Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 25

Thread: Traditional Christian Marriage

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972

    Traditional Christian Marriage

    So much for marriage's "religious origins."
    Early Christian authorities rejected marriage, for the very reason that it was Goddess-oriented, and also on grounds of eschatology. Since they believed that the world was going to end at any moment, according to Jesus’ promise, they saw no point in continuing another generation–-for their savior specifically stated that the world would end in his own generation (Luke 9:27). However, as the decades wore on and the world did not end, fathers of the church turned even more firmly against marriage because they thought universal virginity was needed to bring about the promised kingdom of Christ.

    St. Jerome said the purpose of every godly man should be “to cut down with the ax of Virginity the wood of Marriage.” St. Ambrose called marriage a crime against God. Origen said, “Matrimony is impure and unholy, a means of sexual passion.” Tatian said marriage is “a polluted and foul way of life,” and Tertullian described it as an obscenity, a moral crime, “more dreadful than any punishment or any death.” St. Augustine flatly declared marriage a sin. Saturninus explained that God made only two kinds of people, good men and evil women, and marriage turned good men toward evil. Jesus himself said there could be no marriage in heaven (Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25). St. Bernard wrote that it is easier for a man to bring the dead back to life than to live with a woman without endangering his own soul.

    For many centuries therefore, marriage remained outside the church, under the auspices of common law. It was grudgingly accepted by religious authorities only when new laws restricted a wife’s rights of ownership and inheritance, taking the means of independence away from women and turning them over to men.

    Priests had abandoned the early church’s rule of celibacy and had begun to take wives in the 5th and 6th centuries. But in the 11th century, the church decided to forbid clerical marriages, because they produced children to inherit property. When an unmarried priest died, all his property reverted to the church. Therefore, new papal decretals commended clergymen to turn their wives out on the street and sell their children as slaves. Some of the wives stayed on as concubines, though they were disinherited in the church’s favor. By this means the church acquired a great new influx of wealth, although the women and children who were left destitute suffered terribly.

    Marriage continued under the common law up to the 13th century, having no endorsement by canon law. Historian F.C. Conybeare says, “Nothing is more remarkable than the tardiness with which liturgical forms for the marriage ceremony were evolved by the church.” The earliest approach to a Christian ceremony was a simple blessing of the newlyweds in facie ecclesiae–-on the porch, outside the church door–-to prevent the so-called “pollution” of God’s house. Though this blessing technically violated canon law, in 1215 the fourth Lateran Council granted it legal status because it had become too popular to ignore. It was only in the 16th century that the church finally made the priestly blessing mandatory (and, of course lucrative), refusing to recognize common-law marriages any more.
    Freethought Today, November 2008
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  2. #2
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MrWriteLA View Post
    So much for marriage's "religious origins."Freethought Today, November 2008
    Yet another anti-Christian post by a gay activist.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,119

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12 View Post
    Yet another anti-Christian post by a gay activist.
    Yet another false assessment.
    Why is posting Christian historical context "anti-Christian"?
    "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution.
    You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."
    *** Jamie Raskin

  4. #4
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
    Yet another false assessment.
    Why is posting Christian historical context "anti-Christian"?
    Now who's being disengenuous? When was the last time one of you gays posted a pro-Christian thread? lYou ONLY post anti-Christian threads, even though Christianity has been responsible for much of the good in the world.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972
    Funny how the truth so often tends to have an anti-Christian bias.

    If you can find something untrue in the article, point it out and proffer your evidence; otherwise... I didn't think posters were required to "balance" their opinions here.

    At least now we see what passes for "moderation" on this board. (That's right, folks: you can't put JPS on your ignore lists, 'cuz he's a "moderator." You know, like Glen Beck on "fair and balanced" Fox News.)
    Last edited by MrWriteLA; 10-18-2009 at 08:51 PM.
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  6. #6
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MrWriteLA View Post
    Funny how the truth so often tends to have an anti-Christian bias.

    If you can find something untrue in the article, point it out and proffer your evidence; otherwise... I didn't think posters were required to "balance" their opinions here.

    At least now we see what passes for "moderation" on this board. (That's right, folks: you can't put JPS on your ignore lists, 'cuz he's a "moderator." You know, like Glen Beck on "fair and balanced" Fox News.)
    What would you know about fair and balanced?

    I know a lot of truths about gays. Do you want me to start posting incessant threads pointing them all out?

    And I am the moderator for the formal debate forum, not the entire board. Want to debate me on the benefits of gays on society vs Christianity?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,119

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12 View Post
    Now who's being disengenuous? When was the last time one of you gays posted a pro-Christian thread?
    So I am anti-Christian because I don't go around posting pro-Christian threads?
    Your logic is really skewed.

    Can I declare you anti-gay cause you don't frequently post pro-gay threads?


    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12
    You ONLY post anti-Christian threads, even though Christianity has been responsible for much of the good in the world.
    Quite frankly, you don't know squat about me. So stop trying to pretend you do.

