I   wrote   this   book   because   I   wanted   to   initiate   a   discussion   in   our   free   church   circles.   This   discussion   has   been   in   full   swing   for some   time   now.   Since   the   first   publication   of   the   original   German   version   Trauscheinlüge?   in   2019,   I   have   had   many   discussions and   answered   many   questions.   The   majority   of   responses   have   been   positive.   I   continue   to   receive   phone   calls,   letters   and   visits from   Christians   who   are   thankful   that   this   book   was   published.   However,   my   priority   is   not   to   gather   a   large   a   number   of supporters   for   my   cause.   As   much   as   I   appreciate   the   encouragement   and   need   the   support,   I   really   wish   even   more   for   a   positive dialogue with those who are critical of this book. In   this   discussion   section,   I   would   like   to   reply   to   all   of   the   questions   that   I   have   been   asked   over   the   last   few   years.   I   presume   that many   people   have   not   really   read   the   book   and   only   participate   in   the   discussion   because   of   the   book’s   title.   That   is   why   it   comes as    no    surprise    that    there    are    a    few    very    bizarre    claims    going    around.    Furthermore,    lots    of    the    criticism    is    based    on misunderstandings.   For   example,   some   people   stubbornly   claim   that   in   the   model   I   present,   marriage   is   sealed   with   sexuality, even   though   I   do   not   write   it   that   way.   On   the   following   pages,   I   am   providing   10   answers   to   10   questions   and   claims.   I   hope   I   can clear up a few misunderstandings this way.

Question   1:   There   are   many   Christian   publications   that   argue   in   the   same   way   as   the   current   church   moral   standard.   How is   it   that   you   come   to   a   different   conclusion   and   that   you   question   tried   and   tested   knowledge?   Why   hasn’t   anyone   else come up with such ideas before you? I   have   asked   myself   exactly   this   question   also,   many   times.   If   you   look   at   the   bibliography   at   the   end   of   this   book,   you   can   see   how much   I   read   about   the   topic   prior   to   tackling   the   book.   I   did   lots   of   reading   because   I   wanted   to   investigate   if   really   no-one   else   had written   about   this   topic   in   a   similar   way.   To   my   surprise,   I   discovered   that   when   the   topics   of   premarital   sex   or   sex   without   a marriage   license   are   dealt   with   from   the   point   of   view   of   free   churches,   then   it   is   done   solely   from   the   perspective   of   the   current church   moral   standard.   In   some   cases,   I   received   very   strong   negative   reactions   to   my   book.   Some   letters   were   formulated   in   such a   way   that   you   would   not   think   they   had   been   written   by   believing   Christians.   That   may   already   be   part   of   the   answer.   Presumably, I am simply the first who has dared to put into writing a position that is contrary to that of the current church moral standard. Furthermore,   during   the   course   of   church   history,   there   were   always   times   when   the   old   ways   of   thinking   were   questioned.   I   am thinking   of   John   Nelson   Darby,   for   example.   When   in   the   19th   century,   he   promoted   the   doctrine   of   rapture   on   the   basis   of   1   Thess. 4:13-18,   he   was   mocked   and   criticized   by   the   Christians   of   his   time.   He   was   reproached   for   claiming   something   that   everyone   had seen   differently   for   the   last   1500   years.   The   church   of   the   Middle   Ages   and   the   Protestant   reformers   did   not   believe   in   rapture. Nowadays, the doctrine of rapture has spread to many evangelical churches. Perhaps the reflections in this book will do the same. Question   2:   The   civil   marriage   license   may   not   be   biblically   proven,   but   at   least   it   provides   some   sort   of   orientation. Doesn’t   your   book   create   a   lack   of   orientation?   What   kind   of   moral   order   should   Christians   follow   when   the   civil   marriage ceremony does not mean anything anymore? What good is your model? For   me,   it   is   not   about   creating   disorder.   