beta wrote:Oh I'll take a position and it's right alongside God
That is meaningless to those of us who don't have any proof of a god. I understand you are right next to god on this one, but I have no idea what position your personal god takes on anything. "God's will", "God's mind" etc vary depending on which person is telling the story, so to simply say, your with god on this one doesn't tell anyone else very much.
beta wrote:There was actually a reason why I quoted from God and it was for YOUR benefit - not as you had noticed.
heh. You never need to quote a god for my benefit. But actually, that is what is most annoying, you haven't really quoted your god.
beta wrote:if you read condemnation into that it is YOUR problem.
No, I don't see condemnation in your comments, your words were relatively mild actually. What I found unacceptable was what I said several times now. You take a position, but try to say it is "god's" and not your own. It is your view based on what you BELIEVE is god's view. But it is just that, YOUR belief based on YOUR interpretation of what YOU believe your bible states.
beta wrote: I also said that our personal opinions don't matter, why should you want to demand one ? Are you just looking for an argument ?
I demand nothing, but you did it again here. You keep trying to rationalize your view as god's without any "proof" that it is god's position at all. You presume that words like fornication mean today what they meant in the past. Perhaps I would be better off showing why I do not think the bible supports your view, then perhaps we could have some biblical point to actually counter.
beta wrote:Normally people who agree with God are called Believers and those who don't Unbelievers , sorry if that offends you, how else can we differentiate ?
No, being called an unbeliever is not a bad thing at all. I would hate for anyone to be under the mis impression that I do believe in fairy tales. I doubt you would be able to find anything to offend me even if you tried (Not that I think you have tried).
1. Whatever marriage is, it predates legal definitions. (Meaning people got married before there were pieces of paper involved)
2. If Adam+Eve. Seth+his sister etc were married, then I hope we can agree there was no white dress, flowers and garters.
3. If #2 is accurate, then what made them married. Personally I can't imagine a rational position other than they chose to be together and had sex.
4. In the OT we have many examples of MEN with multiple wives. But no Women with multiples.
5. If a Marriage were possible without paper or ceremony in the past, and god doesn't change, then pieces of paper and ceremony are not really what defines marriage.
If 1-5 are accurate, I fail to see how a man can have premarital sex. If the woman isn't married, at worst he would then be married to her, after all biblically he can have as many as he desires.
Or perhaps nothing more than a concubine, some of the OT personalities had hundreds of them. Someone they had sex with, and were not married to, seems like a pretty good deal for men so far.
I would like to thank you for posting some scriptures to Mc and Confused. But for me they only further illustrate their point. It also better shows what I have been saying all this time.
You bring out scriptures with the word fornicators. But you expect us to accept your preconceived definition of the word. That is exactly why it is your view (not some god's).
What is fornication? Having sex with someone outside of marriage? The bible doesn't support that definition. Men had sex with Concubines, even had offspring, but they were not their wives. Men had Multiple wives for that matter.
It is arrogance on your part to presuppose your 2007 views are relevant to define terms used thousands of years ago.
What rights do you think the author of genesis would grant to you. What level of respect do you think his time had in general for women?
Consider this society where women were little more than property, traded from father to husband. This is the time in which you want to take their laws and traditions as your own. Does that include a husband with multiple wives?
Remember, when Moses came down off the Mountain with the 10 commandments (Mel Brooks claimed there were 15
) He gave his laws to a much different crowd than today.
So what makes you think your definitions are qualified to reflect that time, and those values? Marriage isn't some pillar, standing the test of time. Nor is it the 4000 year old tradition some homophobes care to use as a mantra.
In the book of Judges, there is a story I have never heard any preacher uses as scripture text.
Judges 19:1-2 wrote: And it came to pass in those days, when [there was] no king in Israel, that there was a certain Levite sojourning on the side of mount Ephraim, who took to him a concubine out of Bethlehemjudah. And his concubine played the whore against him, and went away from him unto her father's house to Bethlehemjudah, and was there four whole months.
Judges 19:20 wrote: And the old man said, Peace [be] with thee; howsoever [let] all thy wants [lie] upon me; only lodge not in the street.
Judges 19:22-30 wrote: [Now] as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, [and] beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, [nay], I pray you, do not [so] wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. Behold, [here is] my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord [was], till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down [at] the door of the house, and her hands [were] upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her [up] upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, [together] with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel. And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak [your minds].
A society where a man would offer his daughter and a concubine so easily? Here, have my daughter, and this guy's girlfriend...... Now you kids enjoy ok?
THIS is the group we want to take moral advise from? But don't worry, the story does get better.
Judges Chapter 20 is essentially the children of Israel - Benji ofc, doing a little old school genocide on the Benjamin tribe in retribution.
Chapter 21 brings us to a few hundred Benjamite males, who have no wives, and no prospects.
Judges 21:1 wrote: Now the men of Israel had sworn in Mizpeh, saying, There shall not any of us give his daughter unto Benjamin to wife.
Judges 21:10-14 wrote: And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children. And this [is] the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man. And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which [is] in the land of Canaan. And the whole congregation sent [some] to speak to the children of Benjamin that [were] in the rock Rimmon, and to call peaceably unto them. And Benjamin came again at that time; and they gave them wives which they had saved alive of the women of Jabeshgilead: and yet so they sufficed them not.
Typical OT Rape and Plunder scenario. Keep the virgins, Give them to the Benjamites for
wives. Not sure where consent falls into any of this.
Unfortunately, there still were not enough women, so Plan B.
Judges 21:21 wrote: And see, and, behold, if the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in dances, then come ye out of the vineyards, and catch you every man his wife of the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin.
Whats a kidnapping charge in the effort to get a wife?
So put words like fornication, immorality etc into that story and what do you get?
