on "household income" rather than "husband and wife income".

In most cases, they (the government) don't actually care if you are married or not?

 

[samir]

By the way, are you SURE of the wording of what you're considering?

I know a lot of income-based government programs are based on "household income" rather than "husband and wife income".

In most cases, they (the government) don't actually care if you are married or not?

Obamacare tax credits are based on tax household. If they filed as married their combined income is used. If they each file as single then it is separate.

 

[RDKirk]

Uh... are you saying that when you date/and/or have sex with someone, that's your married partner?

Because if so, that's some pretty out there beliefs you have... and you realize practically no one else believes that right? That you're alone in that thought?

Don't get me wrong, I have enough wisdom to discern why you have most likely come to that conclusion ("going in" to someone in the Old Testament most likely?). But you're definitely wrong. Married is married. Besides gay marriage and the like, married in the sight of God is married in the sight of everyone else as well. Married according to the laws of the land matters. The act of marrying someone is important and crucial.

Actually, Paul wrote some very interesting words to that effect:

Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, “The two shall become one flesh.” -- 1 Corinthians 7

Paul takes the OT definition of marriage and applies it to sex with a prostitute.

 

[RDKirk]

Two people with health problems would like to get married but they can't afford it because of Obamacare. Both earn $21,000/year which qualifies them to get a good health insurance plan on healthcare.gov for less than $50/month each due to their low income. However, if they get married, they would have to pay $1,600/month (almost $20,000/year) because their combined income of $42,000/year would cause them to lose tax credits they received when they applied individually. Under Obamacare rules, if they lived together as husband and wife, but didn't get married, they could keep their existing plans and pay less than $100/month combined. Since Obamacare makes marriage unaffordable, is there anything wrong with them living together as husband and wife without getting married?

Now, you are the very person who argues vehemently in another thread for adhering to the literal words of the bible for "training your wife," and the "submission of the wife to the husband," yet here you are proposing to flout the bible on marriage for political reasons.

Now, if you want to argue that the Bible does not require a marriage to conform to the state, then you also lose the argument that the state's laws on marriage must conform to the Bible.

 

[samir]

In a state with common-law marriage rules, that would be a legal marriage, and it would legally be fraud not to disclose the fact. In other states, my personal opinion is that morally it would still be wrong.



You would know better than me, although I would still strongly suggest professional advice. On my understanding of the rules, the statements in the OP about costs are incorrect. According to online calculators, a US average silver plan for two singles on the stated incomes would be about $100/month each, while a family plan for a couple on the combined income would be about $300/month.

The amounts you quoted are for the second lowest cost silver plan. However, silver doesn't cover much if you have health problems. With a $21,000 individual income they qualify for a free upgrade to a platinum level plan for the same price as silver. If they chose the cheapest silver plan instead of the second lowest cost one they can get it for less (sometimes even free). But at $42,000, they don't qualify for an upgraded plan and would have to pay $1,600/month for a platinum plan to get the same coverage they have now for less than $100/month.

 

[samir]

Actually, Paul wrote some very interesting words to that effect:

Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, “The two shall become one flesh.” -- 1 Corinthians 7

Paul takes the OT definition of marriage and applies it to sex with a prostitute.

Does that mean if I had sex with a prostitute that I am married to her?

 

[Dave-W]

then as I am lead to understand, the first person you couple with is your "spouse" in the eyes of God.

You have been misinformed. A "first coupling" without being married is fornication - which is prohibited in scripture.

 

[John Hyperspace]

You have been misinformed. A "first coupling" without being married is fornication - which is prohibited in scripture.

Where is that in scripture? What I see is, the mention of the "becoming one flesh" as the indicator of being "one" (how can two not become one in a physical coupling?); so, whenever two become "one" by a carnal union, they have become one - thus, man and woman, husband and wife.

Coupling with any other than your first coupling would then be adultery, and fornication is prostitution.

 

[John Hyperspace]

Uh... are you saying that when you date/and/or have sex with someone, that's your married partner?

I'm saying that when two become one, they are one. You don't "not become one" because there isn't a piece of paper signed by someone, and a tax payed. There's no way to not become one in a coupling situation.

Because if so, that's some pretty out there beliefs you have... and you realize practically no one else believes that right? That you're alone in that thought?

Truth doesn't rely on consensual agreement, otherwise there wouldn't be "few" that find it. But what I do know is that the bible says "two become one" and no matter how anyone spins it, there is no such a thing as a coupling where "two" do not become "one".

 

[John Hyperspace]

John, you were careful the way you stated that, and that was probably a good idea, but could I please ask why you understand that to be the case?

Two become one in a coupling situation. That is the biblical fact. Whoever you first couple with: two became one. That is the biblical definition of marriage since the beginning when it was defined at Genesis 3.

 

[Cute Tink]

I'm pretty sure that you can get married according to your religious beliefs without getting legally married. That would be up to your church whether they would be willing to do it and you have to be sure not to ever declare yourself married on any legal documents or forms and you probably won't get any of the legal rights or protections unless your state has some provisions for couples that have long-term relationships without legal marriage.

 

[CodyFaith]

Truth doesn't rely on consensual agreement, otherwise there wouldn't be "few" that find it. But what I do know is that the bible says "two become one" and no matter how anyone spins it, there is no such a thing as a coupling where "two" do not become "one".

So you're saying that everyone is in a continual state of adultery basically?

That Christians, God's people, are sinning continually in a major way (remember, scripture says adulterer's won't inherit the Kingdom of God)? That all Christian marriages, people who love each other in Christ and are partnered together, are false? (Excluding virgins who marry, but that's pretty rare).

Perhaps you're just interpreting scripture wrong? I know you are of course, but it's a rhetorical question.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Two become one in a coupling situation. That is the biblical fact. Whoever you first couple with: two became one. That is the biblical definition of marriage since the beginning when it was defined at Genesis 3.

OK, I understand how one can draw that conclusion, but since it is not derived from a direct statement and it takes so many "if's" to draw the conclusion, it will be tough for me to see it as a fact.

In a perfect world it could be, and maybe even should be a fact, but I think God realizes that is not our world, at least in this case.

That's only personal opinion, and nothing more, so...

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I don't know the op, just saw this post,
and the answer apparently for "everyone" with few exceptions even in churches is yes, plainly.

So you're saying that everyone is in a continual state of adultery basically?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

YHWH KNOWS,
basically yes.

That Christians, God's people, are sinning continually in a major way (remember, scripture says adulterer's won't inherit the Kingdom of God)?

 

[CodyFaith]

I don't know the op, just saw this post,
and the answer apparently for "everyone" with few exceptions even in churches is yes, plainly.

People who are married and only sleep with their married partner are still committing adultery?

Pfft.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Truth doesn't rely on consensual agreement, otherwise there wouldn't be "few" that find it. But what I do know is that the bible says "two become one" and no matter how anyone spins it, there is no such a thing as a coupling where "two" do not become "one".

If I may, the problem there is the actual "spin" lies somewhere between "two becomes one" and that becoming a binding marriage. There is just too much missing between that to see it any other way.

But maybe there is more to substantiate the possibility someplace else in the bible?