|
Post by Naama on Sept 26, 2022 13:11:07 GMT
I don't support nazis so the "for example" was an example of the worst case scenario in context to you saying I don't think pagans can do moral good.
You keep putting words in my mouth.
Make no mistake I am saying marriage does not exist right now and the church, state and parents are too blame.
I can prove it. This entire thread proves it.
|
|
|
Post by Naama on Sept 26, 2022 14:15:39 GMT
You equate marriage with cohabitation even though they are polar opposites of each other.
Cohabitation is a relationship where two people love and accept each other as persons instead of a man and a woman.
This is the entire basis of gender as opposed to sex.
The reactions on this thread are the result of years of education and indoctrination that marriage not only leads to abuse but is abusive in itself.
The Duluth power and control wheel mixes in cases of abuse with marriage and became law.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Sept 27, 2022 21:00:50 GMT
I don't support nazis so the "for example" was an example of the worst case scenario in context to you saying I don't think pagans can do moral good. You keep putting words in my mouth. Make no mistake I am saying marriage does not exist right now and the church, state and parents are too blame. I can prove it. This entire thread proves it. That's okay. I think I understand where you're coming from. We live in a corrupt society, almost anywhere we live in the world. Institutions made by God are not being honored. It's the spirit of Antichrist.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Sept 27, 2022 21:05:49 GMT
You equate marriage with cohabitation even though they are polar opposites of each other. Cohabitation is a relationship where two people love and accept each other as persons instead of a man and a woman. This is the entire basis of gender as opposed to sex. The reactions on this thread are the result of years of education and indoctrination that marriage not only leads to abuse but is abusive in itself. The Duluth power and control wheel mixes in cases of abuse with marriage and became law. I'm not sure what Duluth has to do with it? Regardless, I'm old enough to have lived in a time when homosexuality was frowned upon and ignored, when it had no so-called "rights," when it was illegal in many places. I also was raised in a time where cohabitation was "fornication," clear and simple. But yes, as society changes, and many people live in a relationship just like marriage without the papers, I have to accept not that it's necessarily the right way to do it, but that it's a form of marriage for the couple. They truly commit themselves to one another, whether or not it's "before God." And I believe it's the commitment that God holds them responsible for, in exactly the same way married couples are held responsible in matters of fidelity, service, and love. But why tie the forum up over a single issue? We've stated our viewpoints. Perhaps my view is for you a cardinal sin? I can't do anything about that. I'm speaking my God-given conscience. Have a nice day!
|
|
|
Post by princess on Sept 29, 2022 16:07:29 GMT
Randy,
Of course you lived in a time when homosexuality was frowned upon and cohabitation was considered fornication but what was spoken was also counterintuitive to what people actually believed and practiced.
Justice Kennedy made this point abundantly clear when he penned down the majority decision to legalize same sex marriage. Justice Kennedy listed each piece of coverture that was struck down and removed from law starting in the late 1800's and replaced with cohabitation.
You can change Randy.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Sept 29, 2022 16:23:21 GMT
Randy, Of course you lived in a time when homosexuality was frowned upon and cohabitation was considered fornication but what was spoken was also counterintuitive to what people actually believed and practiced. Justice Kennedy made this point abundantly clear when he penned down the majority decision to legalize same sex marriage. Justice Kennedy listed each piece of coverture that was struck down and removed from law starting in the late 1800's and replaced with cohabitation. Yes, I grew up in a time when there was a so-called "generation gap," in which the young people rebelled against the authority of a conservative state and their supposedly-conservative parents. My brother was forcibly drafted into the military during the Vietnam War in a time when 18 year olds did not even have the right to vote! So yes, there was obvious hypocrisy. But at least they had the dignity to hold on to an appearance of righteousness. We used to say that the law-makers who opposed the use of marijuana were at the same time all in favor of medical opiates. And parents who angrily disallowed their children to drink alcohol were at the same time using it themselves, and had lots of drugs in their medicine cabinets. But I, living at the time when homosexuality was proscribed, completely agreed with social opposition to homosexuality, and even more to homosexual marriage. But when the cat is out of the bag, and your favorite movie actor or sports figure is gay, there is going to be flow downhill towards widespread immorality. At the same time, God continues to judge people not by their own social standards, but by their conscience. And He convicts them by His own law, which requires that people keep their commitments, and be faithful to those they choose to live with and be intimate with.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 5, 2022 16:09:32 GMT
Can you explain what people commit themselves to in sexual sin? Can you supply the verses that say God's law allows for sexual sin so long as people are faithful and committed?
