When are we married?

[presidente]

Who said this was a "virgin" - lol? Who said the two people hadn't already received approval...from whomever they needed or wished to receive approval? Who said they weren't already living together "in sin" for 18 years? Who said the dad wasn't a deadbeat who left the family long ago and lives with his girlfriend in Las vegas and couldn't care less who his daughter marries and barely has any contact? Who said this wasn't a 48-year-old woman on her second marriage? Who said these weren't two retirees in their 60's?

No one had limited the discussion to "virgins" - lol. The thread has no such limitations. We're talking about the entire gamut of humanity, whoever among them might desire to be married. You're off-topic. Off on some argumentative tangent no one is talking about. Need to start a separate thread about what apparently is another of your false doctrines, unfortunately: Living under OT laws and rituals.

Hmmm. I am starting with what the Bible has to say about the issue. So I referred to a specific text that addresses the issue. The text had to do with fornication. I did not make that passage about sex, the sex is already there. I know the Old Testament has laws and rituals. But if we are talking about 'what is marriage' and it doesn't take into account what marriage is in the Old Testament as well, we have an issue.

And two virgins marrying where both fathers are living and the family is in tact is probably the simplest case to consider before we start talking about otehr exceptions.

As far as second marriages is concerned, in some cases, the best answer is to go reconcile with your husband.

Giving in marriage is also referred to in the New Testament. Jesus said there would be marrying and giving in marriage until he came. I Corinthians 7 talks about giving the virgin in marriage.

And the Deuteronomy passage had the father choosing whether to give his now non-virgin daughter in marriage.

I say again - if two people stand up before their own "community" and state their life commitment, whether they do so in person or by email, by texting, or by pigeon...they are then free to commence with their marriage.

In the scenario I mentioned, the community was the fellow teenagers. But the law didn't allow for the elder people to decide the two were married if her father were in the picture.

Good grief, but are you EVER weirdly argumentative and unpleasant...with your unseemly references to "sex behind a bush"

This is a discussion forum. Of course people will discuss their ideas and disagree. Why do you resort to personal attacks.

We are talking about what makes a marriage. Sex is going to come up. If you are prudish about the topic, you should be prepared for that.

(the way you characterized my comments), your wife's "fornication", and what-not.[

That's borderline slanderous, and an immoral thing to type if you did it intentionally. I said we should marry in a propery way. As a husband, I wouldn't want anyone to accuse my wife of fornication. My wife was a virgin when I married her (and so was I), and implying that she fornicated is really out of line.

Weird inappropriate stuff. The other thread - same thing: Very, very odd and very, very cold, unpleasant stuff.

Read what you posted above about my wife and look yourself in the mirror and read those comments.

You also have a tendancy to dodge specific points with personal attacks and other forms of misdirection. This is a discussion forum. If you want to discuss, discuss, but it is bad form to attack people for discussing and disagreeing on a topic like this.

And you've stumbled into sexism. The OT's now-defunct application of morality doesn't fit into the NT era. Both young people (since you were mistakenly envisioning two young virgins desiring marriage) would equally need to get any approval that would be appropriate for younger folks who wish to honor the advisories of their parents.

I think it is appropriate in a family where the parents are alive to get the parents blessing. But I'm dealing with a specific scripture. Many people think that these scriptures are sexist. But they were spoken by God through Moses, so if you think the scriptures are sexist take it up with God.

God did give laws that treated genders differently. Though it wasn't the original design, God did tolerate and regulate polygyny in the Old Testament, so a man not being a virgin and a woman not being a virgin in marriage laws is treated differently.

When you say you're only concerned about the one gender falling into sin...bro, both genders are equally accountable! But...get your own thread.

I never said I was only concerned with one gender falling into sin. I was dealing with specific passages of scripture and the topics in them.

 

[MattTooFor]

I am starting with what the Bible has to say about the issue.

I say again - if two people stand up before their own "community" and state their life commitment, whether they do so in person or by email, by texting, or by pigeon...with or without a piece of paper (marriage license) from a godless bureaucrat, with or without words spoken by a pastor...they are then free to commence with their marriage.

That's all I am saying. I am not interested in your off-topic stuff. Your comments don't apply to the topic. If a woman gets married to a man that her parents don't approve of, she is still married. In other words, you're off-topic. Start a thread about young people honoring their parents' admonition, or something.

But this is interesting: When I referred back to your disturbing analogy about your "wife", now I've crossed the line? I don't get it. You described my views as so horrendous and, in effect, so immoral, that they would cause one's wife to be viewed as a "fornicator". Really, prez? That's pretty sloppy for somebody with a hair-trigger for taking offense: I have just described...my...personal...philosophy...of marriage and you have the obnoxious gall to claim that this turns one's spouse into a you-know-what? Did you think before you typed that out?

My interpretation of that comment was it was meant to be a personal jab (to say the least) and thus meant as deliberate unpleasantness. But honestly, it doesn't rise to a level of any real concern. Water off a duck's back. Just an observation.

