"The Christian Marriage"

[laughingowl]

Even some of the hard lines clear 'bad' can be not be totally wrong if you stupid and think:

"kill "adulterers", it means to kill adulterers"


Now killing is perhaps harsh, but as mentioned also, older times were harder times and penalties were often harsher....

Now as to kill adulterers... That is not what most understand (or use it) to mean, it is not just unmarried sex..

It is very specifically breaking of weddings vows, which perhaps are the highest vows one can make.

Honestly breaking of wedding vows, should be harshly punished...

Now if your vows to your significant other do not preclude other partners, then (arguably) it is not adultery (though perhaps it is also not a marriage, per the bible).

With the bible you have.

1) it has been re-written how many times, re-translated how many times.... Even presuming the original disciples wrote it down right, how many human errors have crept in when translated... transcribed.... (or straight up re-written to be 'more understandable').


2) Since most of the ones mentioned here are from Leviticus isn't all of Leviticus dealing with "Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel', nothing about not going to heaven if you do any of those, just bad luck if you are an Israelite or live in Israel. (see how wonderful translations can be)

[Magdlyn]

Originally Posted by laughingowl

Now if your vows to your significant other do not preclude other partners, then (arguably) it is not adultery (though perhaps it is also not a marriage, per the bible).

On the contrary, marriage was polygynous at the time both Testaments were written. Even early "Christians" were allowed to be polygynous. Only one verse in a Pauline chapter, mentions a bishop (not all men) should be married to just one woman, so he would have more time for his church duties.

1) it has been re-written how many times, re-translated how many times.... Even presuming the original disciples wrote it down right, how many human errors have crept in when translated... transcribed.... (or straight up re-written to be 'more understandable').

Deuteronomy retells earlier books with a contemporary spin, contradicting them many times. Jesus' "disciples" did not write the Bible. (All the books in the New Testament are pseudeponymous.) Paul only wrote some of the books attributed to him, as letters addressed to certain groups. Politicians wrote the rest.

2) Since most of the ones mentioned here are from Leviticus isn't all of Leviticus dealing with "Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel', nothing about not going to heaven if you do any of those, just bad luck if you are an Israelite or live in Israel. (see how wonderful translations can be)

Ancient Judaism did not have the concept of an afterlife. That was a concept borrowed from Persian religion.

[loveboston]

How did a thread that started out as an introduction by a loving couple digress?

Isn't it odd that those who claim to follow Jesus find so many reasons to discuss and vehemently debate opinions that teach us how to disobey His teaching that we are to love one another? Even our enemies.

The members of our own household are unfortunately, often our greatest enemies. It's always been very sad to me that the members of the so called church practice and preach hatred, judgment and condemnation under the cloak of belief in Christ.

And we wonder why those who don't believe Jesus is God shun us as the hypocrites we tend to be.

[Magdlyn]

Originally Posted by loveboston

How did a thread that started out as an introduction by a loving couple digress?

It's a conversation, and conversations tend to do that! It's perfectly OK per the rules of the board.

Isn't it odd that those who claim to follow Jesus find so many reasons to discuss and vehemently debate opinions that teach us how to disobey His teaching that we are to love one another? Even our enemies.

Well, "love your enemies" was and still is a radical teaching. The Old Testament certainly did NOT teach that, and many people still tend to hate their "enemies" as the Israelites hated the Moabites.

The members of our own household are unfortunately, often our greatest enemies. It's always been very sad to me that the members of the so called church practice and preach hatred, judgment and condemnation under the cloak of belief in Christ.

And we wonder why those who don't believe Jesus is God shun us as the hypocrites we tend to be.

The Bible is a very VERY old collection of writings, which contradict each other and confuse many. The OT was written to encourage the traditionally polytheistic peoples to follow just one god, Yahweh (who was conflated with El, a god of Babylon). Most of the OT is nothing more than myth. There is no actual fact about Israel written until about 700 BCE, when Josiah saw the northern kingdom (Israel) assimilated by Babylon and superstitiously and forcefully tried to wipe out Asherah religion in hopes to get the power of Yahweh on his side, Judah's side, militaristically. Read the Bible, it's all in there. (Most Christians do NOT read the Bible, but just cherry pick.) I spent 7 years reading the Bible and associated books, 2 hours a day. I highly recommend Biblical literacy.

The Bible was written for an illiterate audience, first in Hebrew, then in Greek. It was preached and interpreted for the masses and no one could legally own a Bible until around 1500 CE. Scrolls of this or that book of the Bible floated around in different communties, according to their preferences and needs. New sacred books were written and later condemned. Revelation was not added to the canon officially until around 1600. It was seen as craziness until then (and it still is crazy sounding until you understand it was written about Nero or Domitian, and not as a prediction of end times).

Christianity is an awkward combination of polytheism, Yahwism, Babylonian and Persian religion, and Greek mystery religion (the dying and rising god associated with seasonal changes and fertility superstitions), all combined with the politics of 2000 years ago. Add in, they didnt have the benefits of modern science and knowledge of psychology we have today, and of course, it's going to be a mess of disagreements in the Christian communities today! It would be "odd" if it wasn't, in my opinion.

Personally I don't know why any thinking person even bothers to try to "follow the Bible." It's an impossible task without extreme cognitive dissonance being put into play.

[loveboston]

Couldn't agree with you more that trying to make sense of the bible is a hopeless task.

I have a relationship with Jesus that is very personal shaped by my own experience.

I try to be very careful about making generalizations or suggestions that I have some special knowledge of divinity.

I have a unique understanding but nothing can contradict Christ's command that we love each other.

I love people who I wouldn't like to have sex with. I also love people who wouldn't choose to have sex with me.

I think it would be nice if the Christians who visit this web site could have an open discussion about love and sex without the confusion that comes from trying to understand writers of the bible who endorsed slavery, treating women as possesions and hating our enemies.

Jesus told us to love. My goal is to a very good job of loving. For me that's a chore worth working on.

[SNeacail]

Mags, I always love reading you biblical insights. I find it very helpful. Thanks

[Magdlyn]

Originally Posted by SNeacail

Mags, I always love reading you biblical insights. I find it very helpful. Thanks

Oh, you're very much welcome, SNecail!

[loveboston]

I've been around churches for the past 59 years of my 64 year old life that I can remember. Debates about the bible are like debating the true meaning of Harry Potter.

What disturbs me more than anything is that every single time I try to have a discussion about Jesus I end up getting sucked into a conversation about the bible. Here and everywhere else. Especially at church.

Jesus and the bible aren't one in the same. Jesus ridiculed study of the scripture. He vehemently opposed the religious autocracy that conspired with the government to kill Him. He warned that things would be written about Him that would create false teaching.

He said all of the law and the prophets were summed up with two commands. Love Him as God and love each other and ourselves equally.

I’ve spent a great deal of time trying to comprehend what it means to love my wife as much as I love myself. Not one instant of my introspection has caused me anything but even more love for her.

Jesus warned that there was one sin that couldn’t be forgiven. He called it blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Elsewhere He said that if we don’t forgive each other God won’t forgive us. My conclusion is that the message of the Holy Spirit is forgiveness.

If I don’t agree with someone’s perspective I’m free to disengage but I’m never free to not forgive them.

So for me it’s sad that every single time I start reading interaction about Christianity it seems to be dominated by the theme that sexuality is the most important issue on Christ’s mind. In fact He said materialism is our greatest enemy.

As always I’ve read numerous opinions in the forum about the divinity of Christ. But I haven’t read anything that I’d consider unkind about Him from people who don’t believe He is God.

I’ve yet to read one single comment in this forum that promotes or supports treating each other like material objects. Quite the opposite this forum has provided me with insights on how I can continue to improve my lifelong goal to love my wife as much as I love myself.

I don’t believe polyamory is disobeying Jesus. At least not the polyamory being promoted here.

When I think Jesus I think love in esoteric terms. When I think polyamory I think of love in practical terms.

If there are other Christians on the forum I’d be interested to know how things are going with you with your application of Christ’s command that we love one another. I’ve learned that love is as much about letting go as it is about getting near.

I’ve also learned that a eunuch is not a castrated male but a male who has chosen not to get married and have children. I’ve learned that lust for someone who makes it plain their not available is sexual abuse.

I’ve never read a single statement attributed to Jesus about His opinion on homosexuality. I think the same rules apply to any two people who love each other.

For me I wouldn’t want to be sexually intimate with someone I don’t love. But I would always choose to love whether it was a sexually intimate relationship or not.

I’d really like to make connections and have discussions with fellow believers who have decided that they are non-monogamous. An exchange of experiences that includes more than the usual exchange of opinions about the true standard code language of Hogwarts.

[Magdlyn]

Originally Posted by loveboston

...every single time I try to have a discussion about Jesus I end up getting sucked into a conversation about the bible.

Well, since Jesus originally appears in the Bible, that doesn't surprise me. Talking about Jesus is talking about "the bible--" his words are supposedly recorded there. There are other early (2nd, 3rd, 4th cent.) texts that are not considered canonical that round out his character, which I find even more interesting, though.

Jesus and the bible aren't one in the same. Jesus ridiculed study of the scripture.

Yes, he debated the elders at age 12 on the meaning of Hebrew scripture, amazing them with his knowledge. Then he moved on to throwing out much of their tradition. "You have heard it said..., but I say to you..."

He warned that things would be written about Him that would create false teaching.

Other "Christs," ie: Messiahs, were all around back then. Judeans were looking for anyone to lead them to overthrow the tyranny of Rome, as Cyrus the Persian had overthrown Babylon hundreds of years earlier, allowed the Judean leaders to return to Judah, and rebuild the Temple.

He said all of the law and the prophets were summed up with two commands. Love Him as God and love each other and ourselves equally.

This is historically recorded to be the words of another early current era rabbi, Hillel.

Also, according to wikipedia

As a concept, the Golden Rule has a history that long predates the term "Golden Rule" (or "Golden law", as it was called from the 1670s).[2][7] As a concept of "the ethic of reciprocity," it has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard way that different cultures use to resolve conflicts.[2][6] It has a long history, and a great number of prominent religious figures and philosophers have restated its reciprocal, "two-way" nature in various ways (not limited to the above forms).[2]

Statements that mirror the Golden Rule appear in Ancient Egypt in the story of The Eloquent Peasant.[8][clarification needed] Rushworth Kidder discusses the early contributions of Confucius (551–479 B.C.) (See a version in Confucianism below). Kidder notes that this concept's framework appears prominently in many religions, including "Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, and the rest of the world's major religions".[9] According to Greg M. Epstein, " 'do unto others' ... is a concept that essentially no religion misses entirely."[10] Simon Blackburn also states that the Golden Rule can be "found in some form in almost every ethical tradition".[11]

So, sure, take it from your "Jesus," if you like, but you don't need to be a "Christian believer" to find the rule of reciprocity makes good ethical sense.

I’d really like to make connections and have discussions with fellow believers who have decided that they are non-monogamous. An exchange of experiences that includes more than the usual exchange of opinions about the true standard code language of Hogwarts.

Good luck! Christianity had a long tradition of misogygny and sex negativity. It's much easier to practice polyamory from a pagan or agnostic/atheist standpoint/community.

[loveboston]

My concept of divinity comes from Jesus. But, equally important I want to love you, but not more than I love myself.