I   am   also   not   saying   that   the   civil   marriage   ceremony   does   not   mean   anything   anymore. My   point   is   the   recognition   that   the   marriage   license   is   not   what   creates   a   marriage   before   God.   But   that   is   the   very   opinion   that has   become   stuck   in   many   people’s   minds.   I   prove   this   point   with   many   of   the   quotations   in   this   book.   The   three-step   model   is useful   because   in   our   churches,   we   can   stop   measuring   the   blessedness   of   a   relationship   with   whether   or   not   there   is   a   marriage license.   Cohabitation   or   living   together   has   a   very   negative   reputation   with   many   Christians.   The   typical   thinking   is:   Those   who   live together   without   a   marriage   license   are   not   serious   about   the   relationship!   And   it   leads   to   couples   who   want   to   live   in   a   committed relationship not being able to really be together if they do not have a marriage license yet. There   are   countless   examples   of   Christian   couples   who   were   cast   out   from   ministry   or   other   church   work   because   they   went   on vacation   with   each   other   before   their   civil   ceremony.   There   are   even   more   examples   of   Christian   couples   who   were   refused   a church   wedding   because   they   moved   in   together   before   the   civil   ceremony.   I   keep   on   hearing   that   pastors   expect   couples   who have   been   living   together   for   some   time   already   to   live   separately   for   a   while   before   they   can   get   married   in   a   church.   I   think something   like   that   is   incapacitation   and   blackmail!   On   the   one   hand,   we   want   to   have   mature   believers   who   should   be   able   to make their own decisions under the leading of the Holy Spirit. On   the   other   hand,   especially   we   pastors   take   on   the   position   of   a   moral   authority   that   resembles   that   of   earlier   centuries. Whoever   reads   this   book   with   an   open   mind   will   notice   that   it   is   not   about   disorder.   I   think   that   God’s   instructions   in   Gen.   2:24 offer   a   good   and   implementable   model   for   building   up   a   relationship.   Parents,   friends   and   the   church   could   accompany   couples through the individual phases of building a relationship according to this model. If   we   would   stop   believing   the   views   of   the   current   church   moral   standard,   then   we   could   start   talking   to   couples   at   a   much   earlier stage   about   sexuality   and   financial   security.   Right   now,   after   their   wedding,   many   couples   are   “thrown   into   the   deep   end”   as   far   as sex    is    concerned.    In    addition,    older    couples    are    pressured    into    getting    a    marriage    license,    which    often    causes    financial disadvantages   for   them.   A   lack   of   orientation   occurs   where   you   do   not   talk   about   things.   I   would   hope   that   churches   get   going   and start   rethinking   what   a   new   biblical   model   for   dating,   sexuality,   and   marriage   can   look   like   according   to   the   three   pillars   of   Gen. 2:24. Question   3:   You   say   that   sex   is   possible   before   the   civil   marriage   license.   Aren’t   you   luring   teenagers   to   premature sexuality this way? In   many   places   in   my   book,   I   have   stated   that   the   three-pillar   model   is   not   meant   for   teenagers.   God   says   in   Gen.   2:24   that   a marriage   is   built   up   in   his   sense   if   a   couple   have   separated   from   their   parents   and   have   taken   plenty   of   time   to   get   to   know   each other.   Both   is   generally   not   the   case   with   teenagers.   They   still   live   with   their   parents   and   fall   in   love   with   one   person   one   day   and with   another   the   next.   As   long   as   you   are   not   yet   independent   and   your   hormones   are   going   wild,   you   should   not   have   to   be thinking   about   marriage.   Obviously,   if   someone   wants   to   reduce   the   contents   of   this   book   down   to   merely   the   topic   of   freedom, then they would probably deduce that I am promoting free love for teenagers. That is absolutely not the case! In   my   book,   besides   freedom,   I   also   advocate   personal   responsibility.   This   means   that   parents   and   the   church   should   start   much earlier   than   the   time   of   puberty   to   teach   their   children   that   they   should   not   play   around   with   other   people’s   feelings.   According   to Gen.   2:24,   a   marriage   begins   when   two   partners   start   spending   time   exclusively   with   each   other.   The   current   church   moral standard   does   not   really   care   much   about   who   is   spending   time   with   whom   and   who   is   falling   in   love   with   whom.   They   only   start   to get   interested   and   try   to   control   things   when   a   couple   starts   being   in   a   firm,   committed   relationship.   In   my   model,   an   individual’s responsibility    begins    a    long    time    before    sexuality.    If    personal    responsibility    is    carried    out    regarding    the    building    up    of    the relationship   in   the   way   God   states   it   in   Gen.   2:24,   then   parents   and   churches   do   not   need   to   worry   later   on   when   the   couple   takes the step into sexuality. Question 4: Do you really claim in the book that a marriage is sealed by sexuality? No!   On   the   basis   of   Gen.   2:24   I   state   that   a   marriage   is   sealed   by   God   only   when   the   three   pillars   mentioned   in   the   verse   are present:   I   call   the   first   pillar   “Spending   time   with   each   other”.   The   second   pillar   is   called   “Sharing   your   hearts   with   each   other”.   And the   third   pillar   consists   of   sexual   intercourse.   The   sequence   in   this   verse   is   important   for   me,   despite   that   it   went   the   other   way around   in   earlier   times.   In   Old   Testament   times,   the   three   pillars   were   set   up   by   first   having   sex   with   each   other.   Only   then   could the   couple   spend   time   with   each   other   and   get   to   know   each   other.   I   consider   it   better   for   the   building   of   a   relationship   if   a   couple sticks   to   the   sequence   in   Gen.   2:24.   Only   after   you   have   separated   from   your   parents   and   only   after   you   have   taken   lots   of   time   to become one heart and one soul, only then should you take the step into sexuality. Many   critics   seem   to   understand   this   three-step   sequence   the   wrong   way.   Sexuality   is   obviously   at   the   end   of   the   sequence   in   Gen. 2:24.   A   marriage   is   not   completed   by   sexuality,   but   instead   it   is   completed   when   all   three   pillars   are   present   and   lived   out. Specifically,   a   couple   that   only   has   sex   but   otherwise   does   not   spend   any   time   with   each   other   and   is   not   in   a   unity   of   the   heart   is not   married   in   this   view.   Jesus   speaks   of   such   a   case   in   John   4:16-18.   Seen   in   a   modern   way,   a   marriage   certificate   would   not   make any   difference   whatsoever!      My   view   is   that   a   marriage   before   God   only   exists   when   ALL   THREE   pillars   of   a   marriage   exist.   Sexuality ALONE does not create a marriage! Question   5:   Why   do   you   work   with   such   clear   contrasts   in   the   book?   Aren’t   you   polarizing   the   argument   too   much   and creating unnecessary fronts between yourself and the representatives of the current church moral standard? It   is   not   my   intention   to   create   fronts   in   the   negative   sense.   But   it   is   a   fact   that   there   is   hardly   any   other   opinion   around   except   that of   the   current   church   moral   standard.   Fronts   only   exist   where   one   side   has   not   learned   to   deal   with   other   opinions   in   a   respectful way.   In   my   book,   I   am   trying   to   treat   the   representatives   of   the   current   church   moral   standard   respectfully.   I   cannot   say   that   this   is the case the other way around. Could   it   be   that   some   representatives   of   the   current   church   moral   standard   already   consider   it   as   an   attack   if   someone   questions their   point   of   view?   If   that   were   the   case,   then   the   problem   would   not   come   from   my   side!   I   have   never   had   a   problem   with   other opinions and am open to controversial exchanges. Question   6:   You   talk   a   lot   about   the   private   beginning   of   a   marriage.      But   what   role   does   God   play   in   a   partnership?   From which point onward does he bless a marriage? I   emphasize   the   private   beginning   of   a   marriage   to   show   that   for   several   thousand   years,   there   was   no   governmental   beginning   of a   marriage.   