Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,454 Year: 3,711/9,624 Month: 582/974 Week: 195/276 Day: 35/34 Hour: 1/14


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Presbyterian Church approves of same-sex marriages
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 1 of 123 (753217)
03-18-2015 9:38 AM


The Presbyterian Church (USA) has changed its constitution to define marriage as "Marriage involves a unique commitment between two people, traditionally a man and a woman, to love and support each other for the rest of their lives."
There are almost two million Presbyterians in the US and while this change does not require that a church perform same-sex marriages it does allow that.
The important point is that you cannot get much more Protestant Christian than the Presbyterian Church.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 10:38 AM jar has replied
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 03-18-2015 3:24 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18308
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 2 of 123 (753220)
03-18-2015 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
03-18-2015 9:38 AM


Club Rules
Inevitable progress, I suppose. You have mentioned before that you think that Christians need to try and do their best to eliminate bigotry and prejudice, and i agree. My questions, on this subject..are these:
1) Apart from Jesus, why should a male limit his commitment to only one other male? Should not a member of the "Body" of Christ strive to commit to everyone in the body rather than simply one person?
2) What rules does your club have? What recommendations might a Priest or Reverand have for a soon-to-be-married couple and also, why not emphasize to all that Jesus should be our main love interest?

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo
If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 9:38 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 10:41 AM Phat has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 3 of 123 (753222)
03-18-2015 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Phat
03-18-2015 10:38 AM


Re: Club Rules
I'm sorry but I don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Phat writes:
1) Apart from Jesus, why should a male limit his commitment to only one other male? Should not a member of the "Body" of Christ strive to commit to everyone in the body rather than simply one person?
So you are saying Jesus should shag all the guys. Got it.
Phat writes:
2) What rules does your club have? What recommendations might a Priest or Reverand have for a soon-to-be-married couple and also, why not emphasize to all that Jesus should be our main love interest?
I can tell you that anyone making such a silly statement would just be greeted with laughter and rightly so.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 10:38 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:06 AM jar has seen this message but not replied
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:10 AM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18308
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 4 of 123 (753224)
03-18-2015 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by jar
03-18-2015 10:41 AM


Re: Club Rules
are you that dense? Do you not know the difference between flesh and Spirit? Honestly, jar I think your intellect prevents you from understanding the simplicity of Christian concepts...which you somehow regard as "silly". sheesh

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo
If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 10:41 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18308
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 5 of 123 (753225)
03-18-2015 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by jar
03-18-2015 10:41 AM


Re: Club Rules
Lets try this again.
In my opinion, when a male limits his love to only one other male, he is basically becoming idolatrous...avoiding Jesus...and living "in the flesh".
You do know the meaning of living in the flesh, I hope. (seeing as how you claim to have read the Bible)
Any two people...of whatever gender combination...have a legal right to get married, but there must be a spiritual purpose to the communion.
Again, you do understand spirit, I trust. (Seeing as how you claim to have read the Bible)

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo
If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 10:41 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 11:21 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 7 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-18-2015 11:25 AM Phat has replied
 Message 18 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2015 4:00 PM Phat has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 6 of 123 (753227)
03-18-2015 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Phat
03-18-2015 11:10 AM


Re: Club Rules
Phat writes:
In my opinion, when a male limits his love to only one other male, he is basically becoming idolatrous...avoiding Jesus...and living "in the flesh".
You do know the meaning of living in the flesh, I hope. (seeing as how you claim to have read the Bible)
Any two people...of whatever gender combination...have a legal right to get married, but there must be a spiritual purpose to the communion.
Again, you do understand spirit, I trust. (Seeing as how you claim to have read the Bible)
I don't doubt that you believe such utter nonsense and thanks for the laugh.
Why should there be any spiritual purpose to anything (whatever "spiritual purpose" is supposed to mean)?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:10 AM Phat has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(5)
Message 7 of 123 (753228)
03-18-2015 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Phat
03-18-2015 11:10 AM


Re: Club Rules
In my opinion, when a male limits his love to only one other male, he is basically becoming idolatrous...avoiding Jesus...and living "in the flesh".
Are you trying to denigrate a male-male marriage by saying that it means that the male is limiting his love to one male, and therefore no longer loving Jesus?
Why doesn't that happen when a woman marries a man?
Why can't the man love his husband and also love Jesus?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:10 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:32 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18308
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 8 of 123 (753229)
03-18-2015 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by New Cat's Eye
03-18-2015 11:25 AM


Re: Club Rules
Cat writes:
Are you trying to denigrate a male-male marriage by saying that it means that the male is limiting his love to one male, and therefore no longer loving Jesus?
No. Im saying that any two people should be committed to God first...before each other.
Why doesn't that happen when a woman marries a man?
It can happen.
Why can't the man love his husband and also love Jesus?
He can. My point is that if a man and woman get married, the purpose is to raise a family. Two men have no such restriction and should not have a need to focus exclusively on each other.