I've seen so many crazy things of the Internet. I get hostile emails (along with praising ones) from having this e-book (linked in my bottom caption below, for the two and a half people reading this thread) and other publications for the last ten years. Shots coming from every angle.

But this is the second time you have done this very odd thing of provocatively dangling your spouse in front of me, like a chip on your shoulder. The first time, you were daring me to call your wife a "liar" (good grief). I had to use some rather nimble and gracious wording to get around that little booby trap. NOW here you give it a second shot.

You also have a tendancy to dodge specific points with personal attacks and other forms of misdirection. This is a discussion forum. If you want to discuss, discuss, but it is bad form to attack people for discussing and disagreeing on a topic like this.

Personal attacks? Just making observations. If you don't like 'discussing' with me, then don't 'discuss' with me. My goodness - it would seem the solution would be easy to figure out. You're the one seeking out my posts, as you did here. Or running away from my posts, as the case may be (with my latest remarks on the other thread). I would actually probably prefer you didn't follow me around. Or do. Either way...I will bravely soldier on.

 

[Tinuviel]

These days, it is considered official when you make a commitment in the form of your marriage vows.

In the Jewish culture it was when the marriage was consummated. That being said it was unlawful to have sexual intercourse before you declared your intentions and payed the marriage portion. I believe a ceremony of sorts was also the norm. So...it is a sequence of events at the time.

 

[presidente]

But this is interesting: When I referred back to your disturbing analogy about your "wife", now I've crossed the line? I don't get it.

My point was a valid one. It's appropriate to get married in a way acknowledged by society (as long as it is not sinful, e.g. participating in idolatry), so that people don't consider your wife to be fornicating with you. If you just tell a bunch of people in your community you are married, don't get a marriage license, don't get married at church, some people might consider that fornication. I was addressing your view.

But you implied my wife fornicated, which wasn't the case. You said "your wife's "fornication". But she was a virgin when she met me. Other people might read that and think that she had done that. That was out of line. I don't badmouth your wife or kids or aging mother or whoever is in your life.

You described my views as so horrendous and, in effect, so immoral, that they would cause one's wife to be viewed as a "fornicator". Really, prez?

If you declare that you are married to a woman but don't legally get married or get married in church, some people might think you are just shacking up. They might say bad things about your wife. This is a legitimate concern, not 'obnoxious gall'.

You said "your wife's "fornication", as if my wife had done that. She was a virgin when she married me. Under common law, and in some states, insulting a woman's virtue is enough justification for a libel or slander lawsuit without having to present evidence that the other party intentionally lied. I'm not threatening to sue you, but our forebearers had a sense of ethics and morals that forbade saying bad things about women in this way. You think 'sex behind the bushes' is unseemly, but don't think it is wrong to imply that someone's wife who you don't even know fornicated? Of course that is offensive.

You badmouthed someone you didn't know on that other thread. I was hoping you would behave yourself better on a different topic.

My interpretation of that comment was it was meant to be a personal jab (to say the least) and thus meant as deliberate unpleasantness. But honestly, it doesn't rise to a level of any real concern. Water off a duck's back. Just an observation.

Why don't you just man up and say, "I did not mean it that way. I'm sorry if you took offense." instead of writing all that other junk. You should be careful how you type stuff. Implying bad stuff about stranger's wives and chilidren who you don't even know is not appropriate for these kinds of discussions.

Personal attacks? Just making observations. If you don't like 'discussing' with me, then don't 'discuss' with me. My goodness - it would seem the solution would be easy to figure out. You're the one seeking out my posts, as you did here. Or running away from my posts, as the case may be (with my latest remarks on the other thread). I would actually probably prefer you didn't follow me around. Or do. Either way...I will bravely soldier on.

I just started to ignore your tantrums on the other thread. Your arguments weren't reasonable.

 

[OneFaith]

It's probably a daft question, but when are we married according to the Bible. Is it through ceremony, sexual activity, or when a born or unborn child is created.

I ask because the Bible says you become one flesh, potentially during conception.

The woman Jesus spoke to at the well was living in fornication with a man, after having five husbands. Jesus said the one she's with now IS NOT her husband. Therefore sex is not marriage. If she had a child with her fornicater, becoming a mom does not make her married.

Jesus attended a WEDDING where He turned water into wine. This couple was MARRIED. Marriage is when God brings two together, and witnesses recognize their stated commitment to each other to be husband and wife.

God brought Adam and Eve together, and the angels bare witness. God says to obey the laws of the land in which we live, unless they go against God's laws. Therefore, if the laws in your land require and marriage license, then you can't forgo a document. And if a document goes against God, such as in the case of homosexuality, then according to God you are not married, no matter what a document says. Both are needed- God's approval, and the laws of the land in which we live. In Adam and Eves case, there were no land laws except by God directly.

 

[MattTooFor]

My point was a valid one.

