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.

 

Picking and choosing (How about the original marriage?)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
If because of Adam man is out of the garden of Eden...
If because of Adam man lives cursed because of the orginal sin...

...then tell me why the hell do so-called religious scripture followers marry to this day when because of Adam and Eve and through Adam and Eve man and woman are twain as in been become one flesh and dont need to marry after Adam's rib became Eve?

Genesis 2:24
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

^^It doesnt even indicate you have to marry. No! It indicates you are already as married since the word wife is used. How can ppl not see this?

Genesis 2:25
And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

^^How is Eve Adam's wife? What made ppl even think they have to marry the opposite sex if they follow Genesis in the after affects to the implications in its stories?

If you still think you have to get married to a woman or a man, then why cant it also be that you are aware you arent affected by what Adam ate then? If you are aware that you are affected by what Adam ate, then you are hindering yourself by fixing yourself in what puts man's orginal marriage in vain as null and void. And so, how dare you with any church hinder the rest of man and woman by promoting marriage outside of the original marriage! Now you have an obligation to inform the churches to your religion and inform every man, woman, and child that they already have the opposite sex as a wife or husband. Dont just sit there, get busy!

And yes, every woman you like and every woman you dont like are all your wives. You just dont have to take to you every one, as in, you dont have to take to you to have sex with and do other things with the ones you dont like. And I am implying that man and woman are free to have sex with each other they like because of and through the original marriage which was set in WORD to FLESH if you will believe in Genesis' stories.

Need more proof?

Genesis 4:19
And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.

^^See? You may take unto you any from who in all are already your wives! Do you not see this?! If you dont, then explain.

The only thing you've done by getting married outside the original marriage is shown dishonor your Creator's plan, and you have put yourself to be a victim to what things you didnt have to be a victim to.

Let me add: Based on Gen 2:24 your mother/father is the one not your wife/husband. Doesnt indicate your other relatives arent your wives, but like what was also indicated is that you may take you wives you want. And when you take to you wives it could be for anything other than for sex.


[edit on 28-5-2008 by Mabus]




posted on May, 28 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   
So word to the wise, dont marry someone you're already in a marriage with. Besides, it'll save you money and off set possible legal problems down the road. Women dont need to be given rings... So why let them be materialistic enough to drain you out what you should be saving for your retirement when you're already married to them? You're only fooling yourself when you become engaged when you're already married to woman not your mother. Hell, e-mail this topic to the news so that they can ask the churches live and the religious live what all they have to say about marrying outside the orginal marriage.

If you are married outside of the original marriage, then you need to repent through divorcing a.s.a.p. out of it so that you can honor the original marriage. Plus so you can be free to take to you more than who you thought you were just bound to in the man made dishonoring marriage.

The conspiracy was/is in man with the churches to dishonor the orginial marriage.

[edit on 28-5-2008 by Mabus]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Mabus
 



Hello
Rank Paganism!

and shed load of cash into the "church" coffers for more tea and wardrobe full of more frocky type gear to wear.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
More to bring light to:

According to the implications in Gen we are born into the aftermath/results of what happened with Adam and his choices. So that means we are originally born into polygamy (you instantly leave your mother and father, as in, divorce them as you're born into a polygamy excluding them. The leave thing doesnt mean what some think unless it said you leave their rules or household, which it didnt for a clear reason).

It was man who didnt find polygamy acceptible, not your Creator. It's a question of which do you favor? Man or your Creator?

Lamech didnt have to have took to himself more than one wife, even though he was already born into a polygamy (note: and he also left mother and father as born). He didnt even have to keep them taken to him either.

Whatever you put up with is on you concerning who in all you take to you of your wives you're already in marriage with.

Who in all you will take to you in this orginal polygamy is on you. A person doesnt have to take to themself more than one wife, but they should honor the truth about being in an orginal marriage already that is a polygamy/ being in an orginal divorce already from their mother and father.

