Open Letter to the Writers and Signers of the Nashville Statement.

Dear Writers and Signers of the Nashville Statement,

I write this in the love of the Lord Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit with the intention to exhort and rebuke those who would redefine the holy institution of marriage so that they would come to repentance. It is my prayer that the Holy Spirit would guide your hearts and mind to the truth of Christ and that you would consider the concerns of those who defend the truth of marriage as a representation of the Gospel.

I have read the articles of the Nashville Statement in their entirety and I was nodding my head in approval to nearly everything you wrote in the Preamble. There is no doubt that this statement was intended to clarify the position of Evangelical Christians on the definition of marriage as one man and one woman for life to an ever-changing culture of increased sexual perversion. I was entirely convinced that the last paragraph in the Preamble was necessary in expressing such a noble statement of sexual ethics.

“We believe that God’s design for his creation and his way of salvation serve to bring him the greatest glory and bring us the greatest good. God’s good plan provides us with the greatest freedom. Jesus said he came that we might have life and have it in overflowing measure. He is for us and not against us. Therefore, in the hope of serving Christ’s church and witnessing publicly to the good purposes of God for human sexuality revealed in Christian Scripture, we offer the following affirmations and denials.”

The problem all believers should have with the Nashville Statement leans more in what Evangelicals REALLY believe about marriage and the underlying hypocrisy surrounding this manifesto. It is my hope that those who read this letter would understand the eternal consequences surrounding those who redefine marriage. It is also my hope that the Holy Spirit will quicken the spirit of those who may or may not have realized the error of their ways so that they would come to repentance and receive the abundant grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The first article deals with the simplistic message that God has defined marriage from the beginning. The Lord Jesus Christ makes special notes of this (Mt 19:4-6; Mk 10:6-9) to a group of people (The Pharisees) who believed there was certain loopholes which offered a husband to divorce his wife.

WE AFFIRM that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant love between Christ and his bride the church.

WE DENY that God has designed marriage to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous relationship. We also deny that marriage is a mere human contract rather than a covenant made before God.

My question is that if you truly believe that the first article magnifies God’s design for mankind than why is there not an article which condemns divorce and remarriage?

Or, why not state in the first article that there are loopholes in certain instances which make marriage a contract?... But that would deny that marriage is a covenant would it not?

If it was necessary to express the truth of sexual ethics and define marriage according to God’s design, why not tell the whole truth? It makes no sense to this reader to accept the statement if it does not include an article that terminates the thought that a one-flesh covenant marriage can end in any other way than death. This Nashville Statement (NS) also makes me see why many unbelievers reject this offering since it reeks of hypocrisy. But I already know the answer some of you will give to me…

You will quickly point to the articles of divorce and remarriage in the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCOF) rather than point to what the early church, or even so, what the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul wrote about marriage. If there are loopholes as you believe, why were they not presented in the Nashville Statement? It makes no sense to write the first article without expressing the terms of where divorce and remarriage came to be. If marriage is a covenant as you say that God says that it is, then why not include the WCOF’s “exception clause” (Mt 19:9) and the Pauline Privilege (1 Cor 7:15) in this statement?Or is it simply because nearly every Evangelical has long since capitulated on marriage since it is common place to divorce and remarry for any reason?

Then there is article 10…

WE AFFIRM that it is sinful to approve of homosexual immorality or transgenderism and that such approval constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness.

WE DENY that the approval of homosexual immorality or transgenderism is a matter of moral indifference about which otherwise faithful Christians should agree to disagree.

Is it sinful to approve of divorce and remarriage to the point it constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness? If there are loopholes to divorce and remarry, how do you explain this with the language offered in the NS? The Lord and Paul make it quite clear that all remarriages after a divorce are adulterous unions (Mt 5:32, 19:9; Mk 10:11,12; Luke 16:18; Ro 7:2,3) and NOT marriages in the Lord (1 Cor 7:39). Paul makes it quite clear on the commands that he received from the Lord, that a husband is never to divorce his wife, and a wife, if divorced, is to remain unmarried or reconcile to the husband…. reconcile to the husband, (1 Cor 7:10,11) not "ex-husband"...her HUSBAND.

Perhaps the greatest threat to marriage is the contradictory words of the WCOF and this new rendition “marriage redefinition” to article 14 of the NS itself. If “the Lord’s arm is not too short to save and that any sinner is beyond his reach”, how than are there loopholes to divorce and remarry?

WE AFFIRM that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners and that through Christ’s death and resurrection forgiveness of sins and eternal life are available to every person who repents of sin and trusts in Christ alone as Savior, Lord, and supreme treasure.

WE DENY that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach.

The WCOF speaks to the contrary…You know the article on the WCOF’s about marriage and divorce…these articles are your treasure in what you REALLY teach about marriage….in particular the last sentence.

WCOF on marriage and divorce article IV- Adultery or fornication, committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract. In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce, and after the divorce to marry another, as if the offending party were dead.

WE DENY that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach.

Does this exclude the sinner within a one-flesh covenant marriage? YOU MUST ANSWER THIS QUESTION!

If both the Lord and Paul calls all marriages one man and one woman for life, why would the Lord allow “loopholes” if you deny that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach? The law of marriage is one man and one woman for life…you state this in the first article of this Nashville Statement…yet the WCOF says it is lawful for the innocent part to sue out a divorce, and after the divorce to marry another…as if the offending party were dead…What do the last sentence in the Westminster Confession of Faith’s article IV. on marriage and divorce…”as if the offending party were dead”…and …The last sentence in the last article of the Nashville Statement …” WE DENY that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach” ,have in common?

Perhaps there is the power of the Gospel in what the Lord and Paul teach about marriage. Perhaps the grace of God is required of the “innocent” party to remain under the provision and power of the Lord in obedience to His commands since it can be determined (And has been determined by those marriages which have survived EVEN after adulterous affairs) that the Lord’s arm is NEVER too short to save AND that any sinner is NEVER beyond His reach.”

The Gospel is at stake in this Nashville Statement just as marriage is at stake. If the homosexual or transgender experience the saving power of the Lord Jesus Christ, he or she will never remain in their sins. They will know that marriage is one man and one woman for life as they will know this since they have the mind of Christ. So too do those who have vowed in one-flesh covenant marriage.

You cannot simply write another manifesto on marriage and sign it without ever repenting of what you believe about divorce and remarriage. It is hypocrisy! This NS has no power coming from men and woman who believe civil paperwork and hollow “remarriage” vows suddenly make “adultery” a marriage in the LORD. In fact, the only people permitted to sign this statement are the men and women who remain in their vows of covenant even after men and women like you “remarried” their covenant spouses to another.

I am somehow convinced that this new statement, not unlike the Manhattan Declaration, is an attempt to stem the tide of the coming persecution to religious liberty…rather to the persecution of Christianity. We do not wrestle with flesh and blood…The problem is that this statement totally considers that divorce and remarriage are already compromised within the Christian circles and it would make no sense to add to these articles on what John the Baptist died for. It would seem to me that this is an article to those who fit the description of Sodom and Gomorrah rather than to those who have long since compromised to the leaven of Herod.

I personally cannot sign this hypocritical statement since most of the initial signers have not fully repented of what they believe about divorce and remarriage. Besides, the Bible clearly declares that marriage is a representation of the Gospel (Eph 5:31,32) and WCOFs and Nashville Statements are unnecessary. If there were any necessary additions to align this NS to the Bible, I and others who hold true to the teachings of our Lord on marriage would have added to the 10th article after the words “WE AFFIRM that it is sinful to approve” the words “remarriage adultery” and would be worthy of the signatures to express the true definition of marriage as one man and one woman for life. No excuses, no exceptions.

It is my belief that many of the signers of this statement paper have done more to redefine marriage from article one than they will ever care to admit. Thus, it is my purpose as a blood-bought believer to defend the truth of marriage against those who have long since redefined marriage. It is also my responsibility to rebuke and exhort those who call themselves believers of the Lord and deny His true definition of marriage.

In conclusion, your only real choice is to repent on what you believe about divorce and remarriage, and make amends to this NS, or any future marriage manifestos that divorce and remarriage no longer have any bearing on one-flesh covenant marriage… as defined from the beginning (Gen 2:24; Mt 19:4-6; Mk 10:6-9). This requires a humble and contrite heart as well as a renewed commitment to right the wrongs of every single “remarriage” you performed. It also requires a renewed effort to teach and preach that marriage is, and will always be, one man and one woman for life…this side of the Lord’s coming. Then, and only then, will you have the power of the Holy Spirit behind your signatures.

May these words condition the heart for an abounding love of Christ and a life filled with the fire of the Holy Spirit…for presenting the power of Gospel and in witnessing to the world the love of Christ through the committed love of a husband for his wife… as Christ loves His bride….one man and one woman…till death do we part.

I AFFIRM that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners and that through Christ’s death and resurrection forgiveness of sins and eternal life are available to every person who repents of sin and trusts in Christ alone as Savior, Lord, and supreme treasure.

In Christ’s love,

Neil Novotnak