For   thousands   of   years,   marriage   was   always   agreed   upon   by   the   consent   of   two   persons   within   a   private   framework. During   the   time   when   the   New   Testament   was   being   written,   the   mutual   promise   of   marriage   was   even   valid   when   no-one   else except   the   two   partners   were   present.   I   contrast   this   with   the   present   form,   where   a   couple   today   must   still   say   “I   do”   to   each other.   But   a   marriage   is   only   valid   before   the   law   if   a   government   official   witnesses   and   certifies   this   promise   of   marriage.   That   is the key difference to all of the previous millennia. In   my   book,   I   advocate   that   a   marriage   before   God   does   not   take   place   simply   because   a   civil   servant   is   present.   God   blesses   a marriage   when   a   couple   builds   up   their   relationship   according   to   Gen.   2:24   and   asks   him   to   be   part   of   their   relationship.   This   step does   not   depend   on   the   civil   registry   office!   As   I   understand   it,   this   step   can   also   happen   when   no-one   else   is   present   except   the couple.   However,   that   does   not   mean   that   this   always   has   to   be   the   case!   The   couple   can   obviously   also   make   their   wedding   vows to   each   other   in   the   presence   of   their   families,   their   house   group   or   their   church.   What   I   find   important   is   that   it   is   clear   to   the reader that God’s blessing does not depend on the civil marriage license. Question   7:   The   book   deals   with   having   sex   before   having   a   marriage   license   and   the   question   of   when   a   marriage   begins. Yet   the   Bible   speaks   of   a   marriage   covenant   that   we   enter   into   with   and   through   God.   Aren’t   you   missing   out   on   this   topic in your book? In   the   Bible,   it   is   always   about   covenants   that   God   makes   with   persons   or   his   people.   A   covenant   means   a   kind   of   contract   where mutual   rights   and   obligations   are   discussed.   Some   of   the   Old   Testament   prophets   compare   the   covenant   between   God   and   Israel to   a   marriage.   When   doing   so,   they   refer   to   the   marriage   traditions   in   the   ancient   Orient,   where   a   marriage   was   arranged   by   the heads of the families. I write a lot about these arrangements in my book. However,   the   problem   is   that   the   marriage   covenant   is   considered   in   almost   a   sacramental   sense   in   many   Christian   circles.   It   is either   said   that   God   only   becomes   part   of   a   relationship   when   a   couple   has   had   a   civil   marriage,   or   else   people   claim   that   God   only becomes   part   of   a   relationship   when   a   couple   has   married   in   a   church.   In   my   book,   I   advocate   that   God   becomes   a   part   of   a relationship   when   the   couple   has   examined   on   the   basis   of   Gen.   2:24   if   it   wants   to   stay   together   bindingly   and   decides   to   live according   to   the   three   pillars   of   this   verse.   In   addition,   the   couple   can   certainly   also   get   married   in   a   civil   ceremony,   because   that provides   a   legal   security   for   themselves   as   well   as   when   children   are   born.   Naturally,   a   couple   can   also   have   a   church   wedding   if   it wishes to inform the general public. But God’s blessing does not depend on those steps, as I understand it. Question   8:   You   speak   a   lot   about   the   couple’s   own   personal   responsibility.   Doesn’t   this   place   an   “unbearable   burden”   on young people? How can teenagers already know if they will actually marry their childhood sweetheart? As   I   already   said,   I   am   not   aiming   this   book   at   teenagers.   In   order   to   live   out   the   three   pillars   according   to   Gen.   2:24,   you   need   a maturity   which   I   feel   is   not   present   yet   in   puberty   nor   in   many   young   people.   The   only   people   who   can   assume   personal responsibility   are   those   who   are   capable   of   doing   so   out   of   their   cognitive   ability.   This   means   that   just   as   I   do   not   give   a   teenager my   car   keys,   I   will   also   not   support   him   if   he   would   ask   me   if   he   can   have   sex   with   his   girlfriend.   