Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | R, Can you Biblically justify actions? | Acts 20:28 | Reighnskye | 135208 | ||
(continued) EdB, You further stated: 6. "You keep referring to Genesis 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. As God’s ideal for marriage. If you look closely it says nothing about the any church involvement either. If that is what you consider marriage fine. But again I remind you that is a redefinition of the term marriage as defined by the law of the land. You can call it anything you want but that does not make it a marriage." Again, I've only asked for a biblical definition of marriage without secularly-based governmental references. Nonetheless, I do believe that Adam and Eve had a valid marriage, even if God did not see fit to conform to the laws of the land that you suggest, when uniting them. I am greatly saddened that you seem to overlook the example of the first marriage on earth, as provided by scripture for us, when obtaining a marriage example and/or definition. Instead, you seem to rely solely on secular sources in your definition of marriage. If I ask for a biblical reference, you attest that I am looking for a "redefinition of marriage" as you call it. 7. "You said I offered some unpleasant scenarios. I wasn’t trying to paint a bad picture what I was trying to show you without a legally recognized marriage you forfeited all rights, protections, obligations and liabilities offered to a “married couple”. In fact you and your ‘wife’ would be nothing more than two single people." Insofar as Adam and Eve did not themselves reside under your secularly-derived definition of marriage, would you also term them as two single people? Again, why not go to the bible here for your marriage definition, as opposed to extra-biblical sources? Is the bible inadequate to define marriage for us, that you should rely on the government to define marriage for you? 8. "Also know if you live together for 7 years you could be declared common law. I’m not a lawyer nor do I pretend to know all the law but I believe this can be initiated by the state should they feel your attempting to circumvent the law." That's fine. I'd have to investigate the legalities of common-law further. You seem to have already painted me as a deciever of the government, when I have broken no law. I have in no way attempted to circumvent the law, nor do I intend to, but you are free to imagine me to be a circumventer of law if you wish. I do consider it a projection, however. 9. "In a word God does not define marriage other than setting these conditions or obligations. Genesis 2:24, Proverbs 2:17, Malachi 2:14, Matthew 5:32, Matthew 19:5, Mark 10:7, Mark 10:9, Luke 16:18, John 4:18, Romans 7:2, 1 Corinthians 7:10, 1 Corinthians 7:11, 1 Corinthians 7:39, Ephesians 5:28, Ephesians 5:31" I'll go through the verses here, and attempt to see if they have anything to do whatsoever, with the secularly-derived definition of marriage that you've elaborated on. Afterwhich, I'll get back to you, with a verse by verse analysis. - Genesis 2 24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
2 | R, Can you Biblically justify actions? | Acts 20:28 | EdB | 135220 | ||
Reighnskye Let me address you by point 1. Any body that marries homosexuals is not a church. they may call themselves that but I assure you there are not. 2. There is no scriptural description of marriage other than what has already been offered you. However since the Scripture repeatedly admonishes us not to violate the laws of the land we have to look to those laws for further definition of the marriage. And as long as those laws do not force us to violate God’s law we must uphold them. 3. You know best what God has laid on your heart. I retract that suggestion as not to upset you further. 4. I mentioned the insurance issue in reference to your future wife. Possibly someone you meet would have such insurance and your medical needs would be met. I didn’t mean you should get another job. 5. I understand life and it’s twists having lived it myself for 57 years. What I meant was every time a point is made you offer a counter point. It appears your intent is to debate this rather than seek advice. 6.I too believe Adam and Eve had a valid marriage. I also think if they had lived in the United States they would have also obtained a marriage license. Again God’s criteria has been expressed here by me and others. In it God states his requirements for marriage which you can meet without a marriage license. However God also stipulates we adhere to the laws of the land as long as they do not require us to violate God’s law. With that in mind, every state requires a marriage license to be obtained before a wedding ceremony can legally be performed. 7. I offered the scenarios to point out that there were legal issues that are effected by marriage. Whether you like it or not that is a fact. If you believe you can live around those issues fine. However as many homosexuals are learning there are things you can’t that is why they are fighting so hard to redefine marriage. 8.God’s word says don’t let you good be spoken evil of Romans 14:16. Most consider it wrong to intentionally circumvent a law or situation. The laws says if your married, your benefits will cease, right or wrong that is what you claim the law says. For you to be consider yourself married and still collect those benefits puts you outside the law. While you and I may consider that law very unfair and thus wrong it remains the law. Until that law is changed and you consider yourself married in any form and you still collect your benefits your breaking that law. What else can anyone say? 9. Reighnskye please don’t get back to me. We both know what is right and what is wrong. We both know the answer to your question. Yes the situation as you stated it is unfair, the whole thing stinks, and the law needs to be changed. However we both know that if you live as man and wife you and consider yourself man and wife by whatever means you justify it, then your man and wife and the law says if your married you no longer qualify for disability benefits. EdB |
||||||
3 | R, Can you Biblically justify actions? | Acts 20:28 | Reighnskye | 135242 | ||
EdB, I will respond to you by point. If you don't wish to respond to me, that's fine. I'll leave that up to you. If you do respond to me, however, as you have done here, I will be sure to respond back. If you do not respond, then I will not respond back. Fair enough? - 1. "Any body that marries homosexuals is not a church. they may call themselves that but I assure you there are not." I'm not quite sure what you are considering to be a church here. The government recognizes many non-Christian organizations as being churches, even granting them not-for-profit status, based on their pursuit of collective worship. If we shall define what marriage is simply by what the secular state says, should we not also define a church by what the secular state says it to be? You are choosing to adhere to one state-based definition and not another. That's assuming that we've both thrown the bible out the window here, and done away with discussing scripture for the sake of secular argument, as you've done. 2. "There is no scriptural description of marriage other than what has already been offered you. However since the Scripture repeatedly admonishes us not to violate the laws of the land we have to look to those laws for further definition of the marriage. And as long as those laws do not force us to violate God’s law we must uphold them." You are looking to extra-biblical definitions of marriage. Rather than looking to the secular state to define marriage, you would've been more biblically-based to look to the Old Testament Law of Moses. The bible does indeed speak of the legalities of marriage, and it does say volumes more than what you've offered me. These verses are contained in the Old Testament Torah. I don't see it as feasible that you would toss aside the Law of Moses, and yet quote the laws of the land, as if they were bible. 3. "You know best what God has laid on your heart. I retract that suggestion as not to upset you further." Thank you. My priorities are on medical treatments. 4. "I mentioned the insurance issue in reference to your future wife. Possibly someone you meet would have such insurance and your medical needs would be met. I didn’t mean you should get another job." That'd be a nice benefit, but God forbid I should fall in love without the right insurance policy. Then I'd have to tell God that He sent me the wrong one, and nix a love relationship over money. 5. "I understand life and it’s twists having lived it myself for 57 years. What I meant was every time a point is made you offer a counter point. It appears your intent is to debate this rather than seek advice." And have you not offered counter-points here? And most of them are secularly-based. If you wish to present a concise scripture unit, and then verify it's applicability to a specific situation, I'd be glad to hear it. Instead, however, you've told me that the bible says no more about marriage, than the verses that you've offered me. When indeed the bible has volumes more than what you've offered me. You've merely set aside what the Old Testament Law of Moses says about marriage, and have rather appealed to the secular state. - Genesis 2 24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. (NAS95) (continued) |
||||||