Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
Suzet,

Please don't worry about offending me or anything like that. I guess I was worried that you were "going over to the dark side". As I read your posts, I was appreciative of another voice seeming to suggest that God gave us brains to use. We are to use these to discern right from wrong; including proper and improper interpretations of the Bible. If you read through this entire thread you will see that I am a Christian (albeit not a very good one by some standards), who believes that judgement is something that we should all practice upon ourselves to a much greater extent than we do others. I grow eternally tired of those who seem to want to use themselves as the grand example of how others should act; others who think that because they have concluded, via THEIR interpretation of the Bible, what is right and wrong, and therefore they have the right to tell everyone else what is right and wrong.

Everyone's life is different, as is everyone's relationship to God. The "rules" for my relationship with God are as unique as my relationship with God. So are yours, and Cardinals, and whoever's.

So, please, don't worry about my past. I haven't been abusive to my W or kids, nor was I a victim. I used that scenario as an example that there will always be conditions, to a rational person, that will permit otherwise improper decisions.

ML,

I believe I've made my point. Civil judgement (i.e. crime) is a civil matter; judging someone's worth in the eyes of God is another matter. The two aren't the same thing, and I don't think anyone would argue that they are.

Also, the issue has been raised of whether churches should allow change in issues like this. It all depends on your belief system, and your church. Some believe all decision should come from the top down. They have "prophets, seers, and revelators" who are the ones who speak to God on our behalf. Others believe that ALL members are able to represent themselves before God, and therefore, a concensus of membership should be allowable to altar church law.

Bob

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 76
G
Member
Offline
Member
G
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 76
I’d like to dispel any lingering proclivity among respondents here that hermaphroditic birth defects are common. Depending upon the source, you can find that it has been recorded since antiquity, however there’s no more than 350-450 cases of this in history.

Is it hereditary, or is it people acting out on the own sexual curiosity? In your grandparent’s age, I think vastly fewer people acted out on those feelings than today, and they seemed to get along fine in life.

What this all boils down to for me, is today’s permissiveness of bad and even abnormal behaviors is taking us down the slippery slope. Yes the bible defines adultery more disciplined than today’s common man. Ask yourself, why do we have divorce rates the highest in recorded history?

Will passing this law throughout the country change the % population of homosexuality? My guess is it’s about to increase.

The laws will open up the churches to this, and undoubtedly, some will allow this ceremony to become the new “norm”. Once the thrill factor for this is gone, our human sexuality will again need to be “trumped up” to satisfy more elaborate curiosities.

I hope I’m wrong, but this is too reminiscent of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
C
Member
OP Offline
Member
C
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
OOOKay. Wow. I am going to work now. But please continue!!!

Sooo how do you feel about sex changes? LOL <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

Is that ok too?

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Plumb Bob:
<strong>

ML,

I believe I've made my point. Civil judgement (i.e. crime) is a civil matter; judging someone's worth in the eyes of God is another matter. The two aren't the same thing, and I don't think anyone would argue that they are.

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Bob, perhaps you should clarify your point then because I am responding to your remark to my post about judging with "he who casts the first stone......"

What WAS your point if not that we aren't supposed to judge?

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Plumb Bob:
<strong> It all depends on your belief system, and your church. Some believe all decision should come from the top down. They have "prophets, seers, and revelators" who are the ones who speak to God on our behalf. Others believe that ALL members are able to represent themselves before God, and therefore, a concensus of membership should be allowable to altar church law.

Bob </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Unless a church has the belief that their duty is to abide by the Bible and stick to its teachings, then they are apostates. Jesus warned over and over again about teaching man's law in place of God's law. This was his main complaint againt the Pharisees. There can never be a consensus of man who can change God's law and Word. A prophet's validity is to be measured by 2 things: if the prophecy came true and IF it concurred with the Word of God.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,710
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,710
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Is it hereditary, or is it people acting out on the own sexual curiosity? In your grandparent’s age, I think vastly fewer people acted out on those feelings than today, and they seemed to get along fine in life.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">They didn't acknowledge these feelings because they would have been ostracized and outed from their communities & "labeled". Pretty much the same thing as when teenage girls got pregnant in the 50's and 60's. They were "sent off" to a different town because they were the "town trash" & the parents wanted to keep it quiet from "the neighbors". The problem is, they didn't "get along fine in life". Why do you think so many married men & women have "come out" after years of marriage? Because they are tired of hiding who they really are.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Will passing this law throughout the country change the % population of homosexuality? My guess is it’s about to increase.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I don't understand. Why would the homosexual population increase because of a marriage law? This statement makes me think that somehow people think it's "cool" to be a homosexual? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> Most homosexuals I know do not think it's "cool", they would very much like to be like "everyone else" so they wouldn't have so many stereotypes, judgments, condemnation, ridicule thrown their way.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I hope I’m wrong, but this is too reminiscent of Sodom and Gomorrah </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I wondered when it was going to get to this. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