The   problem   in   practice   is   that teenagers   don‘t   ask   about   such   issues.   Here,   it   is   about   the   question   of   what   kind   of   relationship   we   have   to   the   teenagers   who have been entrusted to us. I   describe   a   relationship   model   where   personal   responsibility   has   a   higher   priority   than   control,   that   is   correct.   But   I   cannot   accept the   responsibility   of   teaching   this   personal   responsibility   to   individual   teenagers   and   young   people.   I   am   convinced   that   the relationship   model   according   to   Gen.   2:24   works.   But   parents   and   churches   have   the   responsibility   of   teaching   their   children   long before puberty arrives that a marriage does not just start with the marriage license. I   do   not   wish   to   provoke   anyone   with   this   statement:   But   I   am   actually   of   the   opinion   that   it   is   not   my   book,   but   instead   the   current church   moral   opinion   that   is   placing   an   “unbearable   burden”   on   many   couples.      Mature   adults   are   being   dictated   and   couples   are forced into a standardized, moralistic behavior that lacks any logic and any biblical references. Question   9:   What   if   teenagers   or   young   people   have   had   sex   and   then   recognize   that   it   was   a   mistake?   Has   a   marriage already taken place with such a false step? Do youth leaders have to do a “divorce course” with such couples? As   I   have   already   stated   many   times,   I   do   not   think   that   a   marriage   before   God   takes   place   only   through   the   sexual   act!   Accordingly, in   my   view,   no   marriage   has   taken   place   when   teenagers   or   young   people   mistakenly   have   sex.   Obviously,   there   are   consequences when   two   people   sleep   with   each   other.   We   know   today   that   the   hormone   oxytocin   is   released   during   sexual   intercourse.   An oxytocin   burst   at   orgasm   causes   a   feeling   of   attachment   and   familiarity.   Sex   researchers   therefore   also   call   oxytocin   an   attachment hormone.   In   addition,   something   particular   happens   to   the   human   psyche   especially   during   intercourse.   Colloquially,   we   say   that you   never   forget   your   “first   time”.   Paul   is   presumably   writing   about   these   connections   in   1   Cor.   6:18,   where   he   says   that   a   sexual sin damages one’s own body. I   write   this   to   show   that   a   sexual   misstep   does   matter   to   some   degree.   But   from   God’s   perspective,   a   sexual   sin   is   not   heavier   than any   other   kind   of   sin!   The   letter   to   the   Romans   states   very   clearly   that   through   believing   in   Jesus   Christ,   the   punishment   for   every sin   in   our   life   has   been   removed.   So,   we   can   grant   full   grace   to   everyone   in   our   churches   if   such   a   sexual   misstep   happens.   You certainly   do   not   need   a   “divorce   course”   afterwards!   Instead,   I   would   advocate   encouraging   people   and   giving   them   hope.   The wonderful   thing   about   our   faith   is   that   God   can   “write   straight   on   crooked   lines”,   so   to   speak!   He   is   capable   of   making   the   best fertilizer   out   of   our   messes!   God   is   a   “God   of   a   second,   third   and   fourth   chance”!   Exactly   this   and   nothing   else   is   what   we   should pass on to our people. Question   10:   You   write   about   churches   possibly   considering   blessing   couples   without   a   marriage   license.   In   Switzerland,   it is forbidden to have a church wedding without a prior civil ceremony. Are you telling people to break the law? Because   I   live   in   Switzerland,   I   am   naturally   aware   that   in   this   country,   a   church   wedding   is   forbidden   if   there   has   not   been   a   civil ceremony   beforehand.   But   I   did   not   write   this   book   only   for   Swiss   people,   and   in   other   countries   this   law   does   not   exist. Furthermore,   Article   97,   para   3   of   the   Swiss   Civil   Code   does   not   prohibit   blessing   the   relationship   between   two   people.   The Protestant   state   churches   in   Switzerland   even   explicitly   offer   to   bless   couples   without   a   marriage   license.   