The Bible and Love and Christians

[GonzoLeaper]

The amusing thing is, though, that "Biblical definition of marriage" tends to be very convenient. We don't see polygamy on the lawbooks (other than to denigrate it), nor do we see concubines, and yet those things are in the bible. Go figure.

Perhaps I should clarify. When I think of the Biblical definition of marriage, I don't think of Solomon having 1000 wives and concubines. They ultimately led to his demise.
Yes, polygamy and concubines are mentioned in the Bible. But there are no verses saying that we should take up multiple wives and mistresses. Sorry, but this sounds like the kind of argument that comes up where incest (which Leviticus 18 clearly condemns as a sin) is brought up because it's mentioned in The Bible. That doesn't mean it's sanctioned by God. Lot's daughters committed incest with their father and they gave birth to the Moabites and Ammonites, two longtime enemies of Israel.
I don't think God was happy with that. There are a number of multiple wives mentioned in The Bible in the Old Testament but I can't think of any examples offhand in The New Testament. This is also where we see verses where deacons are commanded to be men of one wife. As Jesus Himself said in Matthew 19, God allowed divorce in the Old Testament because people's hearts were hard. The same applies for polygamy. This page gives a pretty good quick explanation of it. (http://www.apologeticsindex.org/121-what-the-bible-says-about-polygamy) This one is a little more detailed. (http://www.scripturessay.com/article.php?cat=&id=605)
I look at marriage in The Bible as God defines it in Genesis 2:24- "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."
Jesus also quotes this in Matthew 19:1-12.

 

[frogboy4]

"I'm really sorry that you've been misled, but like you've heard me said: Not Guilty."

--George Harrison (Hey, wasn't he a hippie? Wow, imagine me quoting a hippie. )

I've tried to be gracious, but you're full of it. Conversations with you are often fruitless and I'm not going to waste anymore time on them. At least, not for a while. Have a lovely May and have a few margaritas today on me.

 

[Drtooth]

[Dislike]
You have just described the average career politician. Nothing more.

I thought we were talking ABOUT said politicians.

Way I see it, there's a HUGE difference between politician and voter... the politician either tells voter what to do or exploits whatever the belief is. The voter just does what they think is the right thing, or whatever keeps someone they don't like away from power.

Now, again, it depends on who the politician is, there are some strong, good, honest, decent people on both sides... but they're at the mercy of partisan unity or disorganization... again, depending on which side.

But the fact of the matter is, for everyone that DOES something, there's some dummy going along for the ride. And that very same dummy helps sink a movement.

No, you do NOT have to be poor to combat poverty, but there are a LOT of lazy glory hogs (not even talking politically) that help sink their movement, create a hypocrisy, and give the lazy, selfish and or indifferent side ammunition to take them down and make sure nothing gets done. When something becomes a fashionable cause, it doesn't matter if someone genuinely cares about making a difference or doing it for PR, it turns into a cheap political point, all about pointing out hypocrisy to marginalize them.

I really wanted that part of the point to come across... there IS a difference between people who want to make a difference and those who pretend to care because they feel bored. Some of those bored people go to VERY bad causes. Be they cults or something worse.

 

[frogboy4]

I thought we were talking ABOUT said politicians.

Way I see it, there's a HUGE difference between politician and voter... the politician either tells voter what to do or exploits whatever the belief is. The voter just does what they think is the right thing, or whatever keeps someone they don't like away from power.

Now, again, it depends on who the politician is, there are some strong, good, honest, decent people on both sides... but they're at the mercy of partisan unity or disorganization... again, depending on which side.

But the fact of the matter is, for everyone that DOES something, there's some dummy going along for the ride. And that very same dummy helps sink a movement.

No, you do NOT have to be poor to combat poverty, but there are a LOT of lazy glory hogs (not even talking politically) that help sink their movement, create a hypocrisy, and give the lazy, selfish and or indifferent side ammunition to take them down and make sure nothing gets done. When something becomes a fashionable cause, it doesn't matter if someone genuinely cares about making a difference or doing it for PR, it turns into a cheap political point, all about pointing out hypocrisy to marginalize them.

I really wanted that part of the point to come across... there IS a difference between people who want to make a difference and those who pretend to care because they feel bored. Some of those bored people go to VERY bad causes. Be they cults or something worse.

