How Protestantism Redefined Marriage

Mar 30, 2008
591
206
✟14,124.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Since some have made political references on this thread and same sex marriage is a political matter, I feel safe to add my two cents.
It is getting hard for those of us who care about the direction our country seems to be heading and not just when it comes to this particular issue.

Sadly, there are folks who will vote based on party alone. Others will vote based on religion, race, looks, charisma, gender. Some will vote based on one particular issue that they feel is important to them.

Except for one lone candidate that I believe in, I personally believe that both parties are two sides of the same coin and I will not be casting my vote for either. However, I will be writing in my vote. You may say that I am throwing away my vote or that I should vote for the lesser of two evils. I say that I will vote my conscience and whoever gets in office will be the one that we deserve.
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,466
1,568
✟206,695.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Josiah said:
So, in all countries predominately Eastern Orthodox, the government doesn't issue licenses, there are no divorce court decisions, the government doesn't in any way get involved in spousal or familial issues? ALL this is done - exclusively - by the church?


.


Under the Ottomon system

Wasn't the Ottomon Empire Muslim?




This system is still used in Israel

Isn't Israel Jewish?



It was in use in Greece till the 1980's


Did Greece become Protestant in the 1980's since the whole point is that the civil authorities got involved in the issue of marriage and the family specifically because of PROTESTANTS?


:confused:


,
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,272
Central California
✟274,069.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm blown-away at how many people I went to school with (not friends, just classmates) turned out to be either gay or heavily sympathetic to this garbage. It's depressing.....the "new morality" sigh....

That was good enough to share with my oldest friend from childhood, now active in the movement to legalize this stuff. (It's tricky sharing anything with someone like that.)
Thanks!
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
That was good enough to share with my oldest friend from childhood, now active in the movement to legalize this stuff. (It's tricky sharing anything with someone like that.)
Thanks!

You're welcome!
 
Upvote 0

Lady Bug

Thankful For My Confirmation
Supporter
Aug 23, 2007
22,174
10,518
✟775,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I'm blown-away at how many people I went to school with (not friends, just classmates) turned out to be either gay or heavily sympathetic to this garbage. It's depressing.....the "new morality" sigh....
it's not people being gay that is bothering me, even though I still don't think it's right. it's the expectation to be OK with homosexuality and the idea that if you are opposed to homosexuality, it makes you a hateful homophobe. gee, just because we think sodomy is disgusting, that makes us bad people.
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,466
1,568
✟206,695.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
it's the expectation to be OK with homosexuality.

Is this specifically because of Protestantism? Did this begin because of the influence, specifically, of Protestantism? As I understand it, homosexuality was largely embraced by the Greek/Roman world, LONG before Luther or Calvin were born. IMO, it's difficult to "blame" this acceptance of such specifically and particularly on "Protestants."


And I'm still reading this, trying to see the defense that the government got involved in the issues of marriage and the family SPECIALLY and particularly because of Protestants. Is it true that where Protestants largely don't exist, the government is in no way involved in the issue of marriage?


:confused:




.
 
Upvote 0

Protoevangel

Smash the Patriarchy!
Feb 6, 2004
11,662
1,248
Eugene, OR
✟33,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
For your benefit, I went through and quoted EVERY post other than the OP that specifically mentions Protestantism. I even bolded the relevant sentences, so you could find them easily.

As far as I can tell this had absolutely nothing to do with the reformation and protestantism - whoever I will still blame them for removing the sacramental nature of marriage and obscuring it's true purpose in the minds of most people.

Yeah, I just wanted to say that like most things on HuffPost, the author is wrong. Marriage was always a civil issue with the "marriage ceremony" being nothing more than a blessing and evolving into what we know it today. The Protestants were, if anything, late to the party.
Okay, you can cool your jets. No one's out to get the "protestants", except perhaps the writer of the article. Like Dorothea said, if you have a beef, take it up with the author.
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,466
1,568
✟206,695.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
No one's out to get the "protestants", except perhaps the writer of the article. Like Dorothea said, if you have a beef, take it up with the author.


That's nice.

Then is the thread misnamed?

Is it typical for a discussion to be about an article but have nothing to do with the point of the article?

If the point is the article is WRONG and that the opening poster DISAGREES with it, why was nothing of the sort mentioned? In the title or the opening post?

Make sense?





Thank you.


