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

a reply to: Tapping123

a reply to: Unity_99

Dear Tapping1234 and Unity_99,

Let me clarify because it seems to me that here there is a huge misunderstanding somewhere.

Who is here talking against family values or questioning Marriage??!! I am sure that is not my position at all.

This thread was opened to discuss the extension of the marriage benefits to people that didn't have the opportunity to enjoy them previously, but also constitute permanent unions in between human beings, living under the same roof and also having families.

No statement in my replies has been intended to attack marriage as a respectable institution in any way at all , neither to encourage attitudes that are against it, to the contrary this is an eulogy of a decision that is honoring many families.

I suggest you to open your heart or Are you so blind of passion for discrimination, exclusion or sectarianism that you can't see the point?


Possibly you have understood what you wanted to read, not what it was actually expressed in my posts , or you melted my own ideas with the ones of other members that replied after me.

Now if your reaction is against what other people has posted in the thread perhaps is better to refer to them clearly and directly , after all everybody has the right to reply, but it is unfair to attack who opened the thread, as a free space of discussion of the topic, for what ever other members are saying.

I am completely sure that also the intention of the Holy father was never to try to weak marriage as a sacrament with this benevolent indulgence he is granting, to the contrary is trying to include more people on it, and moreover to avoid that exist excuses to be used to discredit it, in fact his attitude is extremely intelligent since after this redefinition Marriage only can be stronger than before.

With this change no Catholic really has an excuse to remain out of the possibility to honor publically its union with another person. What now matters is if other religions, either other Christian denominations or other religious traditions around the world are going to follow this example of charity or are going to remain in the hard line of sectarian and fanatic interpretation of moral?

The Angel of Lightness

This is a good change, but just like always, the Catholic Church changes their rules with the times. What was just last month considered ungodly, is now Godly, because they said so. I guess that's not unusual for a religion based on things that are not in the bible to begin with (priest shall be alone and not take a wife, no man shall talk to God; the priest shall do that for you).

a reply to: 222mockingbirdlane

Dear 222mockingbirdlane,

I think your post is interesting and respectable as a personal opinion, but I found it based on statements that I am afraid are extremely imprecise, possibly if the are Catholic readers on this thread they can confirm what I have found on them:

- The Catholic Church has one of his fundamental sources of inspiration in the Bible, after all the first translations of the Holy scriptures from Aramaic, a Semitic language that was the mother tongue of the apostles and Christ, to Ancient Greek, known as Septuagint and the first one into Latin, both European languages in use on the first centuries of Christianity were done by Catholic monks : St Augustine of Hippo, and St Jerome respectively.

Pls read: en.wikipedia.org...

- There are Priests that can marry in the Catholic Church: in the western or Latin rite all the Deacons have that privilege, but not the Presbyters and Bishops, and in the eastern or Greek or Ukrainian rites all the Presbyters have also that privilege, but not the Bishops.

There are three major orders in the Catholic Priesthood, only one is universally forced to follow celibacy by wow, the Bishops.

The reason for encouraging celibacy or at least continence before to celebrate mass, in the case of the priests that can marry, is based on the following Biblical quote of St Paul:

1 Corinthians 7:7-8New King James Version (NKJV)

7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;

1 Corinthians 7:32-35New King James Version (NKJV)

32 But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. 33 But he who is married cares about the things of the world—how he may please his wife. 34 There is[a] a difference between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband. 35 And this I say for your own profit, not that I may put a leash on you, but for what is proper, and that you may serve the Lord without distraction.

Thanks for your comment,

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: borntowatch

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

Well it aint somethin that i like to see
And i hope it never happens to me
When ya see a smiling woman and a frowning man
She got a ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Well i knew a guy and he was real funky ya know
That was of course until he got lucky
When ya see a smiling woman and a frowning man
She got a ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Now i know all you men think that you all right
And the one you got well she's alright
When ya see a smiling woman and a frowning man
She got a ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Well i knew a guy and he was real funky ya know
That was of course until he got lucky
When ya see a smiling woman and a frowning man
She got a ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Now i know all you men think that you all right
And the one you got well she's alright
When ya see a smiling woman and a frowning man
She got a ring in his nose and a ring on her hand
Ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Ring in his nose and a ring on her hand

Oh hows that
Yeah
Everybodys got to be unlucky sometime
That's the way it goes

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: 222mockingbirdlane

\
- The Catholic Church has one of his fundamental sources of inspiration in the Bible, after all the first translations of the Holy scriptures from Aramaic, a Semitic language that was the mother tongue of the apostles and Christ, to Ancient Greek, known as Septuagint and the first one into Latin, both European languages in use on the first centuries of Christianity were done by Catholic monks : St Augustine of Hippo, and St Jerome respectively.