ML,

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Jesus warned over and over again about teaching man's law in place of God's law. This was his main complaint againt the Pharisees. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Was it? I thought his main complaint against them was the fact that they were trying to hold all the scriptural laws over people's heads so the "sinners" wouldn't be able to come in to the synagogue to worship. Jesus made it point clear to them that they were sinners like everybody else & had no right to stop others from entering the temple because of rules & regulations. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />

I think the point others miss is the fact that we could follow all of God's rules to the tee, but if we don't have Jesus Christ in our lives, if we aren't living in His spirit, then we may as well prepare our way to that deep, dark pit.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
C
Member
OP Offline
Member
C
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
So is it true that we don't like to follow a couple rules in this book called the Holy Bible? And if I whine enough about what MY NEEDS are, or a group of peoples needs are, lobbying for it if you will, then I will substantiate my claim and get what I want because I need it. And sure I feel bad about what my need is, that I have to change the Bible and all, but so it is. I believe in Jesus and so he will forgive me for all of this rearranging of wording to suit my own and my good friends and family needs ( bio needs...?)

After all it is just rules and regulations!

Rules shmules, just do it...And so many are. They are proud of it, in your face/not ashamed. It is being sold rapidly to all ages, sexes and whether it is genetic does not seem to matter. To make this legal and also a part of Christian fabric is a goal of the "party" here. I resent the political agenda of it, and the fact that it is pretty much a sale.

It is in the media, the children's music, the magazines...It is a hype and a sale. If you buy it, best wishes to you.

I like what Debbras son said..."If you sit at the Barbers long enough, you WILL get a hair cut". Cute.

I think that there is stability in abiding by the rules or at least in the trying to abide by them. Making slight of "rules and regulations" shows a flippant ungodly attitude. Intentional misuse of the Holy Bible does seem to have the odor of Sodom and Gomorrah.


.

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
It seems to me that even Christ taught that rational thought and judgement needed to be used when interpreting scripture. The pharisees took the word literally, and Christ showed them they were wrong, at least in the case below...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> 1: At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the sabbath; his disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat.
2: But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, "Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the sabbath."
3: He said to them, "Have you not read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him:
4: how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests?
5: Or have you not read in the law how on the sabbath the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are guiltless?
6: I tell you, something greater than the temple is here.
7: And if you had known what this means, `I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless.
8: For the Son of man is lord of the sabbath."
9: And he went on from there, and entered their synagogue.
10: And behold, there was a man with a withered hand. And they asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath?" so that they might accuse him.
11: He said to them, "What man of you, if he has one sheep and it falls into a pit on the sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out?
12: Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the sabbath. "

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Christ, himself, acknowledged that sometimes following the written word is less important than doing what is right.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
C
Member
OP Offline
Member
C
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
It is a good idea to check in with the conscience now and again. If you have one, it will keep you from the real kinds of sin, including adultery, fornication, and other ungodly things.

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Plumb Bob:
It seems to me that even Christ taught that rational thought and judgement needed to be used when interpreting scripture. The pharisees took the word literally, and Christ showed them they were wrong, at least in the case below...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Christ taught that we are supposed to understand and abide by his Word and REJECT anything that conflicts with it. The Pharisees replaced God's Law with man's law, that was his complaint about them, NOT that they didn't use rational thought and judgement to understand his word.

They did not CARE to understand God's Word, they cared to understand MAN'S word, which is an abomination to God. So God doesn't care about the "consensus" of man, he cares that man understand HIS WORD.

Matthew 15
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Colossians 2:8
8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Christ, himself, acknowledged that sometimes following the written word is less important than doing what is right. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">He was arguing against LEGALISM in the example you gave. NOT against his own Word. He was certainly not saying that man should ever replace God's law with his own philosophies. He warned again and again against false doctrines.

Galatians 1 7-9
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.


<small>[ June 15, 2004, 06:06 PM: Message edited by: MelodyLane ]</small>

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
Melody Lane...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> He was arguing against LEGALISM in the example you gave. NOT against his own Word. He was certainly not saying that man should ever replace God's law with his own philosophies. He warned again and again against false doctrines. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> The Pharisees replaced God's Law with man's law, that was his complaint about them, NOT that they didn't use rational thought and judgement to understand his word. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> They did not CARE to understand God's Word, they cared to understand MAN'S word, which is an abomination to God. So God doesn't care about the "consensus" of man, he cares that man understand HIS WORD. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Okay, this is getting too weird for me, but I have to reply one more time.

The Pharisee's were arguing law...JEWISH LAW, which was, and is, based on God's word...the first five books of the Bible.

From Halley's Bible Handbook...

"The Pharisees

The two main parties within the Judaism of Jesus' day were the Pharisees and the Sadducees. As Hellenism began to encroach on the religious life of the Jews, the unavoidable question was how the Law of God should be applied in the new circumstances. The Pharisees took the Scriptures and believed it was their responsibility to determine how the Law [of God] should be applied to the new conditions and how it should, if necessary, be reinterpreted.
... the Pharisees in effect disinvited all who did not live by the same standards as they, which was most people. It was especially this exclusivism that Jesus objected to in the Pharisees; by using only standards of external behavior to measure people's relationship with God, they failed to realize that it is what it inside a person that counts, and that they therefore needed God's grace as much as the worst sinner. It was this external religion that made it very difficult for them to believe in Jesus (who did not do all the things the Pharisees felt a religious person should do)."

In regards to the scripture from my previous post, Halley has this to say...

"The healing on the Sabbath of the man who had a shriveled hand so irritated the Pharisees and Herodians (influential members of the political party that supported King Herod, with whom the Pharisees would normally have nothing to do) that they laid plans to kill Jesus. To these professional religionists, a common deed of kindness on the Sabbath was a terrible crime, let alone this very uncommon deed."

The Pharisees, ML, were arguing legalism, but religious legalism. They were the enforcers of Jewish law, not civil law. Civil law was under the control of the Romans. Why else would they have had to take Christ before Pontius Pilate?

The Pharisees were arguing that the commandment of keeping the Sabbath holy was paramount to anything else, including doing good deeds, and Christ was trying to show them that even the Commandments allowed for interpretation.


Bob

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Bob, how does any of that address the issue at hand, which is that God expects us to follow His Word and not that of man? Showing examples of legalism certainly does not mean that we have LICENSE to go to the opposite extreme and make it up as we go along according to a "consensus" of MAN. Both extremes are heresy.

Jesus RAILED against such heresy as you can see above. I have shown you scripture after scripture, using JESUS' own words, demonstrating this point in refutation of your remark that:

"It all depends on your belief system, and your church. Some believe all decision should come from the top down. They have "prophets, seers, and revelators" who are the ones who speak to God on our behalf. Others believe that ALL members are able to represent themselves before God, and therefore, a concensus of membership should be allowable to altar church law."

We can sit here and argue about the meaning of legalism [there is no such thing as "religious legalism", legalism is legalism], but that doesn't change the fact that we don't have license to "alter" church law or God's Word. It is not "altering" the law to not follow it legalistically, it was never intended to be followed as such.

Your example of the Pharisees and the Sabbath does not in any way refute that point. It simply shows the OPPOSITE extreme and both extremes miss the point, which is that those who love Him follow the spirit of the law. They don't follow the letter of the law, nor do they IGNORE the law.

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 170
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Your example of the Pharisees and the Sabbath does not in any way refute that point. It simply shows the OPPOSITE extreme and both extremes miss the point, which is that those who love Him follow the spirit of the law. They don't follow the letter of the law, nor do they IGNORE the law. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I believe my point has been made, because your last sentance expresses EXACTLY what I've been saying all through this entire post. And that is that
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> those who love Him follow the spirit of the law. They don't follow the letter of the law, nor do they IGNORE the law. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I agree completely. What I don't agree with is the stance by some that there is not room for anyone who is unwilling to abide COMPLETELY by the letter of the law, and there have been several posts here stating just that.

I believe that we should all do our best to abide by God's law...but that involves more than just reading it. It involves introspection and examination of the very circumstance at hand. It involved rational thought processes, not just blind obediance to any one given scripture. But ultimately, you are correct...we should all strive to live according to God's law. I think that most of us do...and, I think that most of us also fall amazingly short.

All praise to our loving and forgiving God, that He can see and know our hearts, even when we disagree on semantics and practice.

Good luck on your walk. I feel I've kicked this horse enough now.

Bob

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
C
Member
OP Offline
Member
C
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,973
What a church is about is honoring God. It is not honorable to do the things that are considered immoral, disgusting and deplorable.

When I reread the first page of this thread, it sums it up. The topic is about Bible rules and gay rules. The support is not for gay marriage and gay marriage does not belong in a church where the passages read as Robbie quoted from the Holy Bible.

It is a sad state of affairs when the people who claim to honor God will turn on their heels and purposefully do the things which are against what our church has strived to do in the past. Our church never scorned, but opens its doors to all. In return, the folks who enter those doors - come and go have been able to honor God equally.

But, now is the demands being made upon my little church. It stands for the day and the future. It will change the course for it. Knowing that God is the father, we will purposefully ignore His Book, and do as we wish.

Sounds like more of the way of things to come. Who's domain is it anyway.


THE END.

Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Fordude 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,116 guests, and 67 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5