This   particular   article   of Swiss   law   is   about   the   fact   that   in   Switzerland,   you   cannot   state   that   a   couple   is   MARRIED   or   has   the   civil   status   of   “married”   as   long as it does not have the civil marriage license! A   notary   for   family   law   recommended   that   I   use   alternative   formulations   for   couples   without   a   civil   marriage   license.   When blessing a couple who does not have a marriage license, you could say the following, for example: Dear   …   and   dear   …,   you   have   built   up   your   relationship   according   to   the   three   pillars   of   Gen.   2:24.   You   know   what   God   says   in   his Word   about   the   relationship   between   two   persons   and   you   have   confirmed   to   me   that   you   want   to   live   that   way.   That   is   why   I   wish to place your relationship under God’s blessing in the presence of the entire church community… I   would   hope   that   free   churches   stop   excluding   couples   without   marriage   licenses   from   blessing   ceremonies   and   instead   would   be prepared to seek flexible solutions.

Claim   1:   The   book   is   a   showdown   with   the   current   church   moral   standard   and   attacks   the   representatives   of   this   standard in an improper way! I   consider   the   words   “showdown”   and   “attack”   to   be   false   choices.   I   have   made   a   great   effort   to   present   the   opinion   of   the   current church   moral   standard   in   an   appreciative   way   and   to   treat   it   respectfully.   However,   if   representatives   of   the   current   church   moral standard   feel   they   are   being   attacked   because   I   question   their   opinion,   then   that   is   another   story.   Could   it   be   that   many   pastors   are not   used   to   having   their   opinion   questioned?   In   my   book,   I   work   on   the   assumption   that   every   human   insight   is   “only   in   part”   (1   Cor 13:9).   For   this   reason,   we   should   basically   be   open   to   having   ourselves   and   our   traditions   questioned.   Those   who   are   not   prepared to discuss their position may not be as certain about their standpoint as it may seem at first glance. Furthermore,   this   book   developed   over   a   period   of   almost   ten   years.   A   showdown   would   have   come   about   quickly   after   an   injury. But   the   thoughts   in   this   book   came   from   a   marriage   preparation   course   that   I   wrote   as   a   pastor   during   my   time   of   ministry   in Austria.    I    taught    the    three    pillars    of    marriage    for    many    years    in    different    house    groups    in    Switzerland.    Through    many conversations,   I   was   encouraged   to   publish   my   reflections   as   a   book.   Marriage   Li(e)cense   is   not   a   reckoning   of   some   kind,   but rather the result of many years of (Bible) study. Claim 2: The book belittles/puts down marriage, promotes selling out marriage and destroys the family! This   claim   makes   clear   what   the   thought   processes   are   within   the   current   church   moral   standard:   In   that   point   of   view,   marriage and   family   depend   on   the   civil   marriage   license.   I   consider   that   a   very   narrow   view.   The   divorce   rate   clearly   shows   that   the   marriage license   does   not   cause   a   marriage   to   remain   stable   nor   does   it   prevent   families   from   being   torn   apart.   Marriage   at   a   civil   registry office is a possibility to legally secure a marriage, but it is no guarantee that the marriage will last. If   someone   has   built   up   their   relationship   according   to   Gen.   2:24   and   tries   to   live   their   life   depending   on   God,   then   they   have   a good   chance   that   their   marriage   and   family   will   be   blessed.   But   this   blessing   certainly   does   not   depend   on   the   civil   marriage license.   In   the   end,   there   are   no   guarantees.   When   two   people   live   together,   situations   can   develop   during   the   course   of   time   that destroy   the   relationship,   no   matter   if   there   is   a   marriage   license   or   not.   In   my   book,   I   am   not   trying   to   belittle   marriage;   I   am   simply releasing the blessed relationship between two people from the marriage license. Claim   3:   The   book   urges   people   not   to   have   civil   marriages   anymore!   It   has   a   purely   individualistic   concept   and   ignores   the public importance of marriage for society! In   many   different   places   in   the   book,   I   state   that   the   civil   marriage   ceremony   provides   good   legal   coverage   for   a   marriage.   