No, the septuagint was created before Christ, so there were no catholic monks around yet to do it. As far as we know the the NT was written in Greek, with possibly Matthew originating in Hebrew or Aramaic. The catholic church was responsible for the Latin Vulgate, which was largely done by Jerome, who himself admitted didn't care for or understand the Greek language. Meaning its crap. There are so many problems with the vulgate its not even funny.

Also while on the topic there is little evidence that the Masoretic text is original. Again as far as we know the LXX is the original(not that the consensus follows this, but that is what we have as manuscripts, nothing from the MT earlier than 10th century AD) . We have no record of early Hebrew texts, save a few archeological finds like the medallion with a passage from Isaiah on it.

Who cares what any of the churches or state think about relationships. They use it for control subjugation. They make a mockery of the love between two people by creating a lawful entity that is under their control as well as the fruits of that union.

In all honesty, the true meaning of marriage is sex. Intercourse, when two become one, thus "married" together. A ceremony never had anything to do with anything. And because sex is marriage and marriage is sex, the reason you are suppose to not sleep around before you're married is because the first person you have sex with is your true married partner. This is why we are told not to have sex before marriage. So there are plenty of people out there who have anywhere from 2 to 2000 wives/husbands......

Jesus confirms this in: John 4:18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.

Thus marriage can never be between two homosexuals as their is no "complete" union. There may be a perverted union, but it is not the completion that two different sexes can share. A complete human when combined together. Like the angels in heaven.

a reply to: KJVBible

Well Dear KJVBible

Marriage is not just Sex as you have told, is a union certainly, but is a link of love in between two souls, two spirits and two minds, it is not restricted to sexual intercourse.

This is the difference of what God joints and what the world try to put together, when something comes from God it starts in the level of feelings, mutual understanding, mutual support, affection, consideration, commitment, a link of Love.

When something does not come from God starts and remains only in the level of animal instincts and passions. Now, there can be sex without marriage at all, a violation or rape is the classical example, those are sexual crimes that in the eyes of God never constitute marriage at all, it does not matter that who is violated never before have had sex.

A proof of that Marriage is a union that is primarily in the level of spirit and soul is that the New testament is rich in passages where it is stated that there is a mystical marriage in between Christ and his Church, and of course that does not have nothing to do with sexual intercourse by sure. This mystical marriage has a physical vehicle that is the communion, when you eat or drink the consecrated body and blood of Christ.

Now, it is extremely important to underline that civil unions never have been equivalent, in the eyes of God, as marriage as a sacrament. Marriage according with theology is a sacramental union, so how can be a civil union sealed by the decision of a judge , a secular authority, a truly marriage in the eyes of God?

As far as I know neither the Orthodox, the Roman Catholic or the Episcopalian churches, and I believe that is the same case for all the Lutheran ones, recognize at all civil marriage as a sacrament. Since marriage as a civil union is by definition not a sacrament, but a contract in between two individuals, in some sense it doesn't bring nothing new that the Churches opposes Gay Marriage as a sacrament, since they don't recognize any union granted by a judge as Marriage.

Nevertheless, it is known that in ancient times there was indeed a Sacrament that was used by Christians in the first centuries of our era to seal a kind of union in between people of the same gender, its name was adelphopoesis.

Adelphopoiesis is the result of the decision of two individuals of the same gender to share their lives, to live together in the same home and honor and protect each one the other, so it is a link of love, not based in sexual aspects by the way, but in genuine pure affection.

Here some links about it:

en.wikipedia.org...

orthodoxwiki.org...

religion.wikia.com...

www.orthodoxchristianity.net...


This sacrament was created to facilitate the life of people that for any reason can't find a partner to go into marriage but at the same time do not want to live the rest of their lives in solitude.

This is the kind of solution that a compassionate Christian approach can offer to the couples of the same gender that are living their lives without a blessing of the Church. Adelphopoeisis is not Marriage, but it represents anyway an association in between two persons based in feelings, in love and in mutual respect.

What the Bible condemns is not in general physical expressions of love in between people of the same gender, there is nothing in the scriptures against kisses, hugs, petting, cuddling, what it is expressively and clear banned is to practice sodomy, something that can occur by the way even in between partners of opposite genders and is no less sinful if so.

Who ever commit sodomy, that is to try to perform intercourse through the use of any part of the track is sinning, according with the scriptures, even if they are husband and wife under the sacrament of marriage.

Even modern medicine warns us that these kind of sexual practices are extremely risky to incubate or transmit illnesses, including fatal ones as Syphilis, Aids or Ebola, it doesn't matter if its kind is hetero or homosexual.

There is a lot of extremism and fundamentalism in those sectors that are opposing any kind of affection in between persons of the same gender and demonizing it. That kind of attitude is pushing millions of human beings out of the spiritual life, so in some way is the real root cause for which a lot of Homosexuals leave their families of origin to look for refuge in a pseudo culture that try to isolate them from the rest of the society, the so called LGBT one.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness