It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

At last Marriage going back to its very trully origins. Great change of attitude from Religion

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The Peace of God to all that belong to the light,
Dear Readers,

We have seen in this 2014 a really historic change of attitude from the most important Religious establishment in the world with respect to what became along many centuries the traditional meaning of marriage. First time that a Pope overcome the taboo to marry cohabiting couples.

Well, this appears to be a huge Historic shift in the church, but perhaps is just question of to land in reality, and understand the complexity of the human condition and love.

After many centuries of to try maintain certain ideal standards that have failed dramatically to improve the society, and that even have encouraged double morality, based not in Christian Charity but in hypocrisy, and caused incredible painful hurts to millions of innocent children, a redefinition of the concept of Marriage has arrived.

Of course this is not an apology or justification of adultery, not at all, but of all those unions that preexisted to any other one and that however has not yet reached, until now, acceptance from the religious institutions of validity as actual marriages.

What come to my attention is How many times we knew that the Catholic church, as many other ones Christian and non Christian, had married couples even knowing that at least one of the spouses had procreated children with other person before without marrying it?

How many children product of such free unions then became illegitimate although they preceded to any other one conceived in the so Called corresponding "legitimate" marriages? How could a priest bless a union knowing that with it he was denying the right of full paternity or maternity to human beings that were not guilty of nothing?

Who deserves more to be called Bastard? a person that has born in a such sad condition for the fault of an irresponsible father or mother, or who is able to "parent" with such selfishness and immorality with respect to an innocent child that never asked to be brought to this world in such a way?


In such sad condition notable good people lived along History, as for instance King Arthur Pendragon, Leonardo Da Vinci, St. Martin of Porres, Erasmus of Rottterdam, Alexander Hamilton, Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz, Laurence of Arabia, Anna Pavlova, Evita Peron, Sophia Loren, etc.

At last a Pope has understood that many unions of fact are actually marriages after all, and to deny that is not really ethical, but far to be fair and absolutely not Holy at all.

www.christianpost.com...

The truth is that along History the concept of Marriage, as an institution, has gradually evolved, or perhaps it is better to say being deformed, from what it was originally a link of just genuine Love in between to persons, into the scenario of financial deals, clans fusions, mutual convenience contracts, a method of preservation of social status quo, and even political alliances or plots to assure or gain power!

www.abc.net.au...

It is interesting to recall that Melchizedek, King of Jerusalem and Priest of the Almighty God is the very first Priest ever mentioned in the Bible, living at the time of Abraham, about 1900 BC. There is no evidence of the existence of Priesthood before him, so technically it is highly probable that all marriages from Adam and Eve to Abraham were in fact cohabiting free unions after all blessed only by God himself with the love that sealed them.

en.wikipedia.org...

I believe H.H. Pope Francis I has showed a great level of Christian Charity with this change, accepting that the Church has a lot to apologize with respect to millions of human beings along History that were victimized from the faults that other committed, from a false and distorted concept of Morality, and especially to the many of them that were tortured along all the existence of our civilization by a wrong understanding of marriage.

Interestingly, this so important change on Religious morality comes as an accomplishment of a prediction years ago I posted in other thread also here in ATS.

Pls read: www.abovetopsecret.com...

This thread is of course open to discussion and to anybody that feels compelled to give its opinion.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness

edit on 9/16/2014 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Marriage is just another form of oppression .. serving only to make men miserable .. while women and divorce lawyers profit ...

Marriage should be outlawed.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Marriage is a scam.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Expat888
Marriage is just another form of oppression .. serving only to make men miserable .. while women and divorce lawyers profit ...

Marriage should be outlawed.


An old savoy Brown song
She's Got a Ring in His Nose and a Ring on Her Hand



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:31 PM
link   
The very first marriage ended in divorce! Adam and Lilith!



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

But to make-up for it, lets have 'The Quorum' have Adam(u) have a hand/rib in the creation of 'Eve' this will make those who squat to pee subservient and then Us "Men" can hold on to 'the power'. Then we'll have The Quorum start this "rule book" off with Adam and Eve, NOT Adam and Steve..

If 'The Quorum' fibbed about the beginning, that just sullies the whole story for Me.. Add the fact that My taxes increase to help the gov't. pay for 'charity' while The Churches continue to enjoy their tax free status..

"Common Passerby Opinion" : This is "Yang" dying out. military™; religion™ ; politics™ are ALL 'patriarchal' Folks are awakening to their own "Essence", the fact that GOD is FREE!!!

namaste



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Here in the States, some States have what are considered "Common Law" marriages, where if a couple lives together for a period of time, they are considered married, whether they actually were or not.

Thankfully, my State is not one of them.