You're a bit confused. This is about your affront. Not mine. I saw your comment (about your wife and fornication) as an attempt at an affront. I say again (since you dodged my remark previously) I had just described...my...personal...philosophy...of marriage and you pugnaciously declared this would legitimately cause one's wife to be viewed as a you-know-what. You were saying in so many words "well, I certainly wouldn't put my wife in a position to be referred to as a fornicator but apparently YOU would". You are arguing that would I be 'so foolish' I would therefore deserve to have my wife be called such a thing. You naughty, naughty boy.

Maybe you should "man up" and say "I'm sorry if you took offense"? Just a suggestion. But if you do find a good law firm, I'd appreciate a phone number -- lol. Or maybe an out of court settlement (in the low five figures would be fine).

The problem with your false accusation is that there was no "intent". That's why I put your ugly word in quotations...as a clear indication I think your statement is baloney. There is NO such offense taking place and there is NO excuse for thinking of anyone's wife in those terms. In my mind, I am defending MY wife from your affront...and anyone else's wife who believes in biblically-based liberty. Thus, we have Exhibit A - the quotation marks.

And now you're questioning my manhood too, lol? Maybe you should man up and admit that it's an insult to tell someone to man up. Don't worry -- I'm sure you'll be able to come up with some cockamamie excuse for why it's ok to insult someone's manhood. Take your time. Put some thought into it.

You have been sooo incredibly unpleasant since the get-go. This all started back when I made the claim that because there had been evangelization through a miraculous ability to speak foreign languages on the day of Pentecost...that this should be going on all over the world to this day. There should be thousands of Pentecostal missionaries blanketing the planet. You didn't like that but you have no rebuttal to it...so you're going to pay me back somehow. That's aaalll this is about.

This unpleasantness isn't happening anywhere else. I'm all over that Preterist thread I started. Plenty of vigorous debate. Zero nastiness and unpleasantness. Nobody has called me a "Sadducee". No has described me as a "prude". No one has made sneering remarks about my "manhood". No one has attempted to affront my wife or myself. No one has stood pugnaciously in front of me, daring me to knock the chip off their shoulder, with their wife as the chip (another section of my comments you brushed past, by the way) which you have done twice now.

You're following me around at this point. You sought out my post. I say again - if you don't like 'discussing' with me, then don't 'discuss'. Don't follow me around. Or do. Whatever suits you.

You think 'sex behind the bushes' is unseemly, but don't think it is wrong to imply that someone's wife who you don't even know fornicated? Of course that is offensive.

Wait a minute -- you said something ugly to me (about sex behind the bushes) and thus potentially about MY marriage...and then you claim I said something bad also. OK. Alright. Uh............what was your point again? I think I'm missing it - lol. Again, I used quotation marks and was simply reflecting back to you your bizarre ultra-awkward phrasing which (it 's obvious now) you meant as a booby trap...similar to your first "wife-as-a-chip-on-the-shoulder" booby-trap incident. Would you like me to link you back to those comments?

I just started to ignore your tantrums on the other thread.

Tantrum? I would invite you or anyone to read my response to your last post to me. No tantrum. Just me unraveling all the knots you deliberately try to tie up in your comments. See for yourself.

 

[presidente]

You're a bit confused. This is about your affront. Not mine. I saw your comment (about your wife and fornication) as an attempt at an affront. I say again (since you dodged my remark previously) I had just described...my...personal...philosophy...of marriage and you pugnaciously declared this would legitimately cause one's wife to be viewed as a you-know-what. You were saying in so many words "well, I certainly wouldn't put my wife in a position to be referred to as a fornicator but apparently YOU would". You are arguing that would I be 'so foolish' I would therefore deserve to have my wife be called such a thing. You naughty, naughty boy.

MattTooFor, If you felt I insulted your wife, I am sorry about that. I don't think that is a reasonable conclusion from what you said. I did not assume you just told a bunch of people you had married your wife, and did not have a marriage license or a wedding ceremony. I took your post as your views on marriage, not your personal testimony. These days, with so-called gay marriage, a lot of people who were married the traditional, 'normal' ways want to rethink what marriage is. The govenrment has shown it cannot be trusted to understand what marriage is, and many Christians question the governments role.

My response to your post wasn't meant as an insult. I was pointing out some weaknesses I saw in your position, mainly that it did not stand up as a universal rule about marriage since it did not fit with a specific command God gave Israel.

I don't know your wife, and I wouldn't insult your wife's virtue just because you implied bad things about mine.

The problem with your false accusation is that there was no "intent". That's why I put your ugly word in quotations...as a clear indication I think your statement is baloney. There is NO such offense taking place and there is NO excuse for thinking of anyone's wife in those terms. In my mind, I am defending MY wife from your affront...and anyone else's wife who believes in biblically-based liberty. Thus, we have Exhibit A - the quotation marks.

There is a difference. When I comment on your hypothetical statement about what marriage is, and you take it as a personal insult to your wife, that is not a reasonable conclusion. When you say 'your wife's fornication', when my wife was a virgin when she married me and has only been with her husband, your statement was not reasonable or honorable.