    I have gone on record to say I think Christianity does a lot of good in the world.
    I have even tried to correct Matthew in his anti-Christian tirades. (Until I gave up realizing it would do no good... )

    I hate to break it to you, but the WORLD typically functions with people putting out negative news.
    You hear about how Joe XXXX broke the law.
    Do you ever hear about how Johnny Atlas keeps the law?



    Quote Originally Posted by MrWriteLA
    If you can find something untrue in the article, point it out and proffer your evidence; otherwise... I didn't think posters were required to "balance" their opinions here.
    That's the thing.
    JPSartre12 can't point to anything inaccurate, so you see this mundane complaint that *you're posting something I don't like* ...

    Quite frankly, if Christianity insists on trying to tell the government how it should perform marriages, I think that street should cut both ways and the government should be able to have input on how religion performs marriages...

    JPSartre12's reply is reflective of the *anti-gay Christians are seeking discrimination against gays, but we're going to try to pretend we're the real victims while we bash them* school of thought.
    "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution.
    You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."
    *** Jamie Raskin

  8. #8
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
    So I am anti-Christian because I don't go around posting pro-Christian threads?
    Your logic is really skewed.

    Can I declare you anti-gay cause you don't frequently post pro-gay threads?
    Look at the % of threads that I start thast are anti-gay, then look at the % of gay posters' threads that are anti-Christian. Do you see the dis-similarity in them?
    I don't start gay bashing threads, but all of you are obsessed with starting anti-religion threads. That certainly isn't going to win you any converts.

    Quite frankly, you don't know squat about me. So stop trying to pretend you do.

    I have gone on record to say I think Christianity does a lot of good in the world.
    I have even tried to correct Matthew in his anti-Christian tirades. (Until I gave up realizing it would do no good... )

    I hate to break it to you, but the WORLD typically functions with people putting out negative news.
    You hear about how Joe XXXX broke the law.
    Do you ever hear about how Johnny Atlas keeps the law?
    I know that you are a contrarian that gioes out of his way to argue nonsensical points.
    That's the thing.
    JPSartre12 can't point to anything inaccurate, so you see this mundane complaint that *you're posting something I don't like* ...

    Quite frankly, if Christianity insists on trying to tell the government how it should perform marriages, I think that street should cut both ways and the government should be able to have input on how religion performs marriages...

    JPSartre12's reply is reflective of the *anti-gay Christians are seeking discrimination against gays, but we're going to try to pretend we're the real victims while we bash them* school of thought.
    While you're at it, maybe you can talk Mr Wonderful into debating me formally on the benefits of gays vs the benefits of Christianity in the world today. I could use the practice.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,119

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12 View Post
    Look at the % of threads that I start thast are anti-gay, then look at the % of gay posters' threads that are anti-Christian. Do you see the dis-similarity in them?
    Is your point that you are much more anti-gay than you are anti-Christian?

    I don't really see how that furthers any point you're trying to make...


    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12
    I know that you are a contrarian that gioes out of his way to argue nonsensical points.
    Actually, in this case I am addressing YOUR nonsensical point...

    MrWriteLA just started a thread about part of a FACTUAL CONTEXT of religious treatment of marriage in history.


    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12
    While you're at it, maybe you can talk Mr Wonderful into debating me formally on the benefits of gays vs the benefits of Christianity in the world today. I could use the practice.
    I don't know if you really want to have that discussion.
    I'm already wondering how many centuries (possibly millenia) Christianity has held back scientific research and advancement.

    Plus, I realize you want to change the subject, but some people aren't as interested in biting on such a non-sequitur hook.
    "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution.
    You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."
    *** Jamie Raskin

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972
    Frankly, I don't see vast groups of gays ravaging countrysides with anti-straight Inquisitions, burning Christian "witches" at the stake, going on Crusades against non-homosexuals, throwing scientists into jail for discoveries their Gay Holy Book doesn't agree with, or spending vast amounts of money to deny Christians the right to marry--or worse, bashing them to death--all because some mythical Great Gay in the sky told them to.

    I do see some of them, however, creating some of our finest music and theater, writing some of our greatest literature, decrypting codes that helped end World War II, helping to bring down a jet hijacked by terrorists, giving a life while offering spiritual comfort to firemen dying in the rubble of the World Trade Center, and marching next to MLK Jr. as his right-hand-man in his fight for civil rights.

    Individual gays have occasionally done heinous things, of course, as individuals of any group have always done--but as a whole they've benefited society as much as any other as well. On the other hand, show me a gay oranization or even loosely organized group who's caused harm that can begin to compare with the vast amount of murder, torture, imprisonment and oppression carried out by Christian "true believers" throughout history, all in the name of some vengeful, supernatural sky-pixie.

    "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" --John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson

    "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."--Thomas Jefferson

    "Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistant that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel."--Tom Paine
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,060
    Quote Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post

    I have gone on record to say I think Christianity does a lot of good in the world.
    I have even tried to correct Matthew in his anti-Christian tirades. (Until I gave up realizing it would do no good... )
    Yet every good deed they do is ruined by their war against us. Until they stop this war upon us, their attacks on our families, and their fight to remove our freedoms through the tyranny of the majority at the ballot box, I will continue to consider them evil, destructive, and enemies of freedom. Remember even Hitler did some good for the German people all the while committing evil acts.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Every time one of the Republican presidential candidates speak all I hear is the sound of the marching boots of the Brown shirts.

