Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2018 21:18:43 GMT
Verses just mean to love God and put Him first. Put your dedicated to God first and to family second and He will bless you. Since Jesus said greatest commandment is to love God first and loving others is second. Ok. Three moments: 1. So, it's possible to follow Christ being married (I think you're agree here without any doubts); 2. Family is the traditional thing (there are many types of families: in OT we read about polygamy many times; in NT there are rather monogamy. Also, some traditional values like rituals, celebrations, important dates belong to the family's traditions); 3. To follow Christ having traditions is appropriate in NT (it leads from 1 and 2).
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 5, 2018 21:30:28 GMT
Verses just mean to love God and put Him first. Put your dedicated to God first and to family second and He will bless you. Since Jesus said greatest commandment is to love God first and loving others is second. Ok. Three moments: 1. So, it's possible to follow Christ being married (I think you're agree here without any doubts); 2. Family is the traditional thing (there are many types of families: in OT we read about polygamy many times; in NT there are rather monogamy. Also, some traditional values like rituals, celebrations, important dates belong to the family's traditions); 3. To follow Christ having traditions is appropriate in NT (it leads from 1 and 2). In Genesis 2 and 3 you can read from the beginning it was meant to be one man and one woman, husband and wife.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2018 21:36:27 GMT
Ok. Three moments: 1. So, it's possible to follow Christ being married (I think you're agree here without any doubts); 2. Family is the traditional thing (there are many types of families: in OT we read about polygamy many times; in NT there are rather monogamy. Also, some traditional values like rituals, celebrations, important dates belong to the family's traditions); 3. To follow Christ having traditions is appropriate in NT (it leads from 1 and 2). In Genesis 2 and 3 you can read from the beginning it was meant to be one man and one woman, husband and wife. May be, but through OT we see many variable stories: about whores, about incest, about polygamy, etc. I hope you wouldn't deny that during the story of OT there was one and the same God? So, He gave different orders about family. But, sure in the beginning a man and a woman were created, so it could be taken as an act of creating a family of this type.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 5, 2018 21:54:24 GMT
In Genesis 2 and 3 you can read from the beginning it was meant to be one man and one woman, husband and wife. May be, but through OT we see many variable stories: about whores, about incest, about polygamy, etc. I hope you wouldn't deny that during the story of OT there was one and the same God? So, He gave different orders about family. But, sure in the beginning a man and a woman were created, so it could be taken as an act of creating a family of this type. We aren’t living in the time of the OT. We are living under the covenant of the NT. So, many of the things that God permitted in the time of the OT aren’t permitted today. Christ, who is God in the flesh, came and gave us His commandments under this new covenant. It is recorded in Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9 that a man is to leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, not wives. This is the commandment from Christ who is God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2018 7:05:39 GMT
May be, but through OT we see many variable stories: about whores, about incest, about polygamy, etc. I hope you wouldn't deny that during the story of OT there was one and the same God? So, He gave different orders about family. But, sure in the beginning a man and a woman were created, so it could be taken as an act of creating a family of this type. We aren’t living in the time of the OT. We are living under the covenant of the NT. So, many of the things that God permitted in the time of the OT aren’t permitted today. Christ, who is God in the flesh, came and gave us His commandments under this new covenant. It is recorded in Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9 that a man is to leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, not wives. This is the commandment from Christ who is God. Well, there are couple of moments then. a. OT testifies us about Christ (Deuteronomy, Psalms, Jeremy...); Christ said that He claims not from Himself, but Scriptures (i.e. OT) testifies about Him. Also, previously you rightly said that God created a man and a woman in Heaven; we can read about it in Genesis, and God appeals to us through it (or else, how do we know that ideal family is a couple of a man and a woman?). Denying OT is to the way to deny Christ. Even if Christ has said about the New Testament, but evidences about Him we're reaching in Old Scriptures. How do we know that Christ is Christ? In that time there were many "Christs" what says in "Dead Sea Scrolls", from some places of apocrypha, from the ancient writers (e.g. Lukian from Samosath), and also NT contains few notifications about it, when it says that "there will be many fail-Christs", etc. So, we might be mistaken if we wouldn't take into account OT too. b. Yes, it's obvious that