For   most young   couples,   the   civil   registry   office   provides   the   least   expensive   possibility   to   get   a   marriage   and   inheritance   contract.   That   is why   I   advise   most   couples   to   consider   the   civil   marriage   license   sooner   or   later.   Yet   there   are   situations   where   the   civil   registry office’s   standard   legal   package   is   not   the   best   option,   for   example,   when   there   are   children   or   assets   from   previous   partnerships. The   view   of   the   current   church   moral   standard   has   turned   the   marriage   license   into   something   that   it   is   not.   The   marriage   license   is not   God’s   measuring   rod   for   a   blessed   marriage!   The   marriage   license   is   a   governmental   marriage   and   inheritance   contract   that can   secure   a   relationship.   But,   just   like   I   examine   the   conditions   of   an   insurance   contract   before   I   sign   it,   a   Christian   couple   should be   allowed   to   examine   the   conditions   listed   in   a   marriage   and   inheritance   contract.   I   know   couples   who   for   rational   reasons   would never   have   chosen   the   civil   marriage   license   if   it   had   not   been   so   sacramentalized   in   our   Christian   circles.   There   is   no   reason coming from the Bible to prefer a civil marriage over a notarized inheritance contract or cohabitation contract. A   far   as   the   public   aspect   goes,   I   have   written   a   number   of   things   on   the   subject.   The   marriage   license   can   be   a   very   anonymous matter.   The   general   public   only   gets   to   know   something   about   a   relationship   if   the   couple      makes   its   relationship   public   and   lives   it out   publicly.   However,   this   step   into   the   public   sphere   is   not   dependent   on   the   marriage   license.   Anyone   in   a   life   partnership   can have   their   relationship   blessed   by   the   church   community   and   then   go   celebrate   it   afterwards   with   family   and   friends.   Pictures   and posts in social media show very clearly if someone is living in a steady partnership or not. Claim 4: The book is catastrophic for counseling! It is a danger for young Christians! I   know   of   Christians   who   found   out   at   some   point   that   according   to   their   parent’s   wedding   date,   they   had   been   born   far   too   early.   It was   a   shock   to   learn   that   their   own   parents   had   apparently   had   sex   before   getting   a   marriage   license,   even   though   they   had   raised their   children   according   to   the   current   church   moral   standard.   Another   reply   was   particularly   shocking   to   me.   A   medical   care professional   wrote   to   me   that   she   often   experienced   girls   from   free   churches   who   had   abortions.   Is   it   really   easier   in   some   circles to kill a baby instead of confessing that you had sex before having a marriage license? I   repeatedly   hear   that   couples   get   summoned   before   their   pastor   because   they   went   on   vacation   together   before   marriage.   Other couples   are   denied   a   church   wedding   because   they   already   moved   in   together   before   their   civil   marriage   ceremony.   Many   pastors demand   that   such   couples   live   apart   for   several   months   before   a   church   wedding   is   possible.   All   of   this   is   what   I   consider   to   be   a counseling   catastrophe!   I   cannot   explain   why   so   many   Christians   think   that   the   current   church   moral   standard   with   its   fixation   on the marriage license is the better counseling alternative. There   will   always   be   people   who   overstep   their   limits   and   do   things   they   later   regret.   That   is   no   different   with   the   current   church moral   standard   than   with   the   model   I   propose   in   this   book.   Counseling   and   guidance   support   will   always   be   needed.   The   question is: Which model is more logical, livable, and biblical? For me personally, the answer is the model with three pillars from Gen. 2:24! Claim 5: The book represents a humanistic approach! Humanism   is   the   term   used   to   describe   a   way   of   thinking   with   which   you   trust   people   to   be   able   to   make   decisions   for   their   own good   and   in   their   own   personal   responsibility.   