View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently April 18th, 2014, 8:34 pm



Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
 DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means 
Author Message
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Sorry Wags, I just stopped in to see what was the latest and totally missed your chart on Biblical marriage and the question that followed.

In response to the chart, moreso than the question, I'd like to say that you need to take into context: That every Scriptural reference you used was OLD TESTAMENT, or known as the time of the Law. When Jesus arrived on the scene, He came to fulfill the law at every aspect, as it states in Scripture. The time since His birth, and death have become known as the Church age, in which the Gentiles have been grafted into the Jewish line. The Church age is just about through, and I'm sure that will bring about much celebration, well for a moment anyway, but then the Time of Judgment will begin, and that's when things get nasty.

The Apostle Paul did extensive teaching on many subjects about this, that pertain to today. I'm not exactly sure when the process or acceptance of multi-wives came in, but I have to ask the question if it was culturally acceptable because of survivability post birth and things like that. I'm not sure, and quite frankly like I've said in the Christian thread, I don't really wish to argue the past, when it's the present and on into the future that's the most important relationship wise.

So I hope that helps you a little bit, in that using OT Scripture as a basis for your stance isn't entirely accurate because it's been over ruled, and fulfilled by Jesus, because man could not meet the requirements of the law, and so was therefore having to pay the penalty for falling short. When Jesus came and fulfilled the penalty requirement for the laws that were broken, then for those who chose to accept His offering were welcomed into a relationship with our Heavenly Father through the blood sacrifice of Jesus. This brings in the sacrifice requirements the Jews did as a practice even through Jesus' time. That's why He bears one of many titles, this one being "Lamb of God" and no not the band either.

Have a good day, and let me know if you have another question, or if you'd like to PM so that it doesn't derail this thread.
Thanks for the response. With respect, it appears as though you may have helped to define or clarify what a 'Christian' marriage is, however that's not what was asked. AFAIK the term 'Biblical' refers to the entire Bible. If this is indeed true, then please (anyone) advise which 'Biblical marriage' shown above is accurate / correct / accepted. Unless of course you're stating that the Old Testament should be ignored....

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


July 11th, 2013, 4:34 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
TheRealWags wrote:
TruckinMack wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
Gotta love Cracked's take on it:
Cracked wrote:
A 30-Second Guide to How the Gay Marriage Ruling Affects You
By:David Wong 06-26-2013
Blah Blah Blah

Thanks for the facile information. It is what I expect of Liberal discourse.
Not familiar with Cracked or Mad Magazine? Alfred E Neuman ring a bell?
TruckinMack wrote:
I'm a business owner. What are MY options?
If you're in a state that does not recognize Gay marriage, then you carry on as before. If you're in a state that does recognize it, wait for the Feds to complete their updates / research, etc
TruckinMack wrote:
I'm a parent who wants his kids to be taught intelligently, not pop culturally.
You're the parent, teach your children as you wish
TruckinMack wrote:
To say these decisions don't affect us is horse crap. Before Wednesday, before the SCOTUS overruled Congress, what Gays did on their own time did not affect us. Not they officially, legally affect us. I am a bit surprised that no one is irritated that the President and the SCOTUS have taken over the role of Congress and of the American voter.
How exactly does this affect you? Please, lay it out.
*crickets*

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


July 11th, 2013, 4:34 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Offense
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3012
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Wags,

To answer your question I have to be honest because I'm struggling with the choices. In looking at your chart, the nuclear family is the best option, and it does negate the others. However, here is why!

In Genesis, God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve, and Evelyn, and Martha and so on. He created a pair of procreation able people and told them to go and populate. There are some lines of thought out there that Adam and Eve were not the ONLY humans on Earth at that time, but I don't subscribe to that thinking....

