|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 13, 2018 10:30:26 GMT
Are you for it or against? And why?
|
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 23:53:25 GMT
And where do my definitions differ exactly? I ask this because I can provide further clarity if you wish. Your argument contradicts itself as "love" is used as a transient word that not just lack balance but is dependent only upon a subjectivity. Quite obviously your definition of love is way different than mine. You think it’s just romanticism, which tells me you don’t know what love is. No I said it has nothing to do with romanticism, you really have to reread what I said. Your conceptions stem from the romantic movement, I will provide sources later...have to go because of time. |
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on May 17, 2018 23:56:27 GMT
Quite obviously your definition of love is way different than mine. You think it’s just romanticism, which tells me you don’t know what love is. No I said it has nothing to do with romanticism, you really have to reread what I said. Your conceptions stem from the romantic movement, I will provide sources later...have to go because of time. The way you quote and reply makes it very difficult to read your responses, it looks like you’re writing me a 10 page essay which I don’t have the time to sit down and read. You said marriage based on love is derived from romanticism, which it isn’t. Can you please define what love is? My conceptions stem from the Bible. Nothing else. |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 17, 2018 23:58:57 GMT
We aren’t going to agree on anything because you use different definitions than I do for just about everything  So no point in continuing the discussion. You're using lust. Love is eternal by bible definition. I mean if a parent loves their kid then I hope it's eternal as well...but many could care less and many kill them on the news. That's not love. The verses in Corithians that I showed you is. Or this.... Proverbs 3:3-4: “Let love and faithfulness NEVER leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. Then you will win favor and a good name in the sight of God and man." 1 John 4:16: “And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 18, 2018 0:04:21 GMT
@eodnhoj7 I was shoved a picture. He was on the couch sitting with his parents taken especially for me. And my no wasn't respected completely technically. Went like this. About 5 years ago... Person setting this up: You will marry and I will make sure of it. Me: You won't succeed. Person setting this up: I will make sure I will. A few months later... Person setting this up: shows me a photo on their camera. Me: Who are these people? Person setting it up: That's your future husband with his parents. I am setting up the wedding with them as we speak. Do you want it done in their country? Me: Nowhere *returns camera* Person setting it up: Ok, I will make the decisions. Me: Go ahead. Enjoy the wedding. Send me some pics of how it went. A week later... Person setting it up: Ok, I have arranged for you to speak to him via Skype. When shall we do it? I will be there during it too. Me: Never. Person setting it up: They won't be happy. Me: At least I will be. A few days later.... Person setting it up: They gave up. They think I'm making you up. New family.... Me: Well, you did make up a bride. But no my family isn't for arranged marriages. This person was scolded by them for this to leave me alone. We all have that one odd family member.... Mine? About 15 years ago... given a picture by my father Me: Uhh...no... Father: You sure? She seems real nice... Me: I am not attracted to her.... Father: Okay. Well that was embellished a bit but that give a general definition to the situation. Then real life hit in years later and I found the irony about how easy it was to get laid but difficult to maintain a relationship. No win situation for a man, if I sleep around my conscious will kill me, if I don't sleep around left out by social group. The simple truth, from personal experience and observing the live of those around me, is that the majority of women have no consciences and are shallow...works for me, though, now I don't have to worry about taking care of a family. Most men will not get married in the future because they will not put up with the woman's behavior. That's because people are doing relationships wrong and it's not working. God forbids that way. But whatever...everyone has their freedom of choice to do it right or wrong...to be happy or not. Shrug |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 14:53:58 GMT
No I said it has nothing to do with romanticism, you really have to reread what I said. Your conceptions stem from the romantic movement, I will provide sources later...have to go because of time. The way you quote and reply makes it very difficult to read your responses, it looks like you’re writing me a 10 page essay which I don’t have the time to sit down and read. 10 pages is short and only takes a few minutes.You said marriage based on love is derived from romanticism, which it isn’t. Can you please define what love is? Mutual self-sacrifice as a bonding median which maintains the relationship between the individuals/groups while further manifesting further relationships.My conceptions stem from the Bible. Nothing else. Mine stems from the human condition, the medium (even theologians agree as inherent within scripture) from which these conceptions manifest. Here is one article dealing with the concept of "romanticism" affecting the current conception of marriage hence one of the reasons we see so many failures within the modern relationship. family.jrank.org/pages/869/Industrialization-Marriage.html |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 14:59:53 GMT