And now you're questioning my manhood too, lol? Maybe you should man up and admit that it's an insult to tell someone to man up. Don't worry -- I'm sure you'll be able to come up with some cockamamie excuse for why it's ok to insult someone's manhood. Take your time. Put some thought into it.

I can see how you would take that as insulting. I apologize if you felt insulted. But I do wish you would behave in a more honorable fashion in these discussions. There is no reason for a war. We were just talking about what marriage is.

You have been sooo incredibly unpleasant since the get-go. This all started back when I made the claim that because there had been evangelization through a miraculous ability to speak foreign languages on the day of Pentecost...that this should be going on all over the world to this day. There should be thousands of Pentecostal missionaries blanketing the planet. You didn't like that but you have no rebuttal to it...so you're going to pay me back somehow. That's aaalll this is about.

You are the one insulting my wife. I don't mind discussing theology. Btw, I had a good sound rebuttal. And the issue was that you read your own ideas into Acts 2 and assumed if anyone was speaking in tongues, others always had to be present who understood. That's what we were discussing. My position is that God does miracles through people because this is what the Bible teaches and that it happens from time to time. It is not my position that people are currently blanketing the world with miracles on every street corner.

This unpleasantness isn't happening anywhere else. I'm all over that Preterist thread I started. Plenty of vigorous debate. Zero nastiness and unpleasantness. Nobody has called me a "Sadducee". No has described me as a "prude". No one has made sneering remarks about my "manhood". No one has attempted to affront my wife or myself. No one has stood pugnaciously in front of me, daring me to knock the chip off their shoulder, with their wife as the chip (another section of my comments you brushed past, by the way) which you have done twice now.

Your being melodramatic. I don't recall calling you a Saducee. I said it was good to see you weren't complete Saducee in your beliefs. I was surprised you took such offense. I do skip some of your comments if I don't feel anything could be accomplished by referrirng to them.

You implied my wife had fornicated. I've neither said nor implied anything about your wife? Was it reasonable for me to assume you'd married your wife by telling your community you were married, when you said it was important to have a ceremony for the sake of other people? I don't know everything about you. If you posted about this, maybe I haven't read every post. I've never said anything negative about your wife.

You're following me around at this point. You sought out my post. I say again - if you don't like 'discussing' with me, then don't 'discuss'. Don't follow me around. Or do. Whatever suits you.

There are a lot of posters in a discussion like this. I am responding to ideas as much as to individual posters. If I see a post that I want to comment on, I comment. Your posts can influence other people just like anyone else.

Wait a minute -- you said something ugly to me (about sex behind the bushes) and thus potentially about MY marriage...and then you claim I said something bad also.

If you think my sex behind the bushes comment was about your wife, it makes me wonder if you have a bit of problem with paranoia. It's not a rational conclusion. Maybe you weren't reading carefully. Or maybe you are just trying to accuse me of something as some sort of rhetorical technique or for your own amusement. The scenario I described was set in ancient Israel. I was showing how your theory about marriage did not work with the Old Testament passage. The Old Testament passage gave the father permission to give the bride who'd lost her virginity in marriage to the man or not. It wasn't about you and your wife. If you printed my post and gave it to your wife or a random stranger on the street, I'm pretty if you didn't suggest I was writing about you and your wife, that they would not come to that conclusion.

OK. Alright. Uh............what was your point again? I think I'm missing it - lol. Again, I used quotation marks and was simply reflecting back to you your bizarre ultra-awkward phrasing which (it 's obvious now) you meant as a booby trap...similar to your first "wife-as-a-chip-on-the-shoulder" booby-trap incident. Would you like me to link you back to those comments?

I am not sure why you think I have a chip on my shoulder. I can understand chip on one's shoulder. I understand wife I don't quite get wife as a chip on the shoulder. So I let the comment pass. Too many mixed metaphors, or whatever, for me to get your point. I had no idea that if I mentioned wanting to marry my wife in a way society and church people expected so she wouldn't be accused of fornication, that you'd insult my wife. How could I predict that? And why would I be at fault over that? Mentioning my wife is not dangling her in front of you for you to slander her.

It seems like you have something personal against me. I never insulted your wife. I did use some firm language when you implied my wife had fornicated. You should admit that that was a bad thing to do. I kind of hoped you had just misworded that totally intentionally and that you would just legitimately apologize and I'd be cool with that. I disagree with people on these forums from time to time. There are debates on these forums, and I can disagree with someone on one topic and agree with another. It's okay. It doesn't have to turn into something personal. From the post I'm responding to, it seems like you intentionally accused me wife because you assumed I was trying to say something about you and your wife fornicating or having sex behind the bushes. That wasn't my intention, and it's not a rational way of viewing what I posted at all, IMO. I just don't get how anyone could come to that conclusion based on the posts I have made.

You don't know my wife, and you said something bad about her. I'm sure you know that slander is a sin. Did you intentionally imply my wife had committed fornication to get back at me because you thought I had implied something bad about your wife?

Btw, I know we disagree on some issues. I'm thinking of Matthew 5, around verse 22 and 23. We can have differences in beliefs, but I don't want there to be any bitterness between us or unforgiveness, since that is not pleasing to the Lord. We can take this to PMs if necessary. If you did lash out at my wife on purpose with that comment, I do think that is an issue that needs to be addressed, and even it were unintentional, a simple apology would be appropriate.

 

[MattTooFor]

Oh...my...goodness. Another one of your mile-long posts. Prez, I have a life, bro. I'm not going to answer each of your one hundred false accusations. You are obsessed. Take a chill pill, Bill. OK, I'll give you five minutes:

If you felt I insulted your wife, I am sorry about that. I don't think that is a reasonable conclusion from what you said.

Oh my stars and garters. You are HILARIOUS. Sad but hilarious. The bizarre double-talking. It's just amazing that you trot this stuff out into broad daylight.

and you take it as a personal insult to your wife,

Well, let's be more precise-- I took it as you attempting to affront...affront me and anyone else who doesn't agree with your unbiblical legalism.

When you say 'your wife's fornication'

No, that's a lie. I didn't write "your wife's fornication". Interesting that in your previous post, you at least accurately cut-and-pasted my comment with the quotation marks. Then, when I give you a quick primer on the significance of quotation marks in my previous post here...all of a sudden, you lose the quotation marks, lol! You are a piece of work, prez.

In hindsight, although there was not the intention your conspiracy theory says there was...I am actually glad you have felt your own hot breath. The hot breath of your own attempted effrontery. You promenade around this discussion board, cold and aloof, dispensing stern condescending lectures on various folks. Just a couple of days ago, I noticed you describing someone as having the behavior of a "fool", as one of numerous examples.

I don't recall calling you a Saducee. I said it was good to see you weren't complete Saducee in your beliefs

It is quite amazing and disturbing, the way you lie, twist, shave, alter, stretch, wrench, and double-talk...regarding the facts and the truth. Wow. Watching you tie this "Sadducee" reference of yours up into knots...so obnoxious. You stated that upon reading my comments to the young lady, you were only just then seeing that I wasn't a "complete sadducee". Please, prez...take another 6 to 8 hours to treat me now to yet more stretching, twisting, warping and glossing. I'll be out playing golf.

 

[presidente]

Well, let's be more precise-- I took it as you attempting to affront...affront me and anyone else who doesn't agree with your unbiblical legalism.

I wrote a post a post in response to you where I disagreed with the idea that declaring a marriage in front of your marriage... or something along those lines.. was enough to be married. I pointed out that it did not fit with a Biblical passage about marriage. And you took that as an affront. It seems obvious to me that you are the one with the personal problem with me. As a Christian, should you go around with ill will toward anyway. Have I really wronged you? Is it wrong to tell you to 'man up' and take responsibility when you do something wrong?

No, that's a lie. I didn't write "your wife's fornication". Interesting that in your previous post, you at least accurately cut-and-pasted my comment with the quotation marks.

Read your own post. Read the post I was responding to. You wrote,

Good grief, but are you EVER weirdly argumentative and unpleasant...with your unseemly references to "sex behind a bush" (the way you characterized my comments), your wife's "fornication", and what-not. Weird inappropriate stuff. The other thread - same thing: Very, very odd and very, very cold, unpleasant stuff.

Again, my wife was a virgin when I met her. You keep doing the same thing. I have not slandered your wife.

Did you intentionally slander my wife as revenge, thinking I'd said something bad about your wife?

In hindsight, although there was not the intention your conspiracy theory says there was...I am actually glad you have felt your own hot breath. The hot breath of your own attempted effrontery.

Your being melodramatic.

Just a couple of days ago, I noticed you describing someone as having the behavior of a "fool", as one of numerous examples.

I didn't call him a fool. I told him it was foolish to attribute a healing at a crusade he heard about second hand to Satan. I stand by the statement.

You stated that upon reading my comments to the young lady, you were only just then seeing that I wasn't a "complete sadducee".

If I'd have known you were so easily offended, I wouldn't have made the comment. You seemed a bit easier to get along with at the time.

 

[MattTooFor]

Read your own post. Read the post I was responding to.

Yes, I am precisely aware of exactly what I wrote, lol.

Wow. Are you now flaunting your dishonesty? I was simply saying your presentation of my statement MINUS the quotation marks I had used...was, in effect, a lie. So now, you're engaging in yet more truth shaving/shaping in pretending you didn't understand that...with your phony request that I go back and look at my own statement? I think I'm getting vertigo from your multiple layers of falsity. I'm going to have a to sit down for awhile. You go on without me!

Did you intentionally slander my wife as revenge, thinking I'd said something bad about your wife?

Well again, it's interesting that you use this sneaky/slithery unfair "have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife" type of phrasing, without even batting an eyelash. It's as though this underhandedness is so woven into the warp and woof of your very being...it's second nature. It just seems to reflect an inner instability. You have done this kind of thing over and over and over.

And I say again, I never had any "intent" per your conspiracy theory.

Your being melodramatic.