    "Saying I can't get married because it violates your religion is like me saying you can't eat donuts because it violates my diet!" -------anonymous

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    11,799
    Quote Originally Posted by MrWriteLA View Post
    At least now we see what passes for "moderation" on this board. (That's right, folks: you can't put JPS on your ignore lists, 'cuz he's a "moderator." You know, like Glen Beck on "fair and balanced" Fox News.)
    Meh.
    Foundit66 is moderator on a different site.
    Nobody cares. It's a rare case that a board could ever find a truly centrist person to moderate. If you have a problem with JP as a mod on this forum, no one's making you participate. I don't post on the forum Foundit mods, myself. If it's really that big a deal to you that JP mods a forum catagory on this site, then put your money where your mouth is and don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you, on the way out.
    “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” - Reagan

    "A young man who wishes to remain a sound atheist cannot be too careful of his reading."
    - C. S. Lewis

    "I suffer more harassment as a former homosexual than I ever did as an out and proud homosexual." - Greg Quinlan, PFOX

  13. #13
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
    Is your point that you are much more anti-gay than you are anti-Christian?

    I don't really see how that furthers any point you're trying to make...
    Still suffering from a reading disability, I see. Try reading it again.

    Actually, in this case I am addressing YOUR nonsensical point...

    MrWriteLA just started a thread about part of a FACTUAL CONTEXT of religious treatment of marriage in history.
    And what exactly was the purpose of him sharing that little nugget of knowledge if not to bash Christianity?
    I don't know if you really want to have that discussion.
    I'm already wondering how many centuries (possibly millenia) Christianity has held back scientific research and advancement.

    Plus, I realize you want to change the subject, but some people aren't as interested in biting on such a non-sequitur hook.
    I'm sure you don't want to have that discussion, nor attempt to argue which group has been better for society because you'll lose that argument badly.

    I'm getting a little tired of these "fact-filled" inflammatory anti-Christian threads. Maybe it's time to reciprocate with fact-filled inflammatory anti-gay threads? How about a thread on average life expectancy? Monogomy? or several other topics that "factually" show gays in an unfavorable light?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12 View Post
    Considering 85% of the country is Christian and less than 5% is gay, I wouldn't expect you to. Would you like me to stereotype all gays the way that you stereotype all Christians? I'm certain that I can paint just as inaccurate a picture of the majority as you can.
    He didn't say they are all like that. Gay people would just like to be left alone to enjoy all the rights and freedoms as everyone else. It also is possible for a minority to rule in tyranny over a majority, if the minority has power. Gays have never sought that power.

    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre
    Your numbers have never been significant enough to challenge the masses in anything other than the spread of disease.
    That's mighty ignorant and scummy of you. Yes, we get up in the morning hoping we will get a disease and infect the heterosexuals. You found us out! Thus, when you hear of a gay person having a disease, he or she isn't a victim like a heterosexual who only got it as a result of the evil gay plan. JPSarter, I hope you or a member of your family, or your friend gets a disease, and you tell us about it. Then I will be on here to say they have no right to put my own community at risk. Why shouldn't I get down into the muck too, and fight fire with fire??!! Would you like that? Do you not think you are being extremely hurtful to those who have lost a loved one to disease, or to those who have a disease, who also happen to be gay? It's too bad your imaginary god can't help you to understand what it means to behave like a decent human being.

  15. #15
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by gayhumanist View Post
    He didn't say they are all like that. Gay people would just like to be left alone to enjoy all the rights and freedoms as everyone else. It also is possible for a minority to rule in tyranny over a majority, if the minority has power. Gays have never sought that power.

    That's mighty ignorant and scummy of you. Yes, we get up in the morning hoping we will get a disease and infect the heterosexuals. You found us out! Thus, when you hear of a gay person having a disease, he or she isn't a victim like a heterosexual who only got it as a result of the evil gay plan. JPSarter, I hope you or a member of your family, or your friend gets a disease, and you tell us about it. Then I will be on here to say they have no right to put my own community at risk. Why shouldn't I get down into the muck too, and fight fire with fire??!! Would you like that? Do you not think you are being extremely hurtful to those who have lost a loved one to disease, or to those who have a disease, who also happen to be gay? It's too bad your imaginary god can't help you to understand what it means to behave like a decent human being.
    Thank you for being the first to prove my point above.

    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12
    I'm getting a little tired of these "fact-filled" inflammatory anti-Christian threads. Maybe it's time to reciprocate with fact-filled inflammatory anti-gay threads? How about a thread on average life expectancy? Monogomy? or several other topics that "factually" show gays in an unfavorable light?
    None of the anti-Christian or anti-gay posts serve any purpose other than to inflame the other side. While I could certainly argue the factual nature of my statement, what end does it serve? I ask the same question to the incessant anti-religion posters here. What end are they trying to achieve?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •