The Marriage Debate

[William67]

fine example of social shaming.

Not really. An analogy would be that if someone who calls themselves a vegan, only eats meat, therefore they aren't actually a vegan. You cant be a conservative and support liberal/progressive ideology. Being able to distinguish between what someone says and what they actually do is called discernment. A Conservative Christian believes in a strict interpretation of Scripture. So, since the Word of God forbids fornication, living with someone as husband and wife, but without the sanctifying bond of marriage, is committing the sin of fornication. Conservative Christians do not do this, since it would be a fundamental betrayal of their belief system. Ergo, someone who "shacks up" with someone is not a Conservative Christian, no matter what they say. Their acts betray their claims.

For it to be social shaming, someone would have to constantly "attack" them by exposing their sin.

 

[William67]

I just find her example of "conservative Catholics" to be kind of odd
showing no concern for the immortal soul of their own kinsfolk?
(sorry is the term kinsfolk too anachronistic, I was thinking of "relatives" but that word is almost turned into a sit-com cliché, now I am rambling)

anyways
a conservative Catholic would understand that serious sin puts a soul in danger of eternal damnation

if you commit a serious sin with full freedom and full knowledge that it is a sin then it is a mortal sin
committing a mortal sin means you are cutting yourself out of being in a state of grace
if you die outside of being in a state of grace then you go to hell

I am not really asking if you agree or disagree with this, since you are not Catholic I doubt you hold to many teachings that are particular to the Catholic Church

lack of concern for people who are putting their soul in serious jeopardy is not a sign of love
it is like watching a drug addict waste away and not trying to help them at all "oh I did not want them to feel shamed so I let them get emaciated and OD"

I'm not Catholic, but I do know the difference between venial and mortal sins. Sins which do not separate you from Grace and sins which do. I do agree with that for the most part. Working on the Sabbath does not separate you from God, but we are still to obey that Commandment if we can. Sins for which God will "turn you over to a reprobate mind" does separate you from God, but even those can be forgiven. There is only one unpardonable sin. But I will not say what it is because there may be new Christians reading this and I will not put a stumbling block in front of them.

 

[Rhamiel]

thanks @William67
I did not mean to imply that it was unforgivable
of course if you repent God will forgive
He is slow to anger and quick to forgive, rushing towards us with mercy

 

[Cearbhall]

You cant be a conservative and support liberal/progressive ideology.

Premarital sex is liberal/progressive ideology...? For pete's sake, it far predates any of that. That's just human history in a nutshell. No agenda. It's always been the norm for the majority of people to partake in sexual activity without a marriage license.

The Victorian era really skewed everyone's perceptions of history...

 

[redblue22]

Premarital sex is liberal/progressive ideology...? For pete's sake, it far predates any of that. That's just human history in a nutshell. No agenda. It's always been the norm for the majority of people to partake in sexual activity without a marriage license.

The Victorian era really skewed everyone's perceptions of history...

If their leaders could practice it I might listen to them.

 

[Rhamiel]

Premarital sex is liberal/progressive ideology...? For pete's sake, it far predates any of that. That's just human history in a nutshell. No agenda. It's always been the norm for the majority of people to partake in sexual activity without a marriage license.

The Victorian era really skewed everyone's perceptions of history...

not sure why we are calling it Victorian era
we can look at Christian history, every great moral theologian from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas would agree that fornication is a sin
the VIctorians were weird, glad their era is over, but you can not really blame this on them

 

[redblue22]

we are moving into a time of isolationist theology. where it was once chosen and people lived alone, now it is pushed on us as if Christ never thought of us worshipping by loving one another in relationship. Church is a lonely world. You live far away insulated pure, and I'll live among the dirty people.

 

[Cearbhall]

not sure why we are calling it Victorian era
we can look at Christian history, every great moral theologian from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas would agree that fornication is a sin

Yes, and these were the people going against the grain. The concept of having sex without starting a monogamous, lifelong relationship that's been confirmed in front of your community is nothing radical, and certainly not liberal or progressive. It's just part of being animals. Calling it something like "fornication" is a product of social control. And I'm not saying that social control is always bad. Augustine and Aquinas had their reasons for thinking that it would be beneficial. But let's not pretend that the idea of limiting sex to a man and a woman in the man-made institution of marriage is natural, or that sex didn't happen until this was created.

 

[redblue22]

what kind of animal are you?

 

[Cearbhall]

what kind of animal are you?

A homo sapiens, of course. Are you not?

 

[redblue22]

A homo sapiens, of course. Are you not?

no, I'm kindof a super hero.

 

[Cearbhall]

no, I'm kindof a super hero.

Your secret is safe with me.

 

[Travelers.Soul]

Is it church history you are objecting to? Or people not approving of shacking up, etc? You dislike someone not approving of other peoples lifestyles?

 

[Cearbhall]

Is it church history you are objecting to?

Objecting in what way?

Or people not approving of shacking up, etc?

That I don't mind. You don't have to approve of it, no. And the beauty of the U.S. legal system is that I don't have to worry about whether you do or not.

You dislike someone not approving of other peoples lifestyles?

I value respect and rationality. If they can recognize their opinions for what they are and refrain from acting self-important, I have no problem with their disapproval. There are certainly lifestyles of which I don't approve.

 

[William67]

Premarital sex is liberal/progressive ideology...? For pete's sake, it far predates any of that. That's just human history in a nutshell. No agenda. It's always been the norm for the majority of people to partake in sexual activity without a marriage license.

The Victorian era really skewed everyone's perceptions of history...

You could be publicly flogged in caught fornicating during medieval times. Adulterers/adulteresses were branded. In the OT, if a woman was caught fornicating, the man either had to marry her or pay her father a bride price.

Sorry, but it wasn't Conservatives pushing "free love" during the 60's. Today, its any kind of sexual deviancy being pushed and endorsed by liberals. Think your a rabbit born in a human body? A middle aged dude who wants to be a 6 year old girl? A woman in a man's body? Gender neutral bathrooms from K1-12th grade? Suuuuure go for it. You may not like it, but supporting freaks and perverts is the domain of the left.

 

[William67]

Yes, and these were the people going against the grain. The concept of having sex without starting a monogamous, lifelong relationship that's been confirmed in front of your community is nothing radical, and certainly not liberal or progressive. It's just part of being animals. Calling it something like "fornication" is a product of social control. And I'm not saying that social control is always bad. Augustine and Aquinas had their reasons for thinking that it would be beneficial. But let's not pretend that the idea of limiting sex to a man and a woman in the man-made institution of marriage is natural, or that sex didn't happen until this was created.

So, you want to be on the level of lower animals? It is laws and customs that actually keep you safe, as a woman, since most men abide by the laws of society. But, if you want to be that female animal, who "comes into season" and every male that is nearby takes his turn, go for it. Those pesky laws and social customs.

 

[William67]

we are moving into a time of isolationist theology. where it was once chosen and people lived alone, now it is pushed on us as if Christ never thought of us worshipping by loving one another in relationship. Church is a lonely world. You live far away insulated pure, and I'll live among the dirty people.

Christ ministered to sinners. He also chastised them for their sin. Rebuked them for their sin. He did NOT get down into the gutter and wallow in sin WITH them.

 

[Sketcher]

You could be publicly flogged in caught fornicating during medieval times. Adulterers/adulteresses were branded. In the OT, if a woman was caught fornicating, the man either had to marry her or pay her father a bride price.

Sorry, but it wasn't Conservatives pushing "free love" during the 60's. Today, its any kind of sexual deviancy being pushed and endorsed by liberals. Think your a rabbit born in a human body? A middle aged dude who wants to be a 6 year old girl? A woman in a man's body? Gender neutral bathrooms from K1-12th grade? Suuuuure go for it. You may not like it, but supporting freaks and perverts is the domain of the left.

Right, but the Romans for instance, fornicated all the time. They weren't 60's "progressives" by any stretch.

 

[Cearbhall]

You could be publicly flogged in caught fornicating during medieval times.

In Europe? That's one specific continent. It also depended on your gender and social rank. And what about in the hundreds of thousands of years of human history before that? I've already addressed the history of Christianity. The sexual limitations that it set are not the norm in the course of human history. There was a reason why they needed to go to such extremes to enforce them.

 

[William67]

Right, but the Romans for instance, fornicated all the time. They weren't 60's "progressives" by any stretch.

Did you know that there were laws against fornication in Rome? One Caesar actually banished his daughter because of her immorality. As immorality grew, the Roman Empire fractured, dividing in the 3rd century. The western empire devolved into debauchery. But the eastern empire, The Byzantine Empire, continued for another 1000 years and was the center of Christianity until being conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1453.