Wondering if you need to look up the word "melodrama" in the dictionary? You've used it twice now and missed the mark by a wide margin. I'm simply noting the irony of you, more or less shooting yourself in the foot in shoving this ugly "wife/fornication" phrasing in my (our) face. You wanted ugliness. You wanted a scene. You got more than you bargained for. In the future, try being polite, pleasant, courteous, and tactful in your wording. You'll find it refreshing.

If I'd have known you were so easily offended, I wouldn't have made the comment.

Amazing. Yet more dishonest misdirection: It's not about whether I was "offended". It's about your dishonest tying of your own words up into knots. Lying about what you have stated. Wriggling and writhing away from a plain fact and a plain statement of yours. It's like trying to pin down Jell-O. I find the behavior sooo strange and dysfunctional.

So now unfortunately...I'm expecting more shavings, twisting, slithering, and double-talking. My favorite 'double-speak' of yours was a couple of posts ago where you said in so many words 'I'm sorry AND I take back my 'sorry''. That was beautiful.

 

[MattTooFor]

It's probably a daft question, but when are we married according to the Bible. Is it through ceremony, sexual activity, or when a born or unborn child is created.

I ask because the Bible says you become one flesh, potentially during conception.

I wanted to expand on my thoughts about achieving marital union (before I was rudely interrupted, lol!)...because it is a subject near and dear to me:

I am seeing busloads of young adults from conservative Christianity (in America) who have forlornly proceeded to "shack up" with a partner and simply move into an apartment together...in large part because of the dysfunctions of Christian leaders (pastors, elders, etc) who are still sort of living in their dreamy American Dream "Ken-and-Barbie"-land happy-happy bubble and can't understand why the younger generation that is following them can no longer keep up appearances...can no longer jump through the "American Dream" hoops and have a $20K wedding...and these young people have thus become victims of the prosperity standards inappropriately upheld by these leaders and by the older people in the churches who are more established and have acquired the prosperous trappings that are now quickly getting out of reach for younger people.

Many times the older generation absentmindedly expects these younger people to keep jumping through the hoops. The reality is...a lot of young adults who are stuck with 10-20/hr. jobs and rocketing costs of living can't fork over even a minimal $1000 cost for a wedding...while at the same time, the more prosperous church members are 'role-modeling' $10K, $20K, $50K weddings for their children. And that in turn can create a shame factor when these 'prosperity' showcases are dangled in the faces of the less prosperous.

There's always been some economic disparities...but it's getting really bad now.

Increasingly, we are seeing the financial disparities even in a local church...with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer...all of it exacerbated by "prosperity-preaching" pastors and teachers. It's becoming a nightmare. Young adults and teenagers are dropping like flies out of the "church world" and going off to make their own way.

So...one small solution I see (with a hundred other issues regarding conservative Christianity's dysfunctions still needing to be addressed)...is to streamline the requirements for creating a marital union...down to the biblical level:

Simply declare your life commitment to someone who is already your spouse in God's eyes (since you're already living together)...AND to declare that to your entire community so that it properly sanctifies the marriage and removes the appearance of evil.

I just want to see all these young people get out of spiritual harm's way.

 

[presidente]

MattTooFor,

I'm thinking about what I need to do as a Christian with our little exchanges. I don't think it is a sin to disagree with someone else. But certain things are sinful. Slandering someone is sinful. If I did that, I would need to confess it and try to make amends. If you slander, I am supposed to confront you on it. I'm thinking of Matthew 5 in one case and Matthew 18 in the other.

What do you think about that? If you do something wrong, aren't you supposed to make amends? If you say something wrong about someone, and they have 'aught' against you, aren't you to make it right with them, leave your gift on the proverbial altar and go make it right with them?

So on the one hand, I'm thinking of that. On the other hand, dropping the matter makes sense in terms of time and emotional energy.

As far as ethics go, I consider it unethical to post something on a forum that implies something bad about someone else that isn't true. Like if I posted a message that implied you were a fornicator, adulterer, or homosexual so that if someone just read the message, they would assume those things about you, I'd consider that unethical. If I did the same thing about your wife, that would be unethical, and even less classy than the other scenario.

Both quotes of yours I mentioned might be interpreted by a reader to imply my wife, who was a virgin when I married her and has been faithful to me, had committed fornication. I didn't put all the quotes in the second quote, partly because I'd be using double quotes, and partly because the statement you made seemed to imply the same thing.

If you had just said you didn't intentionally imply that about my wife, and apologized, I probably would have dropped the matter. But the impression I got from your response was that you had made that statement which implied something false about my wife because you thought I was implying that you and your wife had fornicated. This assumption doesn't seem reasonable from my point of view.

I described a scenario where a man slept with a woman after declaring his marriage to a community of his friends. I did not say or imply anything about your wife. I would have imagined, based on your response that you thought stating your intention to be wed before your community was enough in your mind for you two to be married, but that you had a ceremony for the sake of others involved, or else that you arrived at this idea of stating your commitment before the community to have been a position you adopted later.

So my question is, did you intentionally write here in front of the forum something to imply my wife committed fornication. Don't worry. I'm not going to sue you because of teachings found in I Corinthians 6, and because I wouldn't do it anyway. (Besides, I try to stay relatively anonymous here, and you have a username, too). If you did that, that's a sin. I want you to repent of the sin, and that is my motivation. I would not want you to stumble and not repent because of a conversation about the Bible with me online.

I did say I was sorry if you felt insulted. If that's double-speak, it's fairly common double speak used to express empathy. In my case, it was more stream of consciousness writing. I was thinking if I'd wronged you, I should apologize. But the more I thought as I wrote, the more it seemed unreasonable for you to take the scenario I described set in ancient Israel as it applied to your stated stance on marriage, to be some kind of swipe at your personal life or your wife.

I am sincere here. I am not trying to twist your words in any way.

I know we've disagreed and sometimes I can irritate certain people. I don't think irritating or annoying each other is a sin. If I've actually sinned against you in some clear, identifiable way... something specific, let me know. I'd like to make peace. We don't have to agree on everything in order to be at peace with one another.

Did you intentionally slander my wife as revenge, thinking I'd said something bad about your wife?

Well again, it's interesting that you use this sneaky/slithery unfair "have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife" type of phrasing, without even batting an eyelash. It's as though this underhandedness is so woven into the warp and woof of your very being...it's second nature. It just seems to reflect an inner instability. You have done this kind of thing over and over and over.

I don't get this response. This question is not like 'have you stopped beating your wife.' If you answer 'no' you aren't admitting guilt. You'd be saying you did not mean to slander my wife. IMO, the appropriate thing would be to apologize and did not mean for it to come off that way. Okay, if that's sincere, I can accept that. But if it was intentional, then you definitely would need to repent and confess your sin. The issue is about walking holy before the Lord. I want to do that, and I want you to do that, too. Bible discussions should not be an occasion to sin. We should come out with a better understanding of the Lord after these discussions, not weighed down with sin.


I don't get all the other accusations. From my perspective, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. I do not believe I am doing the same thing. Slander is a sin. If you sin, you need to confess your sin and repent.

I'm simply noting the irony of you, more or less shooting yourself in the foot in shoving this ugly "wife/fornication" phrasing in my (our) face. You wanted ugliness. You wanted a scene. You got more than you bargained for. In the future, try being polite, pleasant, courteous, and tactful in your wording. You'll find it refreshing.

I was raised in an environment where I felt like it was sinful to mention sexual issues. I began to realize the Bible discusses sex, especially avoiding sexual sin, without this sense of Victorian shame about the topic. The people of Israel read the laws about circumcision, menstruation, beastiality, homosexuality, rape to all age groups from babies up to old people. So I don't consider it wrong to mention fornication on a discussion group about marriage. And saying I wanted to get married in a way society accepted so people would not think my wife was fornicating with me seems reasonable in this context. I really do not get why you see it as so crude.


And what seems strange to me is that you considered my statement to be so socially unacceptable, but seem to think it is fine to imply that someone else's wife, who you never met and know nothing about, had fornicated. That is what is strange to me.

As far as your comments on weddings go, I agree expensive weddings can be a huge problem for young married couples. Home cooking may reduce the costs, and covered dish weddings might be a good way to help poorer couples.

 

[MattTooFor]

Slandering someone is sinful.

Which is exactly what you are guilty of at this point. If I have repeatedly told you there was not the "intent" you have asserted there was...and have explained the purpose and significance of quotation marks per your disingenuous feigning of ignorance regarding quotation marks...when you nevertheless persist with your accusation about my intention....you have now become an apprentice to "the accuser of the brethren", from my vantage point. You have become a false accuser. A slanderer.

You yourself have alternately conceded you weren't sure about my intentions but then, per your instability, revert alternately back to dogmatic assertions about my "intent". You can't seem to figure out whether you're coming or going. But with this steady drumbeat of accusation...it definitely begins to have the earmarks of "the accuser of the brethren".

You refer to matthew 18. I think you didn't read far enough into the chapter:

If you approach someone to "collect a debt" (an underserved "apology" and false "confession" in this case) and they are not able or willing to repay the debt...and so then you commence a drumbeat of pressure and, in effect, attempt to punish that person...have you read what Jesus has said about people like that in Matthew 18:21-35? You're playing with fire at this point.

You have long since done your "Matthew 18" thing. You've long since made your point. I have heard your point. I do not agree with your point. It is time to move on. If you nevertheless continue on with more wrist-slaps, accusations, denunciations and unpleasantness regarding your F-word issue...you will find yourself smack in the middle of Matthew 18:21-35. I think you have already long since arrived there.

But hey, if you find a good law firm, get me a phone number. We could do an 'out-of-court' settlement...low five figures would work for me. (Good grief.)