many things from OT doesn't permitted in present times, but many rituals (like Eucharist) are going from times of OT. We can avoid all the rituals to just reading Bible, but reading Bible and empathying Christ (i.e. feeling Christ's deeds, not only His words, and understanding what He really did, what He felt, etc) are not the same. If I just a reader, I'm just a reader, but if I follow Christ, with high probability, I will suffer like Him, and will feel pain, misery... As Christ said that following Him is not the way of pleasure, but sorrow, because "[Christians] don't belong to this world". That's why some rituals are needed to. The rituals are not magic actions, but the same path to Christ; for example, to do what Christ's said are the ritual actions. You can ask: what does it mean here 'the rituals'? The rituals are traditions to Christ's words. His words are his words, and when we do something, we do (not read, or write), we're trying to do it with faith that it will be good what we do. So, trying to copying Christ's actions, we're doing it in Christ's traditions. That's why the rituals are traditions of Christ's actions.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 6, 2018 7:27:10 GMT
We aren’t living in the time of the OT. We are living under the covenant of the NT. So, many of the things that God permitted in the time of the OT aren’t permitted today. Christ, who is God in the flesh, came and gave us His commandments under this new covenant. It is recorded in Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9 that a man is to leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, not wives. This is the commandment from Christ who is God. Well, there are couple of moments then. a. OT testifies us about Christ (Deuteronomy, Psalms, Jeremy...); Christ said that He claims not from Himself, but Scriptures (i.e. OT) testifies about Him. Also, previously you rightly said that God created a man and a woman in Heaven; we can read about it in Genesis, and God appeals to us through it (or else, how do we know that ideal family is a couple of a man and a woman?). Denying OT is to the way to deny Christ. Even if Christ has said about the New Testament, but evidences about Him we're reaching in Old Scriptures. How do we know that Christ is Christ? In that time there were many "Christs" what says in "Dead Sea Scrolls", from some places of apocrypha, from the ancient writers (e.g. Lukian from Samosath), and also NT contains few notifications about it, when it says that "there will be many fail-Christs", etc. So, we might be mistaken if we wouldn't take into account OT too. b. Yes, it's obvious that many things from OT doesn't permitted in present times, but many rituals (like Eucharist) are going from times of OT. We can avoid all the rituals to just reading Bible, but reading Bible and empathying Christ (i.e. feeling Christ's deeds, not only His words, and understanding what He really did, what He felt, etc) are not the same. If I just a reader, I'm just a reader, but if I follow Christ, with high probability, I will suffer like Him, and will feel pain, misery... As Christ said that following Him is not the way of pleasure, but sorrow, because "[Christians] don't belong to this world". That's why some rituals are needed to. The rituals are not magic actions, but the same path to Christ; for example, to do what Christ's said are the ritual actions. You can ask: what does it mean here 'the rituals'? The rituals are traditions to Christ's words. His words are his words, and when we do something, we do (not read, or write), we're trying to do it with faith that it will be good what we do. So, trying to copying Christ's actions, we're doing it in Christ's traditions. That's why the rituals are traditions of Christ's actions. You’re saying I’m denying the OT when I am not at all denying it. All I said was that we as Christians are under the covenant of the NT which Christ Himself came and established. Covenants in the OT are done away with according to scripture. I never denied Christ once, but did the opposite, recognizing Him as God, and never said anything about the OT testifying or not testifying of Christ; it isn’t even relevant to the subject matter. So if you want to continue to strawman and accuse me of things I did not do this conversation will be over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2018 7:38:44 GMT
I don't think it's right, because the relatives of spouses are a part of society, and society has rights under any family. A family is just a couple of people, but the society is much more people. Arguing about something is to involve the society to the problem. Solving the problem is to address to something that is under the society's affairs. There's not need to be separated, unit families. All families must be opened as far as we can. A family affairs are society's affairs. Leaving families on their own is to make that 'small countries of tyranny'. One person ought not to be interfered, but a family ought to. But, I'm speaking here about the law family, because two persons living together is not a family. As long as they live like that they are untouchable. But as soon as they're getting married, they become an object of society, and loosing their daily rights. Growing children is the another reason for subordinating families to society's laws. The society is owner of children, not a family. I don't know but if I'm married