In the story do you see any indication of leave mother and father meaning anything other than divorce? Otherwise tell me how a man leaves his mother and father?

Gen 4
17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

18And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech

^^Cain seems to have left mother and father district wise, but Irad begat Mehujael and it doesnt indicate Irad left mother and father district wise. So what does leave imply in Gen 2:24? Original divorce from mother and father. Hell, if leave meant otherwise, then what do you say about parents having their son leave em to go to school if you believe man is only supposed to leave for his wife? No, dont pick and choose now. You'd have to call it a sin that parents have been participating in. I know you see me eye to eye now about "leave" in context.

Oh yeah, the man-made polygamy is not the original polygamy. It's a dishonor. Dont confuse the two either. You'd be foolish if you were to marry a bunch of women just because a new man-made law allowed it when you're already married to them in the original marriage.

And dont confuse 'take to' and 'wives' as if they are the same thing. No, they are not the same. You already have wives according to original marriage, it's just that you may "take to" you any of them in any number. When you read "took to him two wives" you being confused would first think that means just gotten married. Ha, nope. He didnt marry who he was already married to, he just took to him two wives. It dont get more simple than that in understanding.

[edit on 28-5-2008 by Mabus]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
ok, so if we dont need to marry because we are already married, then whats all that hoopla about fornication?

matt 5:[32] But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

1 cor 5:[1] It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

1 cor 6:[18] Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that commiteth fornication sinneth against his own body.

1 cor 7:[2] Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

eph 5:[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

1 thes 4:[3] For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
^^I'll get to that after this I must say:

Rev 2
4Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.

5Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.


First love left? Original marriage is it.

Not fallen, but artfallen? It's like it seems you've just married when you been already born into the original marriage. See the art aspect induced by man who dont follow the Creator's plan?

Do the first work? Those are the works of Adam, even in what he has caused himself (and man following) to have to do and deal with after his choices. First works has to do with Adam inside/outside of the garden.

Gen 2
15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it

^^You must dress it and keep it. Thus you must keep to the orginal marriage which carried from inside the garden to outside the garden. No excuse.

Gen 3
17And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

^^You must eat of the ground (as in court's grounds lingo). You must eat of herbs and bread till return unto the ground (as in earth's dust lingo). Seems like an easy curse to manage. lol.

So by Rev you must repent from man-made marriage, as in dont set foot into it, and if you're already in it you must get out of it like by it on court ground. So you should just mention what you just became aware to by this thread, and the divorce court Judge should grant you a divorce from a dishonorable man made marriage. Your mate shouldn't keep you from repenting if your mate is all for you having a clean conscience.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
ok, so if we dont need to marry because we are already married, then whats all that hoopla about fornication?

matt 5:[32] But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

1 cor 5:[1] It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

1 cor 6:[18] Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that commiteth fornication sinneth against his own body.

1 cor 7:[2] Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

eph 5:[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

1 thes 4:[3] For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:



Fornication (definition)-
voluntary sexual intercourse between two unmarried persons or two persons not married to each other.

^^In context in what's indicated you are unmarried and not married to mother and father after the leave thing I mentioned in detail by birth.

So it is fornication if you have sex with a parent you are divorced from. If you marry someone you're divorced from orgininally, then you are committing fornication. The only way to marry someone your are divorced from by birth may or may not take a man-made court of law. But it's the sex that the scripture is keying in on. Though it's also the marriage in any way with who you are divorced from it is keying in on as well in Matt 5 which can be done by simply having sex with your parent.

In 1 cor 5 your father's wife is your mother, is it not? So what I reveal in the OP doesnt conflict with what you brung to me at all. You are sinning against your own body because you're made of your mother and father if you were to have sex with who you are unmarried to (mother/father). Again, no conflict between what you present with scripture and what I present with scriture. And if you dont have sex but marry mother/father you are commiting fornication. If you have sex with father/mother it is also adultery (you'd be having sex with someone you are orginally divorce from in the Word's spouse law).

