Marriage

greymare · 06-30-2008, 11:03 AM

I just asked this question in another thread but me thinks i should have posted it here.

When one takes the marriage vows and promises to love til death us do part...... why not say "eternal"...... Presuming that the people are honestly wanting to be married for their lives,,,,,,,,,,is there a "real" reason that eternally wouldnt be used. (or is this just a "romantic" notion of mine) Once again, i blame Hollywood. LOL.

Alex P · 06-30-2008, 12:13 PM

I quite agree, it should be eternity, as we are here in the christian forums, most believe we either come back to live on the Earth for ever or we go off into the heavens and live forever.... So either way... We are to be with our loved ones again. Yeah I thee wed till you or me is dead. One pops up daiseys... The other gets married again... Gonna be awarkward when you get to the afterlife.

Thomas · 06-30-2008, 01:05 PM

Oh-oh, look at Luke 20:
"But they that shall be accounted worthy of that world, and of the resurrection from the dead, shall neither be married, nor take wives" (Luke 20:35)

No wives in heaven ... remember that whereas companionship and the idea of two being one flesh was prior to the fall, 'marriage' is subsequent to it ... so perhaps in heaven, all will be of the one Mystical Body — a mode of union of which 'marriage' is a poor substitute?

Thomas

Alex P · 06-30-2008, 02:11 PM

No wives in heaven? What is the point in mankind Thomas? We die. We go to Heaven, we become some kind of dormant idle creature waiting it's extinction? We are meant to be a creature tha breeds and spreads? Yet our end is up in the ethers of the universe with no family connections?

Quahom1 · 07-01-2008, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greymare

I just asked this question in another thread but me thinks i should have posted it here.

When one takes the marriage vows and promises to love til death us do part...... why not say "eternal"...... Presuming that the people are honestly wanting to be married for their lives,,,,,,,,,,is there a "real" reason that eternally wouldnt be used. (or is this just a "romantic" notion of mine) Once again, i blame Hollywood. LOL.

Because, according to the Bible there is no giving or taking in marriage in heaven (though apparently relationships between people continue in some form or fashion). "Eternity" would also cause a mess of those who have married more than once and lost the marriage partner through death or divorce, or war.

Take the woman at the well for instance. Jesus said she had no husband, and she agreed. However Jesus continued "but you have had five husbands before and the one you are with now is not your husband."

Then again there is the time when the Sanhedrin questioned Jesus about the woman who had seven husbands who all died, leaving her no heir, then she died. "Who's wife was she in heaven?" Jesus explained there was no give or taking of marriage in heaven.

There is alot more to marriage than most folks want to delve into, but it does model itself on the relationship human kind (the church) is to have with Christ.

Just because a marriage isn't eternal though does not mean love isn't.

v/r

Q

Ahanu · 07-01-2008, 09:16 PM

Quote:

No wives in heaven?

Precisely. Angels do not die. As an angel, you will not "eat, drink, or propagate."

Quahom1 · 07-01-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ahanu

Precisely. Angels do not die. As an angel, you will not "eat, drink, or propagate."

We will never be "angels" Simple reason: Salvation is offered to Man, not to angels. Angels were created knowing the fullness of God. Man did not, and is learning. Angels were/are designed to be ministers of God's will, Man was designed to be a companion for God. Read Genesis...

Angels were created whole, man is born of male and female.

greymare · 07-01-2008, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

Oh-oh, look at Luke 20:
"But they that shall be accounted worthy of that world, and of the resurrection from the dead, shall neither be married, nor take wives" (Luke 20:35)

No wives in heaven ... remember that whereas companionship and the idea of two being one flesh was prior to the fall, 'marriage' is subsequent to it ... so perhaps in heaven, all will be of the one Mystical Body — a mode of union of which 'marriage' is a poor substitute?

Thomas

oh, thanks for that Thomas And Joshua, for explaining that.

Alex P · 07-02-2008, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ahanu

Precisely. Angels do not die. As an angel, you will not "eat, drink, or propagate."

god made angels. He also made humans... Why if I am to be an angel, why did he make me man? If he wanted me to be an angel, I would have been made an angel. In the Christian belife, looking at it mans purpose was to live forever (it was a sinless realm) and were to spread and be many. Not to die and then be transformed into another animal, we die.. And then are reincarnated to an angel? That isn't how I see it when I read into your bible... And no offence but if that is how you see it, you have to be twisting words to make that so.

But I am a man, so I will need to eat, drink and propagate. That was the "command" of your god. and no one, not even your god has the power to take me from my wife... So he can forget about that right now. Cause it ain't happening... That notion is fail.

Ahanu · 07-02-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

We will never be "angels"

Well,

Quote:

"At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Matt 22: 30).

Quote:

And no offence but if that is how you see it, you have to be twisting words to make that so.

No, I do not see it like that. Just trying to understand what Christians believe. Well, I suppose that we will not be angels, but we will be like angels. Uh, this does not sound like a big difference to me.

Here is a quote from the link that I thought gave an answer to Greymare's question. . .

Quote:

Most Jewish people agreed that angels did not eat, drink or propagate (1 Enoch 15:6-7; Test. Ab. 4, 6A; ARN 1, 37A). Some Jewish traditions also compared the righteous after death with angels (1 Enoch 39:5; 104:2-4; 2 Baruch 51:10-11). Since angels did not die (unless God destroyed them), they had no need to procreate. Jesus' statement about lack of marriage and procreation in heaven (Mt 22:30) follows largely from the logic of the resurrection, to which he now turns (vv. 31-32).

Ahanu · 07-02-2008, 04:25 PM

Man, I hate it when I copy stuff to Microsoft Word and the type gets changed.