and he and I have a problem or whatever then it's our issue alone and our business. I wouldn't want others interfering and possibly causing more problems. Nor do I think anyone should tell us where to live, how to name our kids, etc. I would actually see it as very rude if people interfere in my family like that You know, Elizabeth, personally I don't want to be like that - interfering with family affairs, etc. But what a family means then? A family is a part of society. If I live with someone, I just live with someone; that's all. But if I go to the Church, and ask padre "hey, mierda, quickly marry us, you dirty pig!", then I do a social act. Without social there's no need to marry. As soon as someone gets a licence of marriage, the one becomes another part of society - a married person. So, either I avoid this, or I need to become a part of society. Society is the different mechanism, and it can allow growing children for families, but while doing it the society's loosing its role. Growing children is a part of governing countries. Today many of people forgot about it, but in old times growing children was the countries affairs: the better generation would be, the better affairs of the country would be. I have to admire, this problem is not simple to solve, because on the one hand we're a part of government (it is our shield, our judge, our laws, etc), on the other hand I have my personal life. I would try to solve it taking into account that children were not toys for parents. Growing children is an art, not experimenting. That's why I'm for open families. "Open" doesn't mean "breaking all the old previous rules". No, "open" is for better governing of the country we live.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2018 7:49:00 GMT
DKTrav88 - No way, I'm not going to. All what I wanted to say that if OT served us for testifying Christ, then it appealed to OT as the source of many other thing we had to do. I think it can't be: using of OT for arguing about Christ, and denying its regulations at the same. OT is the source of regulations too. In Apostolic Council at Jerusalem in about 51 year A.C. the Apostles claimed that circumcision is allowed for Jews, but not necessary for aliens. Using the same logic we can say that some of things are appropriate from OT, and some of them are not. For example, there are many good thoughts in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Psalms, so we can aim the words from it to do something. And this is the reason why the marriage is depending not only on NT, but on OT too. NT can't solve the problem with marriage on cousins, but OT can.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 6, 2018 7:57:32 GMT
DKTrav88 - No way, I'm not going to. All what I wanted to say that if OT served us for testifying Christ, then it appealed to OT as the source of many other thing we had to do. I think it can't be: using of OT for arguing about Christ, and denying its regulations at the same. OT is the source of regulations too. In Apostolic Council at Jerusalem in about 51 year A.C. the Apostles claimed that circumcision is allowed for Jews, but not necessary for aliens. Using the same logic we can say that some of things are appropriate from OT, and some of them are not. For example, there are many good thoughts in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Psalms, so we can aim the words from it to do something. And this is the reason why the marriage is depending not only on NT, but on OT too. NT can't solve the problem with marriage on cousins, but OT can. You don’t understand what you’re talking about. I’ll say it one more time; the covenants in the OT are done away with in Christ. A new covenant has been established in Christ in the NT, therefore we do not observed the old covenants. Show me a commandment from God that demands we have more than one wife, please.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on May 6, 2018 8:03:28 GMT
There is not a lot of time on this topic, but Christ clearly said - that he did not come to break the law. The essence of the New Testament is that God died and rose again in the name of the forgiveness of mankind's sins, hence the laws of the Old Testament work simply on them to look in a new light!
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 6, 2018 8:16:30 GMT
There is no law by God in the entire Bible that permits polygamy. My original point was for one man and one woman, husband and wife as it is said from the beginning in Genesis and as Christ reiterates in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. I made no other argument.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 6, 2018 8:18:29 GMT
I'm moving this religious stuff to religion. Too much off topic!
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on May 6, 2018 8:20:02 GMT
I'm moving this religious stuff to religion. Too much off topic! This is mostly not a religious topic! Shrug
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on May 6, 2018 8:25:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 6, 2018 8:30:23 GMT
God always said one male and one female in OT and NT. For example Joseph from OT was a righteous man and did it right and always pleased God. He forgave his brothers and married once and taught his family about God. But many other people God had many problems with and punished. So be like Joseph he was blessed and went from poverty to riches.
|
|