The fathers/mothers who have sex with their daughters/sons on consent are fornicators with them. If it's rape by father/mother to the son/daughter or rape by son/daughter to the father/mother, then the one being raped I wouldnt think is fornicating.


[edit on 28-5-2008 by Mabus]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   
next time i get the thought of replying to one of these threads, im going to hit myself with something blunt until the feeling goes away.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
next time i get the thought of replying to one of these threads, im going to hit myself with something blunt until the feeling goes away.


^^You said that because you're married under man's version of marriage and dont wish to repent based on what I revealed with scripture to you?

^^Is this the case?

Or are you not married under man's version of marriage and have been wishing to marry under man's version of marriage to where you reject what I revealed in this thread with a passion?

Well if you dont want to follow your Creator's plan, it's on you. Though you do see you wouldnt be committing fornication/adultery if you have sex with who is not your parent at least.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
And this shall certify this thread in you all's brains:

And get this:

Leviticus 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

^^The neighbor could only be your father in such the case. And since it didnt indicate a wife taken unto the neighbor, then it is only implying that the man's wife is your mother.

^^This is if we add all in what we learned or what I pointed out with the passages. By the way, they are already put to death says Gen because of the curse that puts man back to dust. So be sharp in understanding how to follow the bible.




By some member on another site:

That doesn't go with your original hypothesis. 'one flesh' states the 2 become one, meaning 2 people become one person. If 2 people become one person, how can the process be done again? the husband and wife are already one person. Furthermore When the whole incident with david and bethseba and how it displeased the Lord goes against your hypothesis, also Mat 5:27-28. If there was to be no marriage, then why did Jesus say "Looking at another woman lustfully is commiting adultry", and for the sake of argument, even if the bible did condone pologamy (and it doesn't but I am saying this to prove a point) there is nothing against having only one wife anyway, which still goes against your hypothesis.


This is what I had to say:

Sorry, but you are going out of context with Matt 5:27-28...

Matt 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

^^In his heart is the key.

And the part above it: Matt5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

Who is them of old time? I dont know about you, but I wont follow them over what is in writing concerning Adam and Eve and the Lord. Besides, adultery can only be done with mother/father because they arent your lawful spouse says the Word based on Gen.

Having one wife? No, we have as many wives as as many women (outside our mothers) are on the earth currently. It's just that we may take unto us whichever we like (and that's however many from who in all is already our wives) with reguard to which our neighbor would or wouldnt share sex wise or would or would'nt share something else wise in particular like built finances between two or more.

And about the definition to marriage. I can say two things...

1. You are choosing man's version over your Creators?
2. We've already entered the marriage contract and everthing else through Adam through birth.

Oh, and it didnt say the two become one flesh, it said they shall be one flesh.

^^"Be" implies something that is already. "Become" implies something that isnt already. "They", in the quote in Gen 2:24, can include every person outside your father and mother in the one flesh. Just because it mentioned "his wife" in the single sense doesn't mean anything because one flesh says otherwise that "his wife" is the one flesh of woman period. "Wife" in definition doesnt say the word "person". It used the term a woman. A wife can imply woman kind period where in biblical context it excludes your mother.

So if she is a woman, then she is your wife if she isnt your parent. And as you turn to look at another person, if it is a woman, then she is your wife if she isnt your parent. They (outside your parents) are all your wife whether you like 'em or not and whether you have sex with them or not. So you can call em *etc. number* wives of your one flesh wife that is considered a "they". Think hard about the punctuation mark ":" used in Gen 2:24 after the word wife... Whether or not it's the right mark, it's place can imply what follows to have to do with the last word before it such as "wife".

So if you put the word one infront of wife, it's flawed. It should be he has his wife or you have your wife. A number(s) infront of wife implies person(s) of the wife.