I agree with many here. Marriage is a scam, first set forth by Religion, and followed shortly afterward by the Government. (Then you also have the lawyers and money grubbing men and women as well looking to make it big through a divorce)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Chances are that if 2 people were married in the eyes of God then there would be no need for a Lawyer .Don forget that the Marriage licence is a modern day invention created by lawyers some time in the 1800's ,,,peace a reply to: Expat888



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: JimNasium




But to make-up for it, lets have 'The Quorum' have Adam(u) have a hand/rib in the creation of 'Eve' this will make those who squat to pee subservient and then Us "Men" can hold on to 'the power'. Then we'll have The Quorum start this "rule book" off with Adam and Eve, NOT Adam and Steve..


LOL. Well, originally, we did have Adam(u) and Steve, AND THEN God said, "It's not good for man (or is it men?) to be alone....."



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 02:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: Expat888
Marriage is just another form of oppression .. serving only to make men miserable .. while women and divorce lawyers profit ...

Marriage should be outlawed.


An old savoy Brown song
She's Got a Ring in His Nose and a Ring on Her Hand


Oh the the tears sting my eyes



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:20 AM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

I am not a fan of the Catholic church in general, but I like Francis. He actually understands the heart of the Father. These religious rules that serve to separate, cause feelings of self loathing, or fear must go. There is no marriage ceremony in the bible. The legal marriage is just as false.

A true marriage is about love and communion between 2 people. A melding of lives together. I love my wife more than when I married her. I've given up parts of my life to be with her, and to serve her. These acts of "dying"(giving myself up for her) are well worth any "loss" of my own desires and wants. We is so much better than I. It is very difficult though and I understand why so many are jaded against marriage. It has become like getting a drivers license, or starting a business. The state, the church, and our broken, self-centered humanity have all contributed to this state of affairs.

Our idea of love is broken much so because of the all the damage religion has done. The image of God has been tainted by the religious mind



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

At last, but not least, the Pope again does something Really STUPID to undermine traditional Christian Marriage.

This pope is actually going AGAINST the Bible and I can prove it.

BTW Op, your tone reads as if the Christian church is the same as the Catholic church, it is not. This stuff only applies to Catholics, not all Christians. You source, The Christian Post is a Catholic publication, Not a Christain publication.

Now you want marriage to go back to it's REAL ORIGINS you will have to do without going out and dating - most Marriages in the Old and New Testament were put together by the parents of the bride or groom while they were yet Children.

And then of course you can forget having the marrage presided over by a Priest or Minister - that too was never done in the old or new testaments. Marriage vows - Forget them, they are Non Biblical. You don't even have to have it legally recognized by your local Government.


In the Old and New Testaments there was only one ceremony that signified the consummation of a marriage. That was the marriage supper (or dinner). If a couple wished to marry in biblical days, the parents of the couple would simply send out invitations to friends and relatives to attend the marriage supper. After the supper was over, the couple were considered by society as being married. There were no vows taken. There were no ceremonies in which a minister or priest officiated. There were no legal documents required by the government
www.askelm.com...


In Biblical times, marriages were commonly arranged by the parents of the bride and groom. The parents sometimes allowed their children to have a say in the choice, but frequently they did not (Genesis 21:21, 24:1-4, 38:6, Judges 14:1-2). Dating and courtship did not precede marriage. The negotiations by the parents resulted in a betrothal, a binding agreement pledging the bride and groom to marriage. Once the groom took the bride into his home, they were considered married. Typically, girls were betrothed shortly after puberty, and the marriage was consummated one year later.

Various ceremonies and feasts accompanied the wedding day at different times in history, but the wedding was not performed, sanctioned or blessed by religious officials. As far as is known, there was no exchange of marriage vows, and our commonly used marriage vows do not come from the Bible. The marriage was neither a civil nor a religious matter, but numerous religious obligations came as a result.
www.christianbiblereference.org...

Here is at Least 34 Bible verses telling why it's Biblically wrong to live together before marriage. www.openbible.info... Here are just the first few:


Hebrews 13:4 ESV / 152 helpful votes
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 ESV / 73 helpful votes
For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God;

1 Corinthians 7:1-40 ESV / 73 helpful votes
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

1 Corinthians 7:2 ESV / 63 helpful votes
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

Genesis 2:24-25 ESV / 54 helpful votes
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

1 Corinthians 6:18-20 ESV / 40 helpful votes
Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.


Seems like the Pope doesn't know a thing about what the Bible teaches about Marriage. Why would anyone trust a so called religious man who doesn't have any clue about whats actually in the bible?

What this Pope is doing is BAD BAD BAD and EVIL EVIL EVIL. He is encouraging people to live together and kave kids out of wedlock and he's saying " thats o.k... (This directly goes against everything the Bible tells us about marraige.) we don't really need to go by the actual Bible, I Pope of the year and making my own non biblical rules." People are sheep, they dont read the Bible either. The Sheep will be led to the slaughter. Go ahead Sheep Catholics, keep following your fake holy man.