Thomas · 07-02-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

But I am a man, so I will need to eat, drink and propagate.

We should not assume however, that pre-Fall man lived the same as post-Fall man. There is no reason to think, for example, that Primordial Man propagates as we now do ... there is every reason to assume that propagation is different, as the process of childbirth — as a 'labour' — was part of the consequence of the Fall.

Current Catholic thinking allows for the idea that man would have been so attuned to his own nature that 'illness' would be very, very rare — he would have been able to self-medicate from nature, and perhaps even self-heal — or put another way he would have been totally in tune with 'alternative' therapies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

and no one, not even your god has the power to take me from my wife...

A noble sentiment, but not true, is it? A drunk driver has the power to take you from this world (God forbid). Or a brain haemorrhage. And God has the power to dispose of you how and as He chooses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

So he can forget about that right now. Cause it ain't happening... That notion is fail.

OK ... so you're going to live forever?

Step back ... deep breath ... and relax ...

If, as Scripture says, "God is love" (1 John 4:8) then maybe ... just maybe ... what He has in mind for us is something so sublime, so utterly wonderful, that our tiny little minds cannot begin to comprehend the bliss that awaits us? So rather than assuming the negative, why not try, which is far more likely, the positive?

Remember that if you truly love your wife (— and I don't doubt it, just pointing out that love is different from lust, possession, requirement, etc., that so many confuse with love... ) then God is part of the process because God is love ... so ...

"For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8:38-39)

We talk of love ... D'you think God, who is love, would undo love? Or would say, 'forget her, look at this!' I don't think so ... but love is something we all long for ... and supposing you were living right in the beating heart of love ... you, your wife ... and everyone else ... then what?

Love? We ain't seen nutthin' yet!

Thomas

Alex P · 07-02-2008, 05:27 PM

Eeek, two replies... Ok lol..

Ahanu.

I am very sorry my bad.. I didn't realise, I should of guessed that you weren't a christian though eh?

Tommy boy!

I think we are getting life and existance too close together. Yes a drunk driver, cancer, gunshot, a rabid hamster, many things could take me from this world... But that wouldn't take me from her.

I believe not that I will live as a human forever :\ But if you look at it from the bible account I believe it claims that yes we will live as humans forever, as that was the will of your god. To spread, be many, be happy and live sinless forever. I would be quite interested in seeing where people get the understanding they will become angels from the bible. God is love is a good one

Thanks for sharing. I don't think we need to assume or await surprises though, if he is going to get rid of "satan" and go back to how he intended things, then... we are immortals upon earth. And then, the laws of god are to of course naturally remain stead fast. So marriage would still be in effect, so by marriage it should be like the sea org contract for "100 billion years" lol... You get what I mean like it ain't gonna run out.

I do believe in a Creator, but it isn't accounted for in any book ever written by a man. bits and bobs sure.. but not the full Creator.

Thomas · 07-02-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

I believe not that I will live as a human forever

You're entitled to believe what you like ... but if I believed everything anybody ever said, I'd be the fool in that scenario.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

I think we are getting life and existance too close together.

No, I think you're getting human nature and human existence mixed up. But again, if it's between you and Jesus, I'll go with Him, thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

But if you look at it from the bible account I believe it claims that yes we will live as humans forever, as that was the will of your god.

Yep, but quite how is a mystery ... which is what is says ... all we can do now is "see through a glass, and darkly" ... but I personally think Scripture is more reliable than sentimentality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

I would be quite interested in seeing where people get the understanding they will become angels from the bible.

It's a mistake if they draw that conclusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

we are immortals upon earth.

Don't know where you got that idea, either. Again, it's a mistake if you've deduced it from Scripture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

And then, the laws of god are to of course naturally remain stead fast. So marriage would still be in effect, so by marriage it should be like the sea org contract for "100 billion years" lol... You get what I mean like it ain't gonna run out.

So ... the law says one wife ... but in a lifetiume you have had two (one died) ... what happens now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

I do believe in a Creator, but it isn't accounted for in any book ever written by a man. bits and bobs sure.. but not the full Creator.

Oh I see, you believe in a Creator, but you still choose to make it up as you go along? You choose to believe bits of a book cos you like them, but when you don't like them, the book's wrong?

So you are the arbiter of truth! Better be careful, there are a few here who think that!

Thomas

Alex P · 07-03-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

You're entitled to believe what you like

Thomas

Yes, yes I am.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

Don't know where you got that idea, either. Again, it's a mistake if you've deduced it from Scripture.

Uhm... Genesis?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

So ... the law says one wife ... but in a lifetiume you have had two (one died) ... what happens now?

Then they gonna have some explaining to do

I personally will never have a second wife.. And you can quote me on that when I am like 80 odd..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

Oh I see, you believe in a Creator, but you still choose to make it up as you go along? You choose to believe bits of a book cos you like them, but when you don't like them, the book's wrong?

So you are the arbiter of truth! Better be careful, there are a few here who think that!

Nah, you don't see lol....

I believe something made all this, but I don't claim to have the truth, I don't claim to know it all.. Like yes... Pretty much the majority of this forum. (up there in the mid 90 percents.)

I just think we're all wrong. Yet we have some truths and traits of the Creator... There is much that proves the ideas and concepts of god as people know are false and just aren't so.. But then there are some ideas/claims and so on that I personally see has to be so.

I don't believe any of your book, or the muslim book, or the sikh books, or the buddhist books, or whatever else. But there are bits in them that I think maybe true, but I don't put stock in any holy book.

ar·bi·ter

–noun

1.a person empowered to decide matters at issue; judge; umpire.
2.a person who has the sole or absolute power of judging or determining.

Oh yeah "sure"... lol That's me 'great' judge of character there.