Much of what you are asking is in regard to customs that came later, arranged marriages, and so on, and these are the things of MAN, not statues of God. In knowing the Bible, you will come to understand that Ephesians 5:22 calls women to willingly submit themselves to their husbands leadership, not as slaves, or subjects, but as willing partners. Likewise, God instructs MEN to love their wives as Christ loved the church (His bride) even unto death, death to himself. So in translation, that means that a husband surrenders his wants and needs for the good of his family, so that the family will flourish. BUT, in a selfish society such as our, we all live for self in some way, and the family no longer flourishes. We are each after our own way, and children are just a by product of the sex we crave. They are no longer seen as a gift, unless you are one of those families who've had difficulty in having children and then you see the children you have as a gift. Whether they be adopted, or medically made possible! But when we husbands are willing to put the needs of our families above our own, then we discover that our needs are being met.

Case in point and by way of description: Charlie comes home from a long day at work, takes his boots off, and hears the kids screaming down the hall, or charging around outside. Instead of engaging the kids, he cops a squat on the couch, and turns on Sportcenter. Ignoring the kids, and maybe even the wife in order to "rest" or decompress. Meanwhile, Mrs. Charlie who has also had a busy day with work, and school functions, groceries, and now kids and dinner is scrambling to keep the pace. As all gets done, the family is fed, the house is straightened, the kids are put to bed, and around late evening the wife falls into bed, exhausted, meanwhile Charly is fresh and frisky and decides he'd like a little after hours perk me up. Mrs. Charlie isn't interested due to exhaustion, and not being in the mood, but well Charlie being a man is always in the mood. So if he can't get the attention from his exhausted wife, he goes to the internet, or movies, or worse yet, that pretty little thing at the office that's been smiling at him. Slippery slope!
But if Charlie, came home and engaged the kids, tidied up the house, or even took over a few of the many chores that needed to be done, the exhausted wife would 1. Feel supported, 2. not be so exausted, 3. be appreciative of the help, 3. engage the husband in meaningful conversation that rebuilds the relationship, and later 4. might actually be "interested" in the pick me up, because her husband has turned her on with his concern for her, and displays of caring affection.

Now I understand that these examples are basic, and maybe a little off point, but please show me where it doesn't apply?

The family structure used to be the core of the American base. When families started being destroyed by selfishness, and divorce, and now we're even going to great lengths to change the definition of the word family, in order to incorporate the new humanly acceptable way, it has shown it's ripple effect by undermining this nations morals, and now we see it in our governmental offices and ways of thinking.

I know that Blueskies likes to debate his "Psychology" and I"m not equipped to argue on that level, but I'd like to know the definition on "BENT." We are not born with a genetic condition called homosexuality, we are born with a genetic condition called SIN. There are no levels to it, no sin is greater than any other a lie is equal to murder, except in the eyes of man. Having said that, we can be conditioned and "programmed" towards certain bents, but more often than not certain sensitivities are passed from one generation to the next. Alcoholism, abuse, sexual issues, addictions, and even weight issues are caused by bents or sensitiveties that we have. Then you mix in "injuries", I'll be back later got to get to work.....

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


July 12th, 2013, 9:00 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Again, thank you for your thought out response.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Wags,

To answer your question I have to be honest because I'm struggling with the choices. In looking at your chart, the nuclear family is the best option, and it does negate the others. However, here is why!