And where do my definitions differ exactly? I ask this because I can provide further clarity if you wish. Your argument contradicts itself as "love" is used as a transient word that not just lack balance but is dependent only upon a subjectivity. You're using lust. Lust would be relegated to any imbalance in eros where the partner is being used "only" for sex or the act exists outside of a stable construct (marriage in this case). Marriage gives form to the absence of reason found in lust, by turning it into a constructive procreative activity. Marriage is a median between no-sex and complete lust. Again my stance does not contradict scripture, specifically some of the letters of St. Paul and the Song of Songs. Love is eternal by bible definition. I mean if a parent loves their kid then I hope it's eternal as well...but many could care less and many kill them on the news. That's not love. The verses in Corithians that I showed you is. Or this.... Proverbs 3:3-4: “Let love and faithfulness NEVER leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. Then you will win favor and a good name in the sight of God and man." You are referencing Agapic Love, which while an element of marriage, marriage itself is dependent upon ero, philios, agape. A marriage without sex is not a marriage and a marriage is not needed...it would strictly be a platonic friendship.1 John 4:16: “And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." You are are equating "marriage" to "agape" and that seems to be where the confusion stems. Under these terms, most likely you will not find a husband. On the other hand, the goods news is that mostly likely you do not need one either. |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 15:00:45 GMT
Mine? About 15 years ago... given a picture by my father Me: Uhh...no... Father: You sure? She seems real nice... Me: I am not attracted to her.... Father: Okay. Well that was embellished a bit but that give a general definition to the situation. Then real life hit in years later and I found the irony about how easy it was to get laid but difficult to maintain a relationship. No win situation for a man, if I sleep around my conscious will kill me, if I don't sleep around left out by social group. The simple truth, from personal experience and observing the live of those around me, is that the majority of women have no consciences and are shallow...works for me, though, now I don't have to worry about taking care of a family. Most men will not get married in the future because they will not put up with the woman's behavior. That's because people are doing relationships wrong and it's not working. God forbids that way. But whatever...everyone has their freedom of choice to do it right or wrong...to be happy or not.  "That's because" is in reference to which point above exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 18, 2018 15:02:48 GMT
That's because people are doing relationships wrong and it's not working. God forbids that way. But whatever...everyone has their freedom of choice to do it right or wrong...to be happy or not. "That's because" is in reference to which point above exactly? All of it Shrug |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 18, 2018 15:05:27 GMT
You're using lust. Lust would be relegated to any imbalance in eros where the partner is being used "only" for sex or the act exists outside of a stable construct (marriage in this case). Marriage gives form to the absence of reason found in lust, by turning it into a constructive procreative activity. Marriage is a median between no-sex and complete lust. Again my stance does not contradict scripture, specifically some of the letters of St. Paul and the Song of Songs. Love is eternal by bible definition. I mean if a parent loves their kid then I hope it's eternal as well...but many could care less and many kill them on the news. That's not love. The verses in Corithians that I showed you is. Or this.... Proverbs 3:3-4: “Let love and faithfulness NEVER leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. Then you will win favor and a good name in the sight of God and man." You are referencing Agapic Love, which while an element of marriage, marriage itself is dependent upon ero, philios, agape. A marriage without sex is not a marriage and a marriage is not needed...it would strictly be a platonic friendship.1 John 4:16: “And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." You are are equating "marriage" to "agape" and that seems to be where the confusion stems. Under these terms, most likely you will not find a husband. On the other hand, the goods news is that mostly likely you do not need one either. I found one 3 times. I just don't need one or don't need one yet. I can be equally happy alone if not more. But yes marriage is with sex. I never said it wasn't. I said God specifically made sex for the married couple to have children. God wants them to have children. |
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on May 18, 2018 15:11:52 GMT
You are are equating "marriage" to "agape" and that seems to be where the confusion stems. Under these terms, most likely you will not find a husband. On the other hand, the goods news is that mostly likely you do not need one either. I found one 3 times. I just don't need one or don't need one yet. I can be equally happy alone if not more. But yes marriage is with sex. I never said it wasn't. I said God specifically made sex for the married couple to have children. God wants them to have children. How long is regular?   |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 15:14:25 GMT
"That's because" is in reference to which point above exactly? All of it And who exactly is doing it right in the current generation? I can count on one hand the successful relationships in regards to the millenials (which I am assuming you are one). The simple truth is that none of the current cultural frameworks are functional as evident by there failure rates. This is due to a variety of reasons, the most evident being the inherent progressive modern mentality which inevitably warps not just peoples relationships but the standards these relationships are held too. This constant breaking apart of results in a various number of "extremes" which in themselves are harmful. Marriage is a mediation between eros, philios, and agape in seperate degrees: 1) Eros to give structure to lustful tendencies by allowing procreation in one respect while inverting this same irrational eroticism into physical intimacy. 2) Philios to give structure to life issues (finances, family, etc.) 3) Agape as the peak of placing another needs before oneself. |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 15:19:39 GMT
You are are equating "marriage" to "agape" and that seems to be where the confusion stems. Under these terms, most likely you will not find a husband. On the other hand, the goods news is that mostly likely you do not need one either. I found one 3 times. I just don't need one or don't need one yet. I can be equally happy alone if not more. But yes marriage is with sex. I never said it wasn't. I said God specifically made sex for the married couple to have children. God wants them to have children. Found what? Sex as a unifying activity is embodied at its height through marriage, and any activity outside of marriage is conducive to a form of psychological fragmentation (religious terms "sin" as seperation). Seperating sex from marriage leads to instability in a society along with personal psychological issues. Sex is for children, by observing the vary nature of the act itself...however the "pleasure" itself is also inherent function of it. Sex should be open to children however the pleasure in it (a pleasure ideally one should be able to do without) does not contradict any moral or ethical code when confined within the marriage. If there was no pleasure for the couple during sex, I would question if the relationship did not have inherent issues within it. |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 18, 2018 15:22:46 GMT
All of it And who exactly is doing it right in the current generation? I can count on one hand the successful relationships in regards to the millenials (which I am assuming you are one). The simple truth is that none of the current cultural frameworks are functional as evident by there failure rates. This is due to a variety of reasons, the most evident being the inherent progressive modern mentality which inevitably warps not just peoples relationships but the standards these relationships are held too. This constant breaking apart of results in a various number of "extremes" which in themselves are harmful. Marriage is a mediation between eros, philios, and agape in seperate degrees: 1) Eros to give structure to lustful tendencies by allowing procreation in one respect while inverting this same irrational eroticism into physical intimacy. 2) Philios to give structure to life issues (finances, family, etc.) 3) Agape as the peak of placing another needs before oneself. Mostly just those that are doing it by scripture. So not many! Which is fine because not all want a happy long lasting relationship.  |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 18, 2018 15:24:22 GMT
I found one 3 times. I just don't need one or don't need one yet. I can be equally happy alone if not more. But yes marriage is with sex. I never said it wasn't. I said God specifically made sex for the married couple to have children. God wants them to have children. Found what? Sex as a unifying activity is embodied at its height through marriage, and any activity outside of marriage is conducive to a form of psychological fragmentation (religious terms "sin" as seperation). Seperating sex from marriage leads to instability in a society along with personal psychological issues. Sex is for children, by observing the vary nature of the act itself...however the "pleasure" itself is also inherent function of it. Sex should be open to children however the pleasure in it (a pleasure ideally one should be able to do without) does not contradict any moral or ethical code when confined within the marriage. If there was no pleasure for the couple during sex, I would question if the relationship did not have inherent issues within it. Found one 3 times who only wants the bible way and proposed or plans to. And I still never separated sex from marriage. I'm confused. |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 15:37:27 GMT
And who exactly is doing it right in the current generation? I can count on one hand the successful relationships in regards to the millenials (which I am assuming you are one). The simple truth is that none of the current cultural frameworks are functional as evident by there failure rates. This is due to a variety of reasons, the most evident being the inherent progressive modern mentality which inevitably warps not just peoples relationships but the standards these relationships are held too. This constant breaking apart of results in a various number of "extremes" which in themselves are harmful. Marriage is a mediation between eros, philios, and agape in seperate degrees: 1) Eros to give structure to lustful tendencies by allowing procreation in one respect while inverting this same irrational eroticism into physical intimacy. 2) Philios to give structure to life issues (finances, family, etc.) 3) Agape as the peak of placing another needs before oneself. Mostly just those that are doing it by scripture. So not many! Which is fine because not all want a happy long lasting relationship. That is my point, the fundamentalist approach either does not result in those relationships lasting (statistically speaking) with the one's that do last even less being "happy" (whatever that is really "is" the question considering "happiness" is a dirty word in the modern culture). Happiness, without fear of contradicting any subjective interpretation, generally extends to a form of "balance as fullness". The marriages today, for the most part, lack any form of balance in the general sense with the exception of a select few which is statistically inevitable. All the women in these fundamentalist marriages are miserable. All the men in secular "effiminate" marriages are also miserable. The question occurs in respect to where one balances faith and reason...not one or the other. The modern relationship is subject to too many extremes which prevent any form of happiness assuming it last to begin with. The relationships which do find "happiness" and "love" usually find it not at the beginning but over a period of time as both partners learn more about eachother and learn to mediate with eachother (yes the word "mediate" is used to often...). |
|