- Josiah




.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
That's nice.

Then is the thread misnamed?

Is it typical for a discussion to be about an article but have nothing to do with the point of the article?

If the point is the article is WRONG and that the opening poster DISAGREES with it, why was nothing of the sort mentioned? In the title or the opening post?

Make sense?


Thank you.

- Josiah

.
Hi CJ,
I think the premise of the article referenced in the OP is questionable and kind of irrelevant. That is why I think no one is talking much about the Reformation in itself (or Protestantism in general) as the cause of this stuff. (My opinion)

So Proto's point is right - I don't think people are getting behind a general attack on Protestants over this issue. So here it feels like you're initial raction is understandable, but carrying it on when nobody's attacking or flaming Protestants looks like being over-sensitive because of the name of the thread.
(I also note that your signature seems to subscribe to a general opposition of Roman Catholic vs Protestant when from our perspective they are seen to be branched from the same tree.) We're not Catholics (although we certainly sympathize with them on some issues. I think it's worth learning more about what we DO believe...
 
Upvote 0

Protoevangel

Smash the Patriarchy!
Feb 6, 2004
11,662
1,248
Eugene, OR
✟33,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
That's nice.

Then is the thread misnamed?


Is it typical for a discussion to be about an article but have nothing to do with the point of the article?
Don't be ridiculous. If you were paying the least bit of attention, you would likely have noticed that the thread is named specifically after the article that was linked for review.

If the point is the article is WRONG and that the opening poster DISAGREES with it, why was nothing of the sort mentioned? In the title or the opening post?
NOTHING of the sort was mentioned?

"As far as I can tell this had absolutely nothing to do with the reformation and protestantism"

"The Protestants were, if anything, late to the party."

Yea, that's "nothing of the sort" all right. I don't see the tone of the thread blaming protestantism.

Make sense?

Thank you.
- Josiah.
Try following the thread as it is developing, instead of squawk on and on about the title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
This blogger from Huffington Post is right, imo!

she says in the article "Were it not for the Protestant Reformation, marriage would not be considered a civil institution today. Had Christians followed the early church's example, marriage would never have been thrust into the realm of the government at all.

"In light of this, Christians find themselves in an ironic and divided situation. As citizens of a secular country they must be licensed by the state to validate a practice that is rooted in a religious belief. Should this be the case? Should a practice rooted in a Judeo-Christian faith even be under the auspices of government? If marriage had been left to the church, the church could marry those who practice and follow its beliefs. Civil unions among same-sex couples could be left to the government, providing the full range of civil liberties citizens in a democracy expect. The fact that marriage is governed by the state, defies its purpose intended by God for heterosexuals and prevents civil liberties from being granted to same-sex couples."

Bethany Blankley: How Protestantism Redefined Marriage


Reading the article, part of me was thinking that the problem with marriage being defined by the state is that the definition still leaves room for so many other things to be done in the name of the "Biblical" view that never were how the Lord defined marriage......for even if others argued that advocating for same-sex marriage goes against what the original "Christian" views were, one would wonder how "Christian views" allowed for marriages to support concepts such as genocide of the American Indians...or the support of slavery (which destroyed families---the foundation of marriages--whenever families were broken up and members, be it husbands or mothers, were sold off). How was the original vision of marriage in the U.S "Christian" if it didn't condemn adultery or divorce or domestic violence, broken homes or advocate for Christ to be glorified---the ULTIMATE reason for marriage and what it was meant to point to (Ephesians 5)?

For nowadays, it seems the definition of "Biblical Marriage" stops at "heterosexual"...and that isn't far enough, IMHO, if one is going to bring the Bible into it. For many, it seems that the U.S never truly had a Biblical viewpoint (exhaustively, at least) of what "Biblical Marriage " was anymore than they had an idea of what a "Christian nation" was like when doing a host of social evils that were far from Biblical....and in that, the Church has always remained seperate from the government since what happens nationally will always be meant to differ from what is meant to occur congregationally amongst believers.

Some of it also gets into the issue of how a marriage Biblically defined is not the same as marriages defined by either the State or theological views counter to the Bible---and if the State defined marriage in a way that was different from the scriptures, that'd not be a surprise since there are many other things where that has already been the case. If the State ways tommorrow that God does not exist, that doesn't mean the Bible goes with it...for the world will always be the world.
 
Upvote 0