[with her]? For, ‘The two,’ says he [in the creation account of Genesis 2:24], ‘will be one flesh.’ But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee from fornication. Every other sin which a man may commit is outside his body, but he that practices fornication is sinning against his own body.”—1 Cor. 6:15-18.

31. To doing what with members of his spiritual body would Christ not consent, and what death-dealing consequences may there be to sinning immorally against one’s own flesh?

³¹ So if a member of Christ’s spiritual body commits immorality with one of the opposite sex, man or woman, that one is trying to take a member of Christ’s body and make it one flesh with the immoral person in fornication or adultery. Do you think that Christ Jesus will consent to being made one with a harlot or an adulteress? Not for a moment! One cannot be one flesh with a morally unclean person and at the same time “one spirit” with the Lord Jesus Christ. By sexually making oneself one flesh with the morally filthy, one is sinning against one’s own flesh. One’s impure, illegal fleshly union may possibly result in contracting a horrible disease and in other death-dealing consequences to the flesh. This may include the Christian congregation’s handing over the immoral member to Satan “for the destruction of the flesh,” in order that the spirit of the clean congregation may be saved in the day of the Lord. That is what Paul did with an incestuous member of the congregation of Corinth in his day. “Remove the wicked man from among yourselves,” the apostle authoritatively ordered.—1 Cor. 5:4, 13.

32. Similarly, even if one is a dedicated person but not of Christ’s “body,” what should one think of before committing immorality, and what does the New World society become obliged to do toward the immoral?

³² Even if you are not a member of the spiritual “body of Christ” but are dedicated to God in hope of his new world of righteousness, then think of what you are before indulging in immorality. Think of making your flesh, flesh belonging to the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses, “one flesh” with an immoral person! Does the New World society consent to your making it “one flesh” or one unit with the fornicator or adulterous person? Not for a moment! If you have no respect for it and its good name, God’s spirit will not let it have any respect for you in your immorality. It cannot count you one of it, for you bring reproach on it and on the God whose name it bears; and thus you are a stumbling block to others.

33. For whom is this something to think about seriously, and in what way should we not want to learn the consequences of immorality?

³³ This is something for missionary girls to think of seriously in their foreign assignments, when they are ardently pursued by smoothly operating native boys or men who put on a front of interest in the Bible message borne by the missionary girl and then try them out with improper suggestive advances, to soften them up. This is something to think about for dedicated Christian young people who are coming into marriageable years and who may be dreaming of happy, successful marriage under God’s blessing either before or after the battle of Armageddon. This is something for all dedicated members of the New World society to think about in this degraded, immoral world of temptation, in which we are under obligation to keep moral integrity to God. Do not try to learn “the hard way.”

34. Hence what prayer of the psalmist do we feel moved to offer?

³⁴ As we reflect on the seriousness of the matter, we feel moved to offer the prayer offered by the psalmist after he had committed a grievous moral mistake: “Create in me even a pure heart, O God, and put within me a new spirit, a steadfast one.”—Ps. 51:10.

Marrying in Honor

1. What question has recently been raised as to the arranging of marriage, and in view of what marital facts?

THE question has recently been raised, Are better results gained in marriage when the parents of the couple arrange for the marriage of their children, as in India today and as in Israel anciently, than when sons and daughters pick their own mates? For instance, in India divorce is almost unknown. In the United States of America in which the boyish little “Cupid,” the son of Venus, is said to arrange marriages, one fourth of all marriages end in legal divorce, not to mention separations legal or otherwise.

2. As to imposing marriage arrangements of one land upon Christians in other lands, what must be said in the light of Scriptural examples?

² What may we say regarding dedicated Christians? We cannot say that the standards for marriage arrangements that obtain in the United States and European lands must be imposed on dedicated Christians in other lands where different marriage customs prevail. Nothing in the Christian Greek Scriptures breaks up or forbids the customs of the Jews, from whom Jesus Christ and the first Christians came, for parents to arrange for marrying off their minor children. Why, Isaac was actually forty years old when his father Abraham, with whom Isaac kept living, procured a God-fearing bride for Isaac. Jacob, the son of Isaac, was seventy-seven years old when his blind father told him where to go and get his wife; whereas Jacob’s twin brother, Esau, at forty years of age, made his own marriage arrangements and undertook bigamy with heathen wives. Obedient Jacob, however, got the Abrahamic blessing through Isaac.

3. As regards parents, what did Paul not advise children, and what right did he not deny to Christian parents regarding marriage?

³ In giving marriage advice, the apostle Paul did not tell children to disregard parents. He did say: “Now I say to the single persons and the widows, it is well for them that they remain even as I am. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry.” (1 Cor. 7:8, 9) Remember, widows were independent persons as regards marriage arrangements. For their sake Paul added: “It is better to marry than to be inflamed with passion” and plunge into fornication. Hence, concerning the “younger widows” in the Christian congregation he said: “When their sexual impulses have come between them and the Christ, they want to marry, having a judgment because they have disregarded their first expression of faith [by letting sexual impulses control and get between them and Christ]. At the same time they also learn to be unoccupied, gadding about to the houses, yes, not only unoccupied, but also gossipers and meddlers in other people’s affairs, talking of things they ought not. Therefore I desire the younger widows to marry, to bear children, to manage a household, to give no inducement to the opposer to revile. Already, in fact, some have been turned aside to follow Satan.” (1 Tim. 5:11-15) Apart from that case of widows who were not under parental law, Paul did not say that as Christians the parents, Jewish or Greek, no longer had the right to make the marriage choice and arrangements for their minor children.

4. However, while exercising their right, yet by what principles should Christian parents be controlled, in order to safeguard what?