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 5, 2022 19:56:11 GMT
Can you explain what people commit themselves to in sexual sin? Can you supply the verses that say God's law allows for sexual sin so long as people are faithful and committed? What I've seen is that people cohabit for one of two reasons--they are either using someone like a prostitute, or they are playing a game with commitment. God's Law would say, I believe, that engaging someone intimately is in itself an act of commitment, unless it is a sinful act of prostitution. What makes prostitution sinful is the very fact it is intimacy without commitment. But many people indicate that they are not "using someone," but actually making some sort of commitment to their partner. When that is a half-hearted commitment, it becomes in the end a broken pledge. And God will hold them accountable. Many relationships have gone through this mess, not taking seriously what their conscience is saying. They may be somewhat ignorant of God's Law, but there is a voice in their heart telling them that they should not be abusing another and making false impressions. People do not, I think, consciously commit themselves to "sexual sin." They normally deny it is "that bad," or sear their conscience, telling themselves, "It's harmless." But there is always a victim in a failed relationship, assuming that a relationship really happened.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 6, 2022 15:52:06 GMT
Hi Randy,
I hate to tell you this but you never explained what people "commit" to in sexual sin nor did you give any verses supporting God supporting committed sexual sin.
Let me give you a hint: The entire basis of sexual sin is the outright rejection of God creating of women as man's helpers. Satan cannot create so he has to distort reality. Let me give you another hint: You are never going to be able to define "helper" or "marriage" from your feelings, imagination or your soul. Try looking in the mirror at yourself and then your sweetheart.
This is what is confusing you.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 6, 2022 19:39:15 GMT
Hi Randy, I hate to tell you this but you never explained what people "commit" to in sexual sin nor did you give any verses supporting God supporting committed sexual sin. Let me give you a hint: The entire basis of sexual sin is the outright rejection of God creating of women as man's helpers. Satan cannot create so he has to distort reality. Let me give you another hint: You are never going to be able to define "helper" or "marriage" from your feelings, imagination or your soul. Try looking in the mirror at yourself and then your sweetheart. This is what is confusing you. I'm not confused, but I've told you all I need to say on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 7, 2022 14:04:54 GMT
Like I said before Randy you already made your decision.
Same sex marriage should have exposed the self righteous hypocrisy and led to repentance but it hardened peoples hearts and caused people double down in fantasy land!
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 7, 2022 21:16:40 GMT
Like I said before Randy you already made your decision. Same sex marriage should have exposed the self righteous hypocrisy and led to repentance but it hardened peoples hearts and caused people double down in fantasy land! I'll let God judge whose hearts are hardened and who is being "hypocritical." Christians should be able to find unity in Christ--not just in all doctrinal matters, but in the true spirit of Christ. There are some essential doctrines that safeguard our remaining in the right Christ and in the right spirit. Judging people on the matters we are discussing is not one of those fundamental issues, in my opinion. I don't know why you link "my decision" with "same sex marriage?" I do not in the least condone same sex marriage, nor do I condone fornication, which is just another form of prostitution. I believe that whether in the Church or in the world God applies the same standards, although He takes into consideration the fact the world doesn't have the full knowledge of God. So I believe that when people cohabit without legal papers, God views it as it was in pristine times--a marriage is a commitment between a couple of opposite genders who are intimate with one another and who may wish to have children. The fact the world doesn't do this for religious reasons does not help them when God is speaking to their conscience, informing them that they either are faithful with their partners or they are guilty of failing in this commitment. Please don't obscure what I believe with incomplete statements about what I believe? I don't want to give others a false impression about what I believe. There are many who read and yet don't sign up for membership, or who will, in the future, read this. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 10, 2022 17:41:07 GMT
God gave people the ability to make judgement calls and if you disagree then please explain why Jesus Christ instructed his disciples to shake the dust off their sandals and move on if people refused to hear.