I'll tell you this much, if it said "two" shall be one flesh, then it would mean just two persons. Though since it said "be one flesh" and "wife" was used before it it isnt to be made as a matter of persons (as though there's a certain number factor), it's to be a matter of flesh.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Exodus 20:17
"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."


covet-
1. to desire wrongfully, inordinately, or without due regard for the rights of others: to covet another's property.

covetousness-
1. inordinately or wrongly desirous of wealth or possessions; greedy.

If a man takes to him a wife and doesnt care if you or other men will have sex with her, then you aren't engaging in covetousness by reguarding who you are allowed to have sex with.

Think of all the women who hate being referred to as property or wealth (a trophy)... Are they implying no one can covet them because they dont belong as property or as a possession or as a wealth to any man be they boyfreind or husband? lol, these are the persons your wife you shouldnt keep unto/take unto you and not mind if some other man does who knows what with them.

What belongs to you property wise and possession wise is what or who is taken unto you.

Haha, you would think the woman that doesnt want to be referred to as your property or possession or trophy wouldn't marry you under man's version of marriage since that would only put her as a particular man's property or possession or wealth.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:16 AM
link   
To my understanding, if you say is truly what the Biblical text means, it deffinetly sounds like people practiced incest enough for it to be a major issue worth being addresed HEAVILY in the Bible.

The Bible recognizes incest as an entirely different thing than adultry and fornication.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
When an application asks if you're single or married, what are you supposed to put "yes" to?

Obviously to the married option. If you arent under the man-made marriage you can indeed put "yes" to the married option. If someone wants to say you're being false on the app, just reveal what you learned from the bible itself. If they are religious, they should see you eye to eye more surely. And if they are not religious, they should still see you eye to eye.

So tell the churches that original marriage cant be refuted against by any dinomination's theory. Tell the churches to repent from preforming man-made marriages.

Oh yeah, and those ppl divorcing more than mother and father should be told to repent, too. You know, those priests and nuns participate in dishonoring the original marriage which they are basically retracting blindly. Their first love they must also return to so they dont hinder the Lord's order socially in some anti sense.

Do you all see what this discovery of truth means?! It means the Pope and the fatherhood and sisterhood can no longer be. It even reveals that the papacy was never following the Lord of the bible in any way honest.

Add: I cant forget virgins... They must also repent. At least the ones who claim to be saving sex for what is the man-made version of marriage. Premarital sex did not exist after Adam's rib became a woman and he knew his wife. Sure he knew his rib already even.

[edit on 29-5-2008 by Mabus]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
The bibles "adultery" vs "man's adultery" I will explain:

matt 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.


^^This means going against the orginal marriage and against the original divorce puts you in adultery. When you put away your wife (wife = all the women not your parent/child) by becoming a priest or a nun or by having sex with your parent/child, you are committing adultery with your parents/children.

Putting away your wife is as putting away your divorce from your parent/child as you then, semi-automatically or automatically, marry your parent/child (or become as though you wont accept that you left your parents once born or that you wont accept your child left you--this can be done by simply resisting cleaving to your wife like by becoming a priest or nun) or have sex with your parent/child. When you shall put something away that something still is, but is just covered up by you in your chosen life style that's dishonoring the Lord's order.

So adultery is:

1. Resist cleaving to wife in any way.
2. Having sex with your parent/child.
3. Marrying, in any way, a parent/child: A) who you were through birth originally divorced from, or /B) who came born originally divorced from you.

If you wont cleave to your wife, then that is just as good as marrying your parents/children who are in the original divorce, even if you dont have sex with your parent/children.

So you'd not only be committing adultery, but your parent or child would be caused to, too, with you. The dictionary's version of adultery involves sexual intercorse, but the bible says it can be committed by fornication or just simply marrying the divorced parent/child.

So all those priests and nuns cause their living parents to commit adultery.

[edit on 29-5-2008 by Mabus]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join