I am not going to pay off your false debt. There was no wrongdoing. There was no INTENT of wrongdoing. I insulated your wife from your own ugly wording and your own false assertion, by putting your F-word in quotation marks. You wanted to splash mud on the feet of anyone who followed my suggestions about marital union. Specifically, you wanted to splash mud on my feet with these references to "sex behind the bushes" and with your use of the Christianized version of the F-word. There were a hundred better, more pleasant and tactful ways to make your point. You chose the low road. And so if you are now frustrated over these futile debt-collection efforts of yours...oh well, hopefully a 'lesson learned'.

 

[MattTooFor]

​BUMP!

I wanted to expand on my thoughts about achieving marital union (before I was rudely interrupted, lol!)...because it is a subject near and dear to me:

I am seeing busloads of young adults from conservative Christianity (in America) who have forlornly proceeded to "shack up" with a partner and simply move into an apartment together...in large part because of the dysfunctions of Christian leaders (pastors, elders, etc) who are still sort of living in their dreamy American Dream "Ken-and-Barbie"-land happy-happy bubble and can't understand why the younger generation that is following them can no longer keep up appearances...can no longer jump through the "American Dream" hoops and have a $20K wedding...and these young people have thus become victims of the prosperity standards inappropriately upheld by these leaders and by the older people in the churches who are more established and have acquired the prosperous trappings that are now quickly getting out of reach for younger people.

Many times the older generation absentmindedly expects these younger people to keep jumping through the hoops. The reality is...a lot of young adults who are stuck with 10-20/hr. jobs and rocketing costs of living can't fork over even a minimal $1000 cost for a wedding...while at the same time, the more prosperous church members are 'role-modeling' $10K, $20K, $50K weddings for their children. And that in turn can create a shame factor when these 'prosperity' showcases are dangled in the faces of the less prosperous.

There's always been some economic disparities...but it's getting really bad now.

Increasingly, we are seeing the financial disparities even in a local church...with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer...all of it exacerbated by "prosperity-preaching" pastors and teachers. It's becoming a nightmare. Young adults and teenagers are dropping like flies out of the "church world" and going off to make their own way.

So...one small solution I see (with a hundred other issues regarding conservative Christianity's dysfunctions still needing to be addressed)...is to streamline the requirements for creating a marital union...down to the biblical level:

Simply declare your life commitment to someone who is already your spouse in God's eyes (since you're already living together)...AND to declare that to your entire community so that it properly sanctifies the marriage and removes the appearance of evil.

I just want to see all these young people get out of spiritual harm's way.

 

[presidente]

I am not going to pay off your false debt. There was no wrongdoing. There was no INTENT of wrongdoing. I insulated your wife from your own ugly wording and your own false assertion, by putting your F-word in quotation marks.

The reader not following the conversation who read the post probably wouldn't have known what you meant by the quotation marks. I was expecting you to just apologize about the wording. That's what I would have done. I'm one of those people who likes to resolve a conflict rather than just leave it hanging.

If you didn't intend to insult her, I can accept that. I wondered how sincere you were about that when you said by disagreeing with your beliefs on marriage, I was saying you'd open your wife up to the same accusation. Did you really think that when you read what I did, or was that an afterthought?

How do we end this thing at peace with one another?

Btw, maybe you want the last post on the thread to be your post on marriage or something else. But people don't seem to be participating in this thread anymor.

 

[zone]

 

[MattTooFor]

I was expecting you to just apologize about the wording. That's what I would have done.[/FONT][/COLOR]

OK so...you're still "debt-collecting", lol! Getting in a little last minute slap-n-smack. And no you would not "just apologize". You wrestled and wriggled and writhed over your "Sadducee" name-calling incident, as just one of numerous examples, and never did apologize. Nor do I want an apology. I couldn't be less interested in an apology.

By the way, you dismiss it as a mere "molehill" when you have viewed someone (me) as an apostate, unbelieving "Sadducee" and you have actually used that word on a Christian individual...but it's a more serious matter to unjustly view someone as a fornicator??

You're confused.

And yes, I understand you have "graciously" upgraded me to 'partial Sadducee'. I can't thank you enough. I'm assuming, being a "partial apostate", I will only partially go to Hell.

 

[MattTooFor]

Now, now, Zone. I noticed over at my "Preterism" thread, you also apparently have some kind of long-running conflict with another person. I'm a "newbie". I just barely got here and I'm being set upon and virtually stalked from one thread to the other, from one post to the next. The "welcoming committee" here leaves something to be desired - LOL!

I may not be long for this Christian Chat world. Rather disappointing thus far. Although, the freedom of expression granted here is almost unprecedented as far as discussion boards go. Very impressive. But I have many irons in the fire. We'll see.

 

[presidente]

MattTooFor,

I apologize for saying you were not a complete Saducee in your position on angels, etc. Do you forgive me?

 

[trofimus]

Well read John 4

“I have no husband,” the woman replied. Jesus said to her, “You are correct to say that you have no husband. 18In fact, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. You have spokentruthfully.

So? Does she have five husbands or no husband? Is she free to marry somebody else now?

Show it for me in some practical example, not just a quote.