How can I misrepresent the words you write? Are these your words or mine? Can you honestly look in the mirror and come back to the keyboard and tell me you are doing a superb job defining marriage from non marriage? I am not shocked that you cannot define marriage or even distinguish it from living in sin since marriage was destroyed and replaced with cohabitation. The replacement of marriage for opposite sex cohabitation is what allowed for same sex cohabitation.
This is not your fault.
OK. Since you are a marriage expert then you should be able to easily explain why virginity has meaning and importance in marriage but has no meaning or importance in cohabitation/sexual sin. Hint: the answer is as simple as looking in the mirror since virginity attaches to the main component of male/female sexuality (the one denied in sexual sin)
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 11, 2022 4:36:16 GMT
God gave people the ability to make judgement calls and if you disagree then please explain why Jesus Christ instructed his disciples to shake the dust off their sandals and move on if people refused to hear. How can I misrepresent the words you write? Are these your words or mine? Can you honestly look in the mirror and come back to the keyboard and tell me you are doing a superb job defining marriage from non marriage? I am not shocked that you cannot define marriage or even distinguish it from living in sin since marriage was destroyed and replaced with cohabitation. The replacement of marriage for opposite sex cohabitation is what allowed for same sex cohabitation. This is not your fault. OK. Since you are a marriage expert then you should be able to easily explain why virginity has meaning and importance in marriage but has no meaning or importance in cohabitation/sexual sin. Hint: the answer is as simple as looking in the mirror since virginity attaches to the main component of male/female sexuality (the one denied in sexual sin) I've long defined marriage as a vow assumed between two people of opposite genders who wish to cohabit and live intimately as one. This doesn't make me an expert. This is simply how all marriages are defined, as a promise a couple make to one another. The confusion comes when this promise is implied rather than explicitly stated. Legal marriages attempt to remove the ambiguity from what the couple are promising one another, which makes breach of contract easier to sue over. Virginity is an assurance in a young couple that each partner's intimacy belongs to their marriage alone, which brings trust. But when a person's marriage partner dies, and he or she remarries, virginity obviously has no importance.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 12, 2022 15:14:16 GMT
Hi Randy,
We discussed "gender" as opposed to "sex" but you denied the difference and chose to embrace gender. You see, gender is a modern construct that soothes the cognitive dissonance associated with the body denial of sexual sin. Both pit the body against the mind/soul. Gender is a construct that accommodates the meaning of the body being a construct in sexual sin.
On the other hand "sex" is defined by objective reality and the basis of reality is defined by the concrete meaning of the body. This is not something we get to freely choose but is imposed by God.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 12, 2022 20:41:09 GMT
Hi Randy, We discussed "gender" as opposed to "sex" but you denied the difference and chose to embrace gender. You see, gender is a modern construct that soothes the cognitive dissonance associated with the body denial of sexual sin. Both pit the body against the mind/soul. Gender is a construct that accommodates the meaning of the body being a construct in sexual sin. On the other hand "sex" is defined by objective reality and the basis of reality is defined by the concrete meaning of the body. This is not something we get to freely choose but is imposed by God. You're losing me because the categories you use to discuss this seem unnecessarily confusing to me. There is nothing difficult about this subject for me. But each time I make a point you seem to want to increase the complexity of the argument. Sorry, we can agree on what the Bible teaches about marriage and sexuality. When people commit themselves to each other in marriage, they are bound for life. And this marriage must be based on a single religious standard in order to maintain fidelity to God. Gay marriage is disallowed. Marriage to pagan partners is disallowed. The male is to assume the position of "head" in the marriage. But he is also to be servant to his wife, being willing to die for her. They co-rule over the children until they are of age to have their own families.
|
|
|
Post by Naama on Oct 12, 2022 22:16:19 GMT
Sorry for going one step too far!