I can agree with that. We are and will continue to be a two-party system in America. There's always going to be some amount of moaning about that and there should be. Eventually we have to look at the donut instead of the hole and figure out the best way to facilitate change so that all our lives can be made better. I fear anyone who aligns too closely to any politician or party just as I fear those who don't invest in any part of the process. Politicians are first and foremost salesmen! Yes, even JFK was a salesman and a very good one at that! If you've ever worked retail you understand the junk you have to swallow in order to do your job for a thankless public so I do have a little sympathy for salesmen. Trust isn't part of it - for any of them.

It would be nice to have mandated term-limits for all politicians. Mine would be something like this: 12 years for local representatives, Congress and White House Cabinet positions, one 6-year term for President and non-retroactive age limit of age 80 (or average life expectancy at the time of appointment) for all Supreme Court justices. This would help insure fresh and current ideas; an active government best represented by the people that's less crippled by chronic reelection campaigning. Public service should be a call of duty and not a life-long career.

My buck-o-five.

 

[Drtooth]

I can agree with that. We are and will continue to be a two-party system in America. There's always going to be some amount of moaning about that and there should be. Eventually we have to look at the donut instead of the hole and figure out the best way to facilitate change so that all our lives can be made better. I fear anyone who aligns too closely to any politician or party just as I fear those who don't invest in any part of the process.

It is INCREDIBLY difficult to walk the middle line, especially when things keep shifting rightward. I don't want to distrust anyone, because when you have no trust, you can't tell the difference between someone who's out to get you, and someone who's out to make sure you DON'T get got!

The thing that really honks me off politically is that both groups whine about being painted with a brush by the others and do NOTHING to dispel, denounce, or distance themselves from stereotypes. People on the right don't want to all be thought of as bigoted gun nuts? Call the actual bigoted gun nuts OUT! Same with ultra-hippies on the left. Both sides need to slash off their extremism to come closer to middle ground. It WILL be beneficial for them in the long run, and the outsider extremists will just vote for fringe parties, as they should.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... Log... Cabin... Republicans. It blows all our conceptions out of the water (I loved the American Dad episode about them). Certain things SHOULDN'T be righty/lefty issues. Save that for tax theory.

 

[CensoredAlso]

There are a number of multiple wives mentioned in The Bible in the Old Testament but I can't think of any examples offhand in The New Testament.

Yeah I noticed that too. I guess the practice had gone out of favor at that point?

Both sides need to slash off their extremism to come closer to middle ground.

I agree, I do think too much attention was put on people like Palin because they got people excited. Fine. But she can't realistically run for President. And now they're struggling to find good candidates!

 

[RedPiggy]

Well, probably, though I'm not in the mood to go through the entire New Testament to make a census of multiple marriages. On the other hand, if we want to remain nitpicky about what the bible teaches, Jesus said that you can't love your family and love Him. He encouraged His followers to just dump families to go on the Christ Road Trip. He's worse than Ash Ketchum, LOL.

 

[CensoredAlso]

He encouraged His followers to just dump families to go on the Christ Road Trip.

It's largely a figurative statement. He was just saying nothing should be more important than God and what he represents.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

Exactly- heralde beat me to the punch, but that is essentially what Christ was saying.
Jesus also said, in Matthew 19:28-30, "And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[e] or children or fields for My sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life."
Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. The life we live on Earth is temporary- just a passing vapor. It is incredibly small compared to the vastness of eternity. So yeah- it is a different way to think about things and to live life- but Jesus calls people to come and die to their own desires and lives and live for Him instead- and He promises not only to be with us all throughout life here on Earth and to give abundant life in the here and now- but also the glorious promise of eternity with Him in Heaven! (Luke 9:23)
Jesus said more than once that Christians need to truly count the cost before following Him- but He also said that following Him is the only way to truly live.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I think it's similar to when he said if your right arm offends you, cut it off. It doesn't mean literally cut it off! Nor is he talking about your right arm! He just means if something is preventing you from being a good person, then it shouldn't be in your life.

In the same way, he's not saying literally dump your families. He's just saying the most important thing above all else is working to be a decent person.

Much of the Bible is metaphor and symbolism and storytelling. It's not Cliff Notes, summing everything up in a neat, simplistic way. It's a work of literature that has to be studied, the same as any other book.