⁴ Nevertheless, in exercising their right according to local custom and law to select marriage mates for sons and daughters, parents who are dedicated to God through Christ should be controlled by Christian principles. Bow to God’s rule, like Abraham. He safeguarded the spiritual welfare of his son as heir of the Abrahamic promise by picking a worshiper of Jehovah God as a wife for Isaac. Thus he did not burden Isaac with an unequal yoke.

5. (a) In insisting upon his father’s arranging a Philistine marriage for him, why did Samson not violate God’s marriage rules? (b) How through improper exercise of his right may a Christian father prove himself unqualified for the congregation oversight?

⁵ In turn, Isaac warned his God-fearing son Jacob against marrying an unbelieving heatheness and sent him to grandfather Bethuel’s home for a bride. Strong man Samson insisted that his objecting father Manoah marry him to a heathenish Philistine woman because Samson wanted to get right on the inside of the Philistine organization in order to execute divine vengeance upon these oppressors; so that “that was from Jehovah.” (Judg. 14:1-4) Hence it was not sex that controlled Samson, but God’s stated purpose that “he it is who will take the lead in saving Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.” (Judg. 13:5) Christian parents, who adhere to their local, native right to arrange marriages, are therefore obligated to marry their children only to dedicated Christians within Jehovah’s theocratic organization, thus putting these under an equal yoke, a theocratic marital yoke. In what other way could fathers keep from irritating their children and keep “bringing them up in the discipline and authoritative advice of Jehovah”? (Eph. 6:4) Certainly a Christian father who unequally yokes his believing son or daughter to an undedicated unbeliever would be showing himself very immature in Christian principles, a man seeking some selfish, materialistic gain, a poor presider over his own household and a man unsuitable to be entrusted with oversight over a Christian congregation.—1 Tim. 3:2-5; 2 Cor. 6:14-16; 7:1.

6. How may this parental right impose a serious problem for a dedicated child, and how in this connection could a dedicated child suffer persecution from a divided household?

⁶ The exercise of the parental right of arranging marriages may impose a serious problem for some children. This is in the case of where the father or legal guardian is not a dedicated witness of Jehovah, whereas the son or daughter is dedicated to Jehovah. If the father or guardian did not respect the child’s dedication to Jehovah and purposed to marry the child off to one who is not a dedicated member of the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses, then the dedicated son or daughter could offer objections. Explanation could be offered that it is contrary to the law and will of Jehovah God for a dedicated witness of Jehovah to marry an undedicated unbeliever. At least, the respectful child could earnestly request for the parent to find the marriage mate among the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses. If the child conscientiously refused to be married to an undedicated unbeliever, persecution might arise from the family. But the faithful Christian would be suffering such persecution from a divided household for the sake of conscience.—Matt. 10:34-37; 1 Pet. 2:19.

7. Where freedom to pick a mate is granted a Christian child, how much of a freedom is it, and how does it become a safe freedom?

⁷ Where the selection of a mate is allowed to a son or daughter by the parents, then the dedicated Christian son or daughter is under apostolic instructions to marry the mate wanted, but “only in the Lord,” that is, only someone in union with the Lord, like oneself. (1 Cor. 7:39; marginal reading) Thus the freedom to pick a mate for a dedicated witness of Jehovah is a relative freedom. This is a safe freedom; it makes for peace and happiness, as it makes for equality religiously between the couple in the marriage yoke.

8. By marrying “only in the Lord,” what does a child show for Christian parents, and thus what does he avoid causing?

⁸ If the parents themselves are dedicated Christians, then a child would be following the apostle’s instruction to honor one’s father and mother who are in union with the Lord, by respecting their theocratic desire for their children to marry only in the Lord, inside of what is approved by the Lord. (Eph. 6:1-3) In this way the child marrying in the Lord causes no “bitterness of spirit” or “disgust” with family connections, such as Esau caused to his parents Isaac and Rebekah, because he profanely did not ‘appreciate sacred things.’—Gen. 26:34, 35; 27:46; 28:1; Heb. 12:16, 17.

9. If marriage is honorable among Christians, what inward reaction should a married one not have, and where should notation of marriage properly be filed?

⁹ Writing to Hebrew Christians, the apostle Paul said: “Let marriage be honorable among all.” (Heb. 13:4) If one’s marriage is honorable among Hebrew Christians and among all other dedicated witnesses of Jehovah, how can there be anything to be ashamed of for being married? There cannot be; there should not be. One’s marriage state should therefore be noted down and the notation of it should be kept in the official files of the congregation with which the married person is associated as a member.

10. (a) What is consensual marriage, and in lands where it is widely practiced can it be registered in the congregation files as a legal living together? (b) What does the Bible name it?

¹⁰ Can all couples who are living together as a legal husband and wife do, have their living together in this way recorded as marriage in the files of the congregation? No; they cannot, if they are living together in what is not legal Christian wedlock. In some lands a man and a woman will consent to live together in the closest intimacy like a man and wife, but without legal authorization or registration. This is what is locally called “consensual marriage.” While this is tolerated locally and may gain neighborhood recognition, yet God’s Word frankly names it fornication, or adultery if either one of this type of union is already married and not divorced on proper grounds.

11. Why is so-called common-law marriage not the correct status for a Christian to be in?

¹¹ In other lands there is carried on what is called “common-law marriage.” It is a marriage that is entered into by agreement by a couple without official marriage ceremony by an authorized servant of the State, but which marriage is provable by the writings, statements or known conduct of the couple. In some states or provinces of a land such common-law marriage is legal; in other states of the same land it may not be legal. If a couple moved from one state in which it is legal to another state in which it is not legal, some there might view them as guilty of fornication or of adultery, even if visiting temporarily at a convention. Thus in all places of the same land the couple might not have the same respectability and recognition. Legal troubles may arise over willing property to children by common-law marriage,