We both mutually agree on the basic principle that marriage is between a man and a woman but we are going to divide quickly over what it means to be a man and a woman.
The west signed its own death warrant once the church opened its doors to female pastors and employed married women which signaled a false spirituality replaced a true relationship with God.
Lights out!
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 13, 2022 4:10:49 GMT
Sorry for going one step too far! We both mutually agree on the basic principle that marriage is between a man and a woman but we are going to divide quickly over what it means to be a man and a woman. The west signed its own death warrant once the church opened its doors to female pastors and employed married women which signaled a false spirituality replaced a true relationship with God. Lights out! I took such a position many, many years ago, and it landed me in hot water with some women who thought I was chauvinistic. I had to re-think my position, particularly since I've come to admire some very spiritual women who have come to influence me. I liked Kathryn Kuhlman, Jessie pen Lewis, and a couple of local women who were outstanding teachers of the word of God. Also, Maureen Gaglardi of Canada, I believe, wrote some books of great influence in my life. These women ministered from the pulpit, and the Church would've suffered great loss had they opposed them. Perhaps God required them to submit to male board members or male pastors in order to minister as they did? Maybe God only required them to maintain a humble attitude of submissiveness, due to their vulnerability to Satan? I'll let God be the judge, because they certainly were blessed of God!
|
|
|
Post by princess on Oct 13, 2022 15:32:29 GMT
We can generically agree that marriage is between a man and a woman but you are going to get angry and frustrated with what it means to be a man or a woman. Once again you falsely assume marriage is valid.
A married woman is under the direct authority of her husband and to "submit" to the authority of a board of men would completely insult her husband and ultimately the source of his authority which is Jesus Christ.
Men and woman are equally intelligent so our vulnerability is not about smartness but due to our desire to submit. If I was not led and guided by a strong confident and assertive man then I probably would join you because your view is the dominant view right now.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 13, 2022 23:11:03 GMT
We can generically agree that marriage is between a man and a woman but you are going to get angry and frustrated with what it means to be a man or a woman. Once again you falsely assume marriage is valid. A married woman is under the direct authority of her husband and to "submit" to the authority of a board of men would completely insult her husband and ultimately the source of his authority which is Jesus Christ. Men and woman are equally intelligent so our vulnerability is not about smartness but due to our desire to submit. If I was not led and guided by a strong confident and assertive man then I probably would join you because your view is the dominant view right now. Many years ago I was taught in Bible School through books like Larry Christenson's "The Christian Family." At that time, Christian teachers, like Bill Gothard, attempted to create a hierarchy in families and in churches. A group of teachers I had been learning from suddenly parted ways with each other over the "Shepherding" controversy. The sad thing is that many of these man-made systems, supposedly based on biblical principles, didn't function in a spiritual way. Too much assumption is built into them. Paul drew his principle of female submission from the Bible--not on supposedly "biblical principles." So it really isn't a matter of human manipulation. To deny the inherent weakness in women towards deception is risking real dangers. And for a man to deny his inherent weakness towards women is also risking real dangers. I think it wise for women, who are indeed as intelligent as men, to remain in submission to men up to a point. Men are fallible, and women can't put their trust in man, but only have an attitude of submission. If a woman isn't married, she's going to have to find a male member of the board or pastor, or even a male friend who is reliable. Men need to get married and stick with their wives. And they need to serve their wives, because what men can't see their wives do see. I have no problem understanding gender differences. But at least we agree that marriage is a complete commitment to the chosen spouse, ending only at death or if one turns pagan. We are not to be married to pagans unless they show an interest in converting.
|
|