In Genesis, God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve, and Evelyn, and Martha and so on. He created a pair of procreation able people and told them to go and populate. There are some lines of thought out there that Adam and Eve were not the ONLY humans on Earth at that time, but I don't subscribe to that thinking....
If I understand correctly, this is attempting to point out the 'marriage is for procreation' definition. If so, allow me to ask what about those that are born sterile? Being sterile, by definition, means that a person is unable to procreate. Are those people forbidden to marry? What about my marriage? My wife & I will not be procreating, is our marriage not 'real or authentic'?
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Much of what you are asking is in regard to customs that came later, arranged marriages, and so on, and these are the things of MAN, not statues of God.
With respect, this sounds an awful lot like making an excuse or rationalizing to me. If the Bible is the 'truth', as I believe you have stated several times, then wouldn't everything in the Bible also be 'truth'? If so, then by extension, all the aforementioned examples of 'Biblical marriage' are also 'truth', no?
WarEr4Christ wrote:
In knowing the Bible, you will come to understand that Ephesians 5:22 calls women to willingly submit themselves to their husbands leadership, not as slaves, or subjects, but as willing partners. Likewise, God instructs MEN to love their wives as Christ loved the church (His bride) even unto death, death to himself. So in translation, that means that a husband surrenders his wants and needs for the good of his family, so that the family will flourish. BUT, in a selfish society such as our, we all live for self in some way, and the family no longer flourishes. We are each after our own way, and children are just a by product of the sex we crave. They are no longer seen as a gift, unless you are one of those families who've had difficulty in having children and then you see the children you have as a gift. Whether they be adopted, or medically made possible! But when we husbands are willing to put the needs of our families above our own, then we discover that our needs are being met.
Is this really the way you view our society, as nothing more than selfish, sex crazed people who look at children as a by-product? While I can agree that some people and relationships may be this way, I'd argue that the majority are peaceful and loving of all people, including children.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Case in point and by way of description: Charlie comes home from a long day at work, takes his boots off, and hears the kids screaming down the hall, or charging around outside. Instead of engaging the kids, he cops a squat on the couch, and turns on Sportcenter. Ignoring the kids, and maybe even the wife in order to "rest" or decompress. Meanwhile, Mrs. Charlie who has also had a busy day with work, and school functions, groceries, and now kids and dinner is scrambling to keep the pace. As all gets done, the family is fed, the house is straightened, the kids are put to bed, and around late evening the wife falls into bed, exhausted, meanwhile Charly is fresh and frisky and decides he'd like a little after hours perk me up. Mrs. Charlie isn't interested due to exhaustion, and not being in the mood, but well Charlie being a man is always in the mood. So if he can't get the attention from his exhausted wife, he goes to the internet, or movies, or worse yet, that pretty little thing at the office that's been smiling at him. Slippery slope! But if Charlie, came home and engaged the kids, tidied up the house, or even took over a few of the many chores that needed to be done, the exhausted wife would 1. Feel supported, 2. not be so exausted, 3. be appreciative of the help, 3. engage the husband in meaningful conversation that rebuilds the relationship, and later 4. might actually be "interested" in the pick me up, because her husband has turned her on with his concern for her, and displays of caring affection.

Now I understand that these examples are basic, and maybe a little off point, but please show me where it doesn't apply?
This sounds like a typical relationship to me and is also an example of why relationships require constant work by all parties involved.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
The family structure used to be the core of the American base. When families started being destroyed by selfishness, and divorce, and now we're even going to great lengths to change the definition of the word family, in order to incorporate the new humanly acceptable way, it has shown it's ripple effect by undermining this nations morals, and now we see it in our governmental offices and ways of thinking.
I'd argue that not only is family still the core of American society, its the core of Global society. Then again, perhaps it depends on which definition you choose for what a 'family' consists of:
Quote:
Definition of FAMILY

1: a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head : household

2a : a group of persons of common ancestry : clan
b : a people or group of peoples regarded as deriving from a common stock : race

3a : a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation : fellowship
b : the staff of a high official (as the President)

4: a group of things related by common characteristics: as
a : a closely related series of elements or chemical compounds
b : a group of soils with similar chemical and physical properties (as texture, pH, and mineral content) that comprise a category ranking above the series and below the subgroup in soil classification
c : a group of related languages descended from a single ancestral language

5a : the basic unit in society traditionally consisting of two parents rearing their children; also : any of various social units differing from but regarded as equivalent to the traditional family <a single-parent family>
b : spouse and children <want to spend more time with my family>

6a : a group of related plants or animals forming a category ranking above a genus and below an order and usually comprising several to many genera
b in livestock breeding (1) : the descendants or line of a particular individual especially of some outstanding female (2) : an identifiable strain within a breed

7: a set of curves or surfaces whose equations differ only in parameters

8: a unit of a crime syndicate (as the Mafia) operating within a geographical area
— fam·i·ly·hood noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/family


