Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Haven't you read, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female and said 'for this reason a man will leave his father and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate".
- Matthew 19:4-6
It can't be any more clear. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman.
NOT, just based on your OPINION and interpretation...
And let's FINISH reading the context of Matthew 19:4---12
7 "Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"
8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
10 The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."
11 Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.
(JESUS SAYING IT IS BETTER NOT TO MARRY)
12 For there are eunuchs (homosexual) who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs (castrated) by others--and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs (celibate) for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
"Haven't you read, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female and said 'for this reason a man will leave his father and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate".
- Matthew 19:4-6
It can't be any more clear. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman.
Mac, you ain't been keepin' up with all these threads. If God chose one man, one woman, why did He not only APPROVE of multiple wives for His most trusted followers, but actually GAVE multiple wives to David?
Moses was one of God’s big shots. Moses was the husband of at least three wives. Zipporah was Moses’ first wife (Exodus 2:21), the Ethiopian woman was his second wife (Numbers 12:1), and Holy Scripture mentions Hobab, the Kenite as the father of Moses’ third wife (Judges 4:11). These are three of the wives of Moses recorded in Scripture.
Abraham, the father of faith, the first Jew, was married to Sarah, Hagar, and Keturah; and Abraham also had many concubines who bore him many sons (Genesis 11:29, 16:3, 25:1, I Chronicles 1:32)
God also blessed Jacob who begat the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel with two wives, Leah and Rachel, and two concubines, Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 29:23-30, 30:4-9, 32:22)
God, who is incapable of sin, incapable of causing anyone to sin, and incapable of tempting anyone to sin, positively gave these multitudes of wives to David the King (James 1:13). Before King David sinned, it was written, “David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David” (II Samuel 5:13). Remember, David did not seek any of these wives for himself, but God gave them to him while he (David) was busy seeking the Lord. First Kings 15:5 states, “David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.”
Elkanah, a Levite, the father of the prophet Samuel, had two wives, Hannah and Peninnah, and Elkanah was not a rich man (I Samuel 1:1-2).
So, enough of the one man, one woman. That was never the story of the God of the Israelites. Three passages in the epistles (1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6 state that church leaders should be the "husband of but one wife."
And the history of the Christian church shows that even AFTER the NT was written, multiple wives were an accepted part of Christianity.
Quote:
In a letter to the Saxon Chancellor Gregor Brück, Luther stated that he could not "forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict Scripture." ("Ego sane fateor, me non posse prohibere, si quis plures velit uxores ducere, nec repugnat sacris literis."
"On February 14, 1650, the parliament at Nürnberg decreed that, because so many men were killed during the Thirty Years' War, the churches for the following ten years could not admit any man under the age of 60 into a monastery. Priests and ministers not bound by any monastery were allowed to marry. Lastly, the decree stated that every man was allowed to marry up to ten women. The men were admonished to behave honorably, provide for their wives properly, and prevent animosity among them."
So at least get your faith in line with the historical facts.
I totally agree with one man, one woman. But it is a CULTURAL concept, not a biblical one. Just as men having sex with men was the result of a CULTURAL concept of the time because it did not provide for procreation which was very important when there was a very high infant mortality.
No, not my opinion. I quoted exactly what Jesus said. If you don't like it, take it up with him.
I did, and Jesus gave me the WHOLE context of Matthew 19 showing me that LOVE is the trump card that brings us together.
Your OPINION of YOUR interpretation of the 4-6 verses is NARROW and just the result of listening to vipers and Pharisees twist the scripture for their own purposes--Just as Karl Marx predicted when he said--
"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".
The quotation, in context, reads as follows (emphasis added):
The foundation of irreligious criticism is:
Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world.
Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.
Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself
NOT, just based on your OPINION and interpretation...
And let's FINISH reading the context of Matthew 19:4---12
7 "Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"
8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
10 The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."
11 Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.
(JESUS SAYING IT IS BETTER NOT TO MARRY)
12 For there are eunuchs (homosexual) who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs (castrated) by others--and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs (celibate) for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
ADVOCATES? Now my words get twisted..of course it does not ADVOCATE--
ad·vo·cate
noun
ˈadvəkət/
1.
a person who publicly supports or recommends a particular cause or policy.
"he was an untiring advocate of economic reform"
synonyms: champion, upholder, supporter, backer, promoter, proponent, exponent, spokesman, spokeswoman, spokesperson, campaigner, fighter, crusader;
Ain't never said Jesus was a SPOKESPERSON, PROMOTER or even a CRUSADER for SSM--
Jesus WAS an ALLY and accepted SSM as a reality that has no prohibitions from God, the Father..
ally
[v. uh-lahy; n. al-ahy, uh-lahy]
verb (used with object), allied, allying.
1.to unite formally, as by treaty, league, marriage, or the like (usually followed by with or to):
Russia allied itself to France.
2. to associate or connect by some mutual relationship, as resemblance or friendship.
Because as we all know, JESUS hates NO ONE and LOVES everyone.
Imagine living in peace right here. Imagine not stressing about your neighbor's sexuality, and placing those energies caring for the planet.. I am going to print this out, and use it for my meditations.
Are you implying that Jesus and his disciples were white?
Jesus was a man of color. He worked in the Sun. His body, of course, would be lighter. Or, Jesus is the white guy with blue eyes, and fair hair, perfectly groomed, wearing white floor length white robes
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