The Dope.. I mean Pope, does Not have the power or the ability to change what is Biblical. He Must stick to the script and he is Clearly not doing that. Therefore this pope is a fake pope. The bible warns us about Fake Popes like this in revelations when it is written:


“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" Revelation 22:18-19


and no less than 3 more times! :



"You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you." (Deuteronomy 4:2)

"Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it." (Deuteronomy 12:32)

"Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar." (Psalms 30:6)


There is your proof this pope is a fake.

Op, if I were you. I'd change my ATS name. Angel of Light is mentioned in the Bible - it refers to what Satan is called. You wanna be associated with Satan? Apparently you're in good company right next to the Pope.


And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. 2 Corinthians 11:14 - 11:15

edit on 17-9-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Maybe if these guys penises was just an inch or 2 BIGGER, by their actions, I'm guessing they are "length guys"... I guess We can ALL be elated that the BIG RED TRUCK hadn't been invented..

And "She" (The Yin consciousness) is "awake" and because She is a 'Lady' and being polite, She is affording Him (Yang) more time than I would, but I'm 'male' this incarnate so "little patience" is part/parcel to My 'role'...

namaste

P.S. No, this is NOT 8" (-------------------------------------------------------------) But "He" will want to know it is...



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: The angel of light

After many centuries of to try maintain certain ideal standards that have failed dramatically to improve the society, and that even have encouraged double morality, based not in Christian Charity but in hypocrisy, and caused incredible painful hurts to millions of innocent children, a redefinition of the concept of Marriage has arrived.

Of course this is not an apology or justification of adultery, not at all, but of all those unions that preexisted to any other one and that however has not yet reached, until now, acceptance from the religious institutions of validity as actual marriages.

Who deserves more to be called Bastard?


So here you are on about the Children. I'll tell you what kid deserves to be called a bastard. Any kid who IS a Bastard. The definition fits.

It's NOT up to the Church to make allowances for the sin of having sex out of wedlock by excusing it and saying "That's o.k. we'll marry you anyway, making your sin null and void with god" It is not the Churches fault those parents did something stupid. You want the millions of innocent bastard children to be vindicated by the Church - thats Not the role of the Church. Put the blame where it belongs, on the parents. You seem to be a very confused individual. The way to vindicate those kids is to teach people not to have kids out of wedlock and stick to it. This pope as clearly can be seen in mt last post, is going in the opposite direction. This Evil Right Hand of Satan called Pope Francisis going to make having kids out of wedlock 20 times worse.

Angle of Light - yeah i'm kinda a straight forward no holds barred type of guy and I may seem harsh to you in my posts. My intention is not to harm but to help you see more clearly. Don't take what the media or even the pope says for the truth. read and study your own bible and prove to yourself which is right - most Catholics are not encouraged to read the bible, so they won't know when the wool is being pulled over their eyes.
edit on 17-9-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The original reason for marriage was to secure financial support for the woman. You had to strike with her and support her because they created legal ramifications if you didn't. It is totally outdated in this day and age.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: The angel of light
It is interesting to recall that Melchizedek, King of Jerusalem and Priest of the Almighty God is the very first Priest ever mentioned in the Bible, living at the time of Abraham, about 1900 BC. There is no evidence of the existence of Priesthood before him, so technically it is highly probable that all marriages from Adam and Eve to Abraham were in fact cohabiting free unions after all blessed only by God himself with the love that sealed them.


Maybe for YOUR religion, but couples have been getting married all over the world before the hebrews came on the scene.

Here's some history of biblical marriages (since that is what your OP is about).

History of Marriage


A wife was seen as being of high value, and was therefore, usually, carefully looked after.[235][236] Early nomadic communities in the middle east practised a form of marriage known as beena, in which a wife would own a tent of her own, within which she retains complete independence from her husband;[252] this principle appears to survive in parts of early Israelite society, as some early passages of the Bible appear to portray certain wives as each owning a tent as a personal possession[252] (specifically, Jael,[253] Sarah,[254] and Jacob's wives[255]). In later times, the Bible describes wives as being given the innermost room(s) of the husband's house, as her own private area to which men were not permitted;[256][257] in the case of wealthy husbands, the Bible describes their wives as having each been given an entire house for this purpose.[258][259]


The article below is an article about the evolution of marriage throughout history. The idea of "traditional marriage" and what you consider to be traditional marriage is SO far off what marriage actually was throughout the millennia it's crazy.

History of Marriage: 13 Surprising Facts


Marriage is a truly ancient institution that predates recorded history. But early marriage was seen as a strategic alliance between families, with the youngsters often having no say in the matter. In some cultures, parents even married one child to the spirit of a deceased child in order to strengthen familial bonds, Coontz said.