WarEr4Christ wrote:
I know that Blueskies likes to debate his "Psychology" and I"m not equipped to argue on that level, but I'd like to know the definition on "BENT." We are not born with a genetic condition called homosexuality, we are born with a genetic condition called SIN. There are no levels to it, no sin is greater than any other a lie is equal to murder, except in the eyes of man. Having said that, we can be conditioned and "programmed" towards certain bents, but more often than not certain sensitivities are passed from one generation to the next. Alcoholism, abuse, sexual issues, addictions, and even weight issues are caused by bents or sensitiveties that we have. Then you mix in "injuries", I'll be back later got to get to work.....
Curious to see your explanation as to why sin is a genetic condition, don't think I've heard it put that way before... That said, I'm also curious if you know when exactly you chose to be heterosexual and only attracted to females. As I stated previously, I don't recall ever making that choice; I have repeatedly chosen on how to react to my attraction or lack of attraction to someone tho.

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


July 12th, 2013, 10:03 am
Profile
Player of the Year - Offense
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3012
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
For sake of time, I'm not sure how many of your responses I'll be able to get to, but I'll try. And I do hope I'm not derailing the original thread by responding.

I'd like to remind you that Abraham and Sarah were also sterile, until the birth of their son Isaac, who was a promise from God. But it didn't happen to they were well in years. In reading that story, there is nothing in Scripture that states they were any less married, or less equal because of their inability to procreate. However, the stigma was especially harsh for women because they were unable to have children. So my answer is no, sterility or the ability to have children does not constitute what makes a marriage. A marriage is a loving committment between a man and a woman, that have the parts to procreate and bring forth children. Whether you choose to do so or not is your own decision. Whether you are medically able to or not does not factor in.

"With respect, this sounds an awful lot like making an excuse or rationalizing to me. If the Bible is the 'truth', as I believe you have stated several times, then wouldn't everything in the Bible also be 'truth'? If so, then by extension, all the aforementioned examples of 'Biblical marriage' are also 'truth', no?"

The Bible is truth, but I want you to understand somethng that many Modern Day Christians don't even realize. The Bible was written BY and FOR Jewish people. HOWEVER, as Christianity spread to the Gentiles, it expanded into Greek areas, and later Roman. These nations eventually formed the ones that we know today, except that there are two different types of thinking. The Jewish concrete and subjectional thinking and the Greek, analytical. Case in point: In learning about a frog, A Jew will sit in it's environment and record everything, favorite hang outs, frog girlfriends, lilly pads, dinner and so on until he/she can give you an accurate description of the frog. The Greek will take a frog REMOVE it from it's environment and disect it, tell you all the parts and pieces, how they work, why they work, and so on. See what I mean? See how today's scientific approach to "God" is so off base? People are trying to discover someone with Head knowledge, as compared to Heart knowledge. One is based upon experience and the other experiment. Check out Ray Vanderlaan for further descriptions of this. He's a teacher at Holland Christian and Nationally known speaker...

"Is this really the way you view our society, as nothing more than selfish, sex crazed people who look at children as a by-product? While I can agree that some people and relationships may be this way, I'd argue that the majority are peaceful and loving of all people, including children." It's not all about sex crazed this or that, it's about SELF. What I want, when I want it. It covers a multitude of thinkings from the road rage idiot that just needs to be in front of you because he has to be .0000001 seconds faster, even if his name is Suh :P.
To the addicted that are suffering from many emotional traumas that cause them to see relief in a drug or alcohol induced state to releave their pain. This deals with something known as the 3 part man. You can google that and find out some VERY interestng things about it if you wish. The original Christians went a long way in working with that in all areas to great success but then the "leadership" removed the power from the people and isolated themselves creating our current, traditional model for church that is broken and ineffective, for the most part.