For   some   Christians,   humanism   is   a   sensitive   term,   because   some   well-known Humanists   were   atheists   who   denied   humans’   sinfulness.   Nevertheless,   many   concepts   that   came   from   Humanism   are   good concepts.   Our   modern   understanding   of   freedom,   our   educational   and   social   systems   would   look   completely   different   if   there   had been   no   Enlightenment   nor   the   many   streams   of   Humanism.   In   my   book,   I   advocate   that   couples   should   themselves   responsibly decide   about   how   they   want   to   build   up   and   live   out   their   relationship.   I   believe   I   see   from   the   Bible   that   God   gave   us   this   freedom. In   this   sense,   I   actually   do   represent   a   humanistic   concept!   But   because   I   also   assume   that   every   person   is   a   sinner,   I   also   believe that   a   relationship   will   best   succeed   if   it   is   led   by   God.   Perhaps   it   would   then   be   better   to   say   that   I   represent   a   Christian-humanistic concept in my book. Claim 6: The book is not suited for unchurched people! That is right! The book deals with a question that generally does not interest people outside of our churches. Claim 7: The book despiritualizes marriage because it does not promote church weddings! Actually,   my   book   hardly   deals   with   church   weddings.   I   only   discuss   this   point   in   relation   to   the   principle   of   public   knowledge   of   the event.   The   reason   for   this   is   that   the   fewest   representatives   of   the   current   church   moral   standard   write   in   their   publications   that   a marriage   blessed   by   God   begins   with   the   church   marriage   ceremony.   As   a   rule,   the   current   church   moral   standard   assumes   that   a blessed   marriage   begins   at   the   civil   registry   office!   I   personally   think   that   a   marriage   blessed   by   God   begins   NEITHER   at   the   civil registry   office   NOR   in   the   church.   I   advocate   that   a   marriage   blessed   by   God   begins   when   a   couple   agrees   that   they   want   to   live   out all three pillars according to Gen. 2:24 together. Afterwards,   a   couple   should   then   decide   on   how   they   want   to   secure   their   relationship   (security   principle).   In   addition,   a   couple should   discuss   how   it   wants   to   live   its   relationship   publicly   (publicity   principle).   I   consciously   write   about   these   principles   rationally. From   the   Bible’s   side,   there   is   no   reason   to   spiritualize   the   principles   of   security   and   publicity.   The   spiritualized   view   of   marriage only   began   with   the   creation   of   the   marriage   sacrament   in   the   Middle   Ages.   We   should   determine   how   far   we   want   to   let   ourselves be   influenced   by   this   Catholic   hallmark.   Martin   Luther’s   view   is   far   more   insightful   to   me   personally.   He   calls   marriage   “a   worldly thing”,   in   a   conscious   step   against   the   sacrament   of   marriage.   For   Luther,   marriage   was   no   spiritual   matter,   but   a   thing   of   this world, that you can speak of and reflect on soberly and objectively. Claim 8: The book ignores that God institutes marriages and brings two people together! I   actually   do   not   write   very   much   in   my   book   about   how   two   people   can   find   each   other.   This   is   primarily   because   this   book   is   not about that question! Claim 9: The book contains errors and heresies! Of   course,   it   is   always   possible   that   mistakes   can   happen   or   that   certain   findings   must   be   revised.   The   main   argument   in   my   book should hold true. I spent many years thinking about my theses, I read and researched a lot and also tested it all before God. Claim 10: The Bible passages in the book are interpreted one-sidedly, only in the sense of the author! I   am   of   the   opinion   that   the   Bible   does   not   offer   much   support   for   the   views   of   the   current   church   moral   standard.   That   is   what   I want   to   show   in   the   book   Marriage   Li(e)cense?.   Many   representatives   of   the   current   church   moral   standard   see   that   differently,   of course.    They    interpret    the    same    Bible    passages    according    to    their    own    viewpoint.    Every    reader    has    their    own    personal responsibility to test the different views and to form their own personal opinion.