That means it predates your bible/torah. The rest of the article talks about the TRUE standards (like polygamy being the norm) of marriage and they aren't anything CLOSE to what you consider to be "traditional marriage".



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

I don't agree with you OP

I think you are selecting information and links and viewpoints that suit you.

I don't agree at all



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Marriage is a three ring circus.
Engagement ring
Wedding ring
Suffer-ring
-anon



Marriage is permanent dibs on someone.
-beezzer

I think marriage is all about that wonderful emotion called love. What it used to be and what it is now are entirely two different things, in my humble opinion. Marriage is proof that the sum is greater than the addition of the parts.

Marriage is also like BBQ. Every individual has their own recipe, their own approach to what marriage is. Marriage is a fact of life. It's a celebration of a union. It can be religious in nature, or not.

I am fortunate enough to have found someone I can travel through life with. A companion to make this journey less onerous.

I hope everyone else could be just as fortunate.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

Of course is going to take some time to reply fully to all the list of concerns you have expressed in your post, but let me begin with the ones that are quite evident wrong and correspond to a very biased interpretation of fragments of the scriptures:

1 ) In none of the scriptures you have posted there is no single mention at all , not what so ever, of that a successor of St Peter will be under control of Satan as you in incredible boldness has claimed is already Propheticed. Your quotes are vaguely , perhaps it is better to say remotely related with the interpretation you are willing to give to them. The word Pope does not appear in any of them by the way.

2) The Apostle of the Gentiles, St Paul, is talking about Adultery, something is not subject of discussion here. I warned since the very first opening post of the thread that here we are not, and the Pope is not, supporting any marriage of adulterer couples. This is not an attempt to legitimate unions that have appeared after a valid Marriage has taken effect. The dispensation of the Pope is granted to couples that are living together when no marriage at all preexisted.

Now, what possible can follow from this decision is that a Catholic marriage might be annulled if it is discovered that there were illegitimate sons or daughters preceding it with another person, different than the one married with. Yes, that is a risk, but who in his or her sane mind is going to marry another person or wants to continue marry with it after knowing that he or she is trying to evade his or her parent responsibilities with his or her children? that is a kind of selfish attitude that is not even ethical at all, is like to try to help a debtor to evade his debts.

3) Sexual immorality is a term that really refers not only to adultery, but to anti-ethical aspects of sexuality as Promiscuity, polygamy, bestialism, Prostitution, or to have sex in an improper way with other person, in an unnatural way. As I have already said to have Adultery it is needed to adulterate something, in other words to trespass another's right, to violate marriage vows, How can be adultery if there is no previous marriage at all? , that is a contradiction, then no sense.

4) The Bible never says that anybody that comes in the name of Light, that is the meaning of to be angel of it, is without any doubt a messanger of Satan, that is no sense at all and is a distorted and by the way insane way to interpret fragments of the scripture. Why I say this with entire conviction, because the Light of this world , according with the Gospel is nobody else than Jesus himself.

5) Instead to be calling names and trying to condemn others people so easily, putting yourself in the place of God by the way, I would suggest you to ask for a really educated instructor of Bible, it is very clear than you need one urgently.

Here a quote that is very clear to show you are extremely wrong:


Gospel according with St John, Chapter 1:

In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

7 He came for testimony, to bear witness to the light, that all might believe through him.

8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light.

9 The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not.

11 He came to his own home, and his own people received him not.


Taken from biblescripture.net...

What the letter you are trying to use to talk about supposed Angels of light really means is that Satan has the power to Pretend to be messenger of God, to assume all that appearance, nothing else.

6) The real meaning of the word Bastard , etymologically is son or daughter that embarrass the family due to discredit or dishonor the parents, in other words who does not show any respect to them. This could be either insulting who has brought it to this world or showing no consideration or love for them, or who is doing things that are against the family honor.

Now, of course to be respected as a parent you must be a genuine Father or Mother, since if you don't behave as it how can you being asking for a respect you have never showed to a son or daughter? Along Centuries this meaning has been distorted until to arrive to the current common use in many people that try to confuse it with illegitimate or extra marital.

7) Now, Finally as I see you are definitively a very judgmental person, I think you must understand what these quotes mean:


Hosea 6:6 For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.



Matthew 9:13
But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners



Matthew 12:7
If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent


Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness

edit on 9/17/2014 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tapping123
a reply to: The angel of light

I don't agree with you OP

I think you are selecting information and links and viewpoints that suit you.

I don't agree at all


I happen to agree with you here. What a bunch of BS.

And marriage is a wonderful honoring of Family. But it shouldn't be embraced quickly and rashly.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join