"I'd argue that not only is family still the core of American society, its the core of Global society. Then again, perhaps it depends on which definition you choose for what a 'family' consists of:"

I believe the statistics will back PART of your commment here, globally yes, but not in the American thinking ESPECIALLY if you return a few decades to see what family was in the 50's and 60's. I'm not saying it was perfect, but it was stronger then with less social violence, than we've become now. I have heard about, but don't have time or exactly konw where to look for the statistics that discuss how families that eat together, tend to be stronger then those who don't. Basically the assumption is, that a father, mother, and kids all involved and in direct relational connection, are stronger as a unit than those who rarely interact. But that can pretty much be said about any relationships.

I'm not a therapist, nor am I a psychologist, and most of my "knowledge" is from things I've learned the hard way. In my own relationship with my wife and daughter, I am constantly trying to be a better husband and dad, so that we can have a united, and loving home environment. However, there are times were my selfish nature kicks in, and it can interupt the flow.

Back to the point about DNA. The Bible talks about the curse of man because of the choice Adam and Eve made in the Garden, Genesis 3. To boil it down, Every animal had a partner for the purpose of community and procreation. Adam initially did not! When God saw this, He chose to make Eve from Adam's side, and not from the heal of his foot. She was to be his Help mate! Due to a poor choice on Eve's part, and then agian on Adams part, who was RIGHT THERE when Eve was enticed by the serpent, they severed the relationship between them and God. Prior to that, they walked with God, and talked with God in the Garden. When their eyes were "opened" they broke that relationship, like I said before. The penalty for this was death, not immediate but eventually as sin progressed our lives dwindled to our present life span. Man's nature has been sinful ever since. Our natural way is to be attracted to the opposite sex, to be inflamed with lust for your same sex is against the natural order of things. In looking at Paul's description of that, it says that they KNOWINGLY despised the natural order and became inflamed with lust for one another (my paraphrase). Like brain washing, sin nature especially in a sinful environment can be taught to be a normal way of things. For example: Does a fish know what water is, until you take it out of it? So does a child know that violence and cursing are unnatural forms of child rearing until it's removed from that environment and given love? Does that make sense?

There's more to the sin nature discussion but I hope that gives you a taste of the thought process.

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


July 12th, 2013, 1:14 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
WarEr4Christ - Serious question, do you know how to use the "Quote" function in this forum?
If not, may I suggest learning it as your posts are rather difficult (and that's being nice) to read / decipher.
If you do, then why don't you use it? Do you not respect your fellow posters? [/threadjack]

Now, let's see if I can make heads or tails out of what you posted.... ](*,)
WarEr4Christ wrote:
So my answer is no, sterility or the ability to have children does not constitute what makes a marriage.
Thank you for clarifying this.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
A marriage is a loving committment between a man and a woman, that have the parts to procreate and bring forth children. Whether you choose to do so or not is your own decision. Whether you are medically able to or not does not factor in.
Would you be able to provide the scripture passage where Jesus says this?
WarEr4Christ wrote:
The Bible is truth, but I want you to understand somethng that many Modern Day Christians don't even realize. The Bible was written BY and FOR Jewish people. HOWEVER, as Christianity spread to the Gentiles, it expanded into Greek areas, and later Roman. These nations eventually formed the ones that we know today, except that there are two different types of thinking. The Jewish concrete and subjectional thinking and the Greek, analytical.
So wait, are you saying that the meaning / context of the Bible may have changed over time? But I thought that was unpossible??? :confused:
WarEr4Christ wrote:
It's not all about sex crazed this or that, it's about SELF. What I want, when I want it. It covers a multitude of thinkings from the road rage idiot that just needs to be in front of you because he has to be .0000001 seconds faster, even if his name is Suh :P.
Yup, I'd say most everyone I know has moments like these.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
This deals with something known as the 3 part man. You can google that and find out some VERY interestng things about it if you wish. The original Christians went a long way in working with that in all areas to great success but then the "leadership" removed the power from the people and isolated themselves creating our current, traditional model for church that is broken and ineffective, for the most part.
A brief search of '3 part man' returns theological-type websites ex: (bibleforums); I won't be reviewing them as they're not likely to be unbiased. Perhaps if there were other, non-religious sources, I'd look more into it.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
I believe the statistics will back PART of your commment here, globally yes, but not in the American thinking ESPECIALLY if you return a few decades to see what family was in the 50's and 60's. I'm not saying it was perfect, but it was stronger then with less social violence, than we've become now.
This is likely a normal, generational thing. Kind of like the typical "You guys have it so much easier now than back in the XXXX" Insert any era for 'XXXX'. As one gets older and/or wiser, they have a tendency to be nostalgic about their own past, then project what it was like 'when they were younger' onto what society is today. This does not, however, make it any more or less accurate; its just different.

On the 'social violence': Are humans more violent than the past? Or could it be, in our current 24/7 connected World, that we're just hearing more about it now? The World is truly are smaller place today because of the technology and, IMO, its because of this that we're being opened to more news / info / data from parts we didn't used to.

As an example, think of the recent 'Arab Spring': Would it have been possible to know everything that was happening as it was happening even 5-10 years ago? Back in our 'glory' days of the 80s & 90s, we would've gotten only 1 side of the story - the side the MSM wanted to show. Nowadays, thanks to Twitter, Facebook, et al not only did we get the MSMs side of the story, but we also had access to the stories from those involved in the 'Arab Spring', from those directly affected by it.
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Back to the point about DNA. The Bible talks about the curse of man because of the choice Adam and Eve made in the Garden, Genesis 3. To boil it down, Every animal had a partner for the purpose of community and procreation. Adam initially did not! When God saw this, He chose to make Eve from Adam's side, and not from the heal of his foot. She was to be his Help mate! Due to a poor choice on Eve's part, and then agian on Adams part, who was RIGHT THERE when Eve was enticed by the serpent, they severed the relationship between them and God. Prior to that, they walked with God, and talked with God in the Garden. When their eyes were "opened" they broke that relationship, like I said before. The penalty for this was death, not immediate but eventually as sin progressed our lives dwindled to our present life span. Man's nature has been sinful ever since. Our natural way is to be attracted to the opposite sex, to be inflamed with lust for your same sex is against the natural order of things. In looking at Paul's description of that, it says that they KNOWINGLY despised the natural order and became inflamed with lust for one another (my paraphrase). Like brain washing, sin nature especially in a sinful environment can be taught to be a normal way of things. For example: Does a fish know what water is, until you take it out of it? So does a child know that violence and cursing are unnatural forms of child rearing until it's removed from that environment and given love? Does that make sense?

There's more to the sin nature discussion but I hope that gives you a taste of the thought process.
So, nothing scientific then?

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


July 14th, 2013, 5:27 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Offense
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3012
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Wags: I thought by inserting the quote lines or symbols, it would do what you asked, I apologize that it did not...

Quote:
Would you be able to provide the scripture passage where Jesus says this?


I hope this will help: Matthew 19: 1 - 6, "When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. 3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?” 4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Quote:
So wait, are you saying that the meaning / context of the Bible may have changed over time? But I thought that was impossible??? :confused:


No what I'm saying is that the Bible was transcribed by Monks who did not have the most accurate ways of translating words. For example: There is a Jewish word "Hagas" it means to feast. I don't remember the point of context in which it was translated into what we are aware of now. But for the Jewish context, Hagas if I've spelled it right is said with the "intensity of a young lions who has just made a kill and is about to DEVOUR the whole thing." It has a guttural context to it, that intensifies the word. Much like Japanese have ways of saying things that include guttural tones that actually change the meanings of words. The same is true for this. So a monk my translate that to say, "give us this day our daily bread" and it actually means, I'm about to devour this like a famished man. Does that make sense?

Quote:
A brief search of '3 part man' returns theological-type websites ex: (bibleforums); I won't be reviewing them as they're not likely to be unbiased. Perhaps if there were other, non-religious sources, I'd look more into it.


The difficulty here is that you are not going to find an "unbiased" approach because it is not an understanding in non-believing circles. I'll break it down as I remember it. Man(humanity) is created in three parts.