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo
If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-18-2015 11:25 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by DrJones*, posted 03-18-2015 11:49 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 10 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-18-2015 11:54 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 11 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 11:55 AM Phat has replied
 Message 29 by Theodoric, posted 03-19-2015 4:48 PM Phat has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2285
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 7.4


(2)
Message 9 of 123 (753231)
03-18-2015 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
03-18-2015 11:32 AM


Re: Club Rules
My point is that if a man and woman get married, the purpose is to raise a family
Not this same old "marriage is for children" bullshit again Phat. So you're saying an infertile couple shouldn't get married?
Two men have no such restriction
Two men/women can raise a family as well.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:32 AM Phat has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 123 (753234)
03-18-2015 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
03-18-2015 11:32 AM


Re: Club Rules
My point is that if a man and woman get married, the purpose is to raise a family. Two men have no such restriction...
These gay men are raising families:
...and should not have a need to focus exclusively on each other.
Let me get this straight.
A man and a woman can get married, as they are going to raise a family, so they can still love god first.
But two men can somehow not raise a family, which means that need to focus exclusively on each other, and therefore they cannot love god first?
Is that what you are trying to say?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:32 AM Phat has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 11 of 123 (753235)
03-18-2015 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
03-18-2015 11:32 AM


Re: Club Rules
Phat writes:
My point is that if a man and woman get married, the purpose is to raise a family. Two men have no such restriction and should not have a need to focus exclusively on each other.
I'm sorry but that is just nonsense. Why can't unmarried couples raise a family or married couples have no intention of ever raising a family?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 11:32 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 1:24 PM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18308
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 12 of 123 (753252)
03-18-2015 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by jar
03-18-2015 11:55 AM


Re: Club Rules
Phat writes:
My point is that if a man and woman get married, the purpose is to raise a family. Two men have no such restriction and should not have a need to focus exclusively on each other.
jar writes:
I'm sorry but that is just nonsense. Why can't unmarried couples raise a family or married couples have no intention of ever raising a family?
Again...they can. MY point is that even though anyone has or should have every legal right to marry whomsoever they want, a church has a primary obligation of joining people in communion with God first---before joining them with each other.
My point was that in my opinion there is little need for two of the same gender to marry since it is selfish to focus on each other to the exclusion of others. The order of communion should be this:
1) To God
2) To Others
Loving ones partner above either God or others is, in my opinion, selfish.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo
If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 11:55 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 03-18-2015 1:42 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 14 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-18-2015 1:47 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 15 by Larni, posted 03-18-2015 2:28 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 17 by Jon, posted 03-18-2015 3:57 PM Phat has replied
 Message 28 by ringo, posted 03-19-2015 1:04 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 30 by Theodoric, posted 03-19-2015 4:51 PM Phat has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 13 of 123 (753260)
03-18-2015 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Phat
03-18-2015 1:24 PM


Re: Club Rules
Phat writes:
Again...they can. MY point is that even though anyone has or should have every legal right to marry whomsoever they want, a church has a primary obligation of joining people in communion with God first---before joining them with each other.
Back to your communing with God nonsense.
Phat writes:
My point was that in my opinion there is little need for two of the same gender to marry since it is selfish to focus on each other to the exclusion of others. The order of communion should be this:
1) To God
2) To Others
Loving ones partner above either God or others is, in my opinion, selfish.
What does that even mean?
What does it have to do with marriage anyway?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 1:24 PM Phat has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 123 (753261)
03-18-2015 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Phat
03-18-2015 1:24 PM


Re: Club Rules
there is little need for two of the same gender to marry since it is selfish to focus on each other to the exclusion of others
I can't make the connection between gay marriage and focusing on each other to the exclusion of others.
How'd you do it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 1:24 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 186 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 15 of 123 (753263)
03-18-2015 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Phat
03-18-2015 1:24 PM


Re: Club Rules
Why is it selfish for two gay people to get married and not for two straight people to get married?
Confused at the difference. And why is it selfish to put a loved one first but not self to put your god first?

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 03-18-2015 1:24 PM Phat has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024