1. Body: consists of the flesh, subject to desires of the flesh
2. Soul: consists of the mind: home of the emotions and "mind"
3. Spirit: is the only eternal part of humanity, and it is the only everlasting part of mankind.

A good source for following this idea is Neil Anderson, google him and see what he has to say on the three part man if you wish.

Quote:
This is likely a normal, generational thing. Kind of like the typical "You guys have it so much easier now than back in the XXXX" Insert any era for 'XXXX'. As one gets older and/or wiser, they have a tendency to be nostalgic about their own past, then project what it was like 'when they were younger' onto what society is today. This does not, however, make it any more or less accurate; its just different.

On the 'social violence': Are humans more violent than the past? Or could it be, in our current 24/7 connected World, that we're just hearing more about it now? The World is truly are smaller place today because of the technology and, IMO, its because of this that we're being opened to more news / info / data from parts we didn't used to.

As an example, think of the recent 'Arab Spring': Would it have been possible to know everything that was happening as it was happening even 5-10 years ago? Back in our 'glory' days of the 80s & 90s, we would've gotten only 1 side of the story - the side the MSM wanted to show. Nowadays, thanks to Twitter, Facebook, et al not only did we get the MSMs side of the story, but we also had access to the stories from those involved in the 'Arab Spring', from those directly affected by it.


So would it be safe to say the knowledge of good and evil has allowed man to progress further and further along as technology progressed and the more we know the more our innocence has been sacrificed? Prior to a world at war, the US was for the most part wholesome, we had serious issues in how we treated one another but there was still a strong innocence to the nation. After WWII, the vets returned and their children were the children of the 60's who eventually rejected authority. The kids of the 60's became the kids of the 80's who absolutely rebelled against authority, and it began the onslaught of teenage pregnancy so you had babies having babies which led to a dependency of support and so on. As technology advanced, our innocence was lost, and now we are seeing astronomical advances in the sciences that are continuing to open Pandora's box in many areas. (for sake of argument, look at the creation of sexbots). As this life goes on we find more and more ways to "sin".

Quote:
So, nothing scientific then?
sorry no, the closest I could find was more Scripture: " Deuteronomy 5:9 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

Hope that helps...

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


July 15th, 2013, 12:12 am
Profile
1st Round Pick

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1228
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
I have a question for anyone to answer. Why should we care what Christianity thinks about Gay marriage?

Marriage wasn't created by Christians and is practiced by people of many different religions, so IMO rules on it should be secular.


July 15th, 2013, 12:53 am
Profile
Pro Bowl Player

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2564
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Quote:
So would it be safe to say the knowledge of good and evil has allowed man to progress further and further along as technology progressed and the more we know the more our innocence has been sacrificed? Prior to a world at war, the US was for the most part wholesome, we had serious issues in how we treated one another but there was still a strong innocence to the nation. After WWII, the vets returned and their children were the children of the 60's who eventually rejected authority. The kids of the 60's became the kids of the 80's who absolutely rebelled against authority, and it began the onslaught of teenage pregnancy so you had babies having babies which led to a dependency of support and so on. As technology advanced, our innocence was lost, and now we are seeing astronomical advances in the sciences that are continuing to open Pandora's box in many areas. (for sake of argument, look at the creation of sexbots). As this life goes on we find more and more ways to "sin".


Actually, humanity has become less violent over time. Read Better Angels of Our Nature
http://www.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels ... 1455883115

Teen pregnancy has been steadily declining for 70 years
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/hea ... 54140178/1

Crime has been plunging since the 90s
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dim ... 78003.html
(This led to the controversial claim that the legalization of abortion led to a reduction in crime, as crime rates began to fall just about 18 years after Roe vs Wade)


July 15th, 2013, 8:04 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Offense
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3012
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Blue and Rao,

What is boils down to is a world view, many of you see things through one set of glasses, and I , others like me, see it through another. We can argue and throw facts around until our fingers get tired, but until the truth is revealed, neither will be persuaded. I don't wish to attack your points, or your arguments, because in doing so it only deepens the resentment, and lengthens the argument. To both of those points, I'm not interested in participating. To put it in a word picture, it's as if you are sitting in your castle, and me in mine, and we're trading shots back and forth. Neither really wins, both actually lose, and the shots are the "facts" that neither will believe. I think Maya Angelou was the person quoted as saying, "The interesting thing about facts is, that they can obscure the truth." So thank you for sharing your world view, and thanks for allowing me to share mine in response to a question, and have a blessed day!

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


July 16th, 2013, 8:26 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Blue and Rao,

What is boils down to is a world view, many of you see things through one set of glasses, and I , others like me, see it through another. We can argue and throw facts around until our fingers get tired, but until the truth is revealed, neither will be persuaded. I don't wish to attack your points, or your arguments, because in doing so it only deepens the resentment, and lengthens the argument. To both of those points, I'm not interested in participating. To put it in a word picture, it's as if you are sitting in your castle, and me in mine, and we're trading shots back and forth. Neither really wins, both actually lose, and the shots are the "facts" that neither will believe. I think Maya Angelou was the person quoted as saying, "The interesting thing about facts is, that they can obscure the truth." So thank you for sharing your world view, and thanks for allowing me to share mine in response to a question, and have a blessed day!
Thanks for your responses above. I will take your lead here and not comment further.

Peace, light and love, my friend.

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


July 16th, 2013, 9:35 am
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
I attempted to read the last page of this thread, but after seeing the wall of text, I abstained. Regardless, true to form, I'm gonna inject my personal viewpoints upon the discussion. I really don't give a f*uck what you do in your own bedroom. It's none of my business. My across the street neighbors of 12 years are gay and we get along great. They have the right to live their lives the way they wish and I respect that.

My problem is with what I call the "Gay Mafia". They demand that everyone accept and respect them or else. To them, a man wearing high heels, lipstick, and a skirt should be appreciated. To me, they are a freak not willing to conform to the norms of society. But to them, I am intolerant, even though they only represent 2-5% of the human population. By definition, as a part of the 95%, I am normal, while they are abnormal. Political correctness won't change that fact. Oops. I guess I'm gonna be labeled as a homophobe now instead of stating basic fact.

_________________
Image


July 28th, 2013, 2:29 pm
Profile
Varsity Benchwarmer
User avatar

Joined: August 9th, 2004, 1:51 am
Posts: 235
Location: kalamazoo,mi
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
slybri19 wrote:
I attempted to read the last page of this thread, but after seeing the wall of text, I abstained. Regardless, true to form, I'm gonna inject my personal viewpoints upon the discussion. I really don't give a f*uck what you do in your own bedroom. It's none of my business. My across the street neighbors of 12 years are gay and we get along great. They have the right to live their lives the way they wish and I respect that.

My problem is with what I call the "Gay Mafia". They demand that everyone accept and respect them or else. To them, a man wearing high heels, lipstick, and a skirt should be appreciated. To me, they are a freak not willing to conform to the norms of society. But to them, I am intolerant, even though they only represent 2-5% of the human population. By definition, as a part of the 95%, I am normal, while they are abnormal. Political correctness won't change that fact. Oops. I guess I'm gonna be labeled as a homophobe now instead of stating basic fact.


=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


Frok

_________________
I feel more like I do now than when I first got here.


July 28th, 2013, 2:37 pm
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Explained: What It All Means
Thanks Frok for the clapping smiley. I appreciate it.

And if anyone here thinks for one f*ckin second that I'm gonna accept some flaming homo wearing a dress and lipstick as a normal human being, you are very sadly f*cking mistaken.

If you want to do that perverted crap in your own home, be my guest. I don't care. However, the second that you DEMAND that it's normal and I respect your CHOICE, we've got a serious f*cking problem. Deal with it. Political Correctness can suck my fat cock.

_________________
Image


July 28th, 2013, 3:03 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.