Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

That marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

187 replies

OneHumanFamily · 27/01/2017 20:11

The House Of Bishops Report proposes no change to ecclesiastical law or to the Church of England’s existing doctrinal position on marriage and sexual relationships. The Report also says that the Church needs to repent for homophobic attitudes. Anglicanism has always been a contested faith: Will homosexuality eventually be accepted?

www.churchofengland.org/media/3863472/gs-2055-marriage-and-same-sex-relationships-after-the-shared-conversations-report-from-the-house-of-bishops.pdf

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Mindtrope · 02/02/2017 07:43

What is there to love about such an angry, violent, jealous god?
Even according to the bible he has killed millions of people, he smites, he commits acts of infanticide, genocide, thinks slavery and human sacrifice are OK. He is demanding, petty and unstable.

And yet people " love" and even worship him.

I wouldn't share a coffee with him.

The more I see of religion the more I am convinced it is some kind of cognitive disease.

thegreenheartofmanyroundabouts · 02/02/2017 08:26

When atheists such as Mindtrope insist that the God of the Christians is X when the Christians say that God is Y you have to wonder what is going on.

We have different world views based on different metaphysical assumptions. To call the people you do not agree with cognitively diseased is a step towards some very unpleasant consequences.

Mindtrope · 02/02/2017 08:43

greenheart I base my view on your god on the bible. It is plain for all to read.

Mindtrope · 02/02/2017 08:47

I am not the first to suggest that religion is a virus of the mind.

We need freedom of speech.

Should I or others be silenced for trying to understand the wholesale grip that causes some to exhibit bizarre and at times very unaltrusitic behaviour?
To abdicate from their own morals, to accept without question "god's will" even when it includes him murdering babies?

FreshStartIn2017 · 02/02/2017 09:41

Mindtrope
I don't think having faith is a disease of the mind. However, if you're right and it is a mental disease then surely you need to show us some decent human compassion?

You keep saying God kills babies for emotive responses, but it is not as you make it sound. He doesn't sneak around suffocating then with pillows. The killing of babies you speak of was first of all WARNED about fairly. If the mothers and fathers didn't want to die and obviously their children with them, then they needed to stop worshipping false gods (which by the way often meant they were sacrificing heir own babies to these false gods). You say God is into child sacrifice and yet there is no verse in the bible that says he is, and there are loads that say he isn't. If you refer to Issac and Abraham then you're missing the point. God had promised generations through Abraham and his son Isaac, and was testing his faith. Would Abraham believe God's promise or not? It turned out he did, and we read later in the bible Abraham believed God could raise his son from the dead to fulfil his promise. Obviously God had no intention of actually killing his son, but wanted to see Abraham demonstrate his unnerving faith, which he did.

As for God being into slavery? Actually you should put the word slaves into a bible website and see what the bible says. You'll find all over the place rule after rule about treating your slave with due consideration and fairness.

thegreenheartofmanyroundabouts · 02/02/2017 10:43

Mindtrope you are basing your image of God on a selection of verses in the OT. This is not the image and experience of God in Jesus that Christians have. It is a bit like insisting that elephants look like woodcut images from the 15th century when there are good photographs from people who study elephants. You have a right to insist that 15thc woodcuts are the only proper representation of elephants and anyone who has studied elephants and respectfully offers photos is cognitively diseased but it is an odd way of going about things.

When I did some work on conflict resolution some years ago one model we were given was based on understanding the other. It was being used very successfully with radicalised Muslim teenagers. The first step is to move away from black and white thinking. I am right and they are wrong. I have a point of view which is very important to me but other people also have a point of view which is very important to them. If I study what they actually believe and practice then I will learn something. Calling the other cognitively impaired dismisses and diminishes the other. It leads to treating the other as less than human, as less deserving of respect, as easier to hurt. It is a slippery slope.

Mindtrope · 02/02/2017 11:05

fresh- The killing of babies you speak of was first of all WARNED about fairly.

So that makes it OK? Hmm

Mindtrope · 02/02/2017 11:06

greenheart- so we can discount everything in the Old Testament

FreshStartIn2017 · 02/02/2017 11:34

Mindtrope: if you fill a bus with families and drive on a closed road, with warning signs blocking the road, telling you that the road is unsafe and you will die if you continue, then you have no one but yourself to blame if you ignore the warning.

It's not the road-maker's fault, it's not the bus-makers fault. It's not the sign-makers fault. You had a fair wanting and you didn't pay heed.

The 'baby-killing' flood warning lasted 120 years. That's a good long time to wait patiently for people to read the sign and turn back to safety. And why do you keep insisting on calling a flood "killing babies" when it was bringing premature death as a judgement to everyone? It's because you like to try and be emotive about it to shock people. The trouble is, it's obvious you're deliberately misconstruing the events to try and suit your own agenda, and trying to make it out to be something it's not.

thegreenheartofmanyroundabouts · 02/02/2017 11:37

Christians read the OT through the lens and life of Jesus. We have four gospels plus some letters to the early church to work with in addition to the meditations and scholarship of other Christians over the past two thousand years and our own experience of the divine in prayer and worship.

JamieXeed74 · 02/02/2017 13:17

But to get back to the original question about accepting gay marriage:

It takes ages for an ancient institution like the church to change direction

That is just another way of saying, 'I don't accept gay marriage but dont worry I might not change my opinion at some unspecified time in the future'. Its been two thousand years! how much more time does the church need?

God being all knowing could easily have put the validity of gay marriage into the ten commandments and avoided this discrimination, but he didn't, so what do we read into that?

FreshStartIn2017

1. If their is in fact, only One. True. God. Then why is it important to make one of his 10 demands relating to something that doesn't exist? Its like me teaching my DC one of the most important things in the world is not to worship any of their other parents. To which they would reply, 'I have other parents'?, and I would say 'no, but dont love them anyway'. Leading to a quizzical look and a mumbled 'mums been on the booze again'.

2. If a second command is needed to backup the first, then maybe he should have made the first a bit clearer. So are you saying god was worried he wouldn't be believed? Then why didn't he back up all other nine demands with a supporting explanation? Confused (He could easily have replaced this one with a marriage equality statement).

3. So taking the Lords name in vain refers to people making up their own mind what God means rather than accepting the truth of the Bible? Who is it that decides what the Bible means? So its ok for who, the church? to interpret the Bible but anyone else doing that is taking Gods name in vain? And the church is telling us that gay marriage is wrong and we just have to bow our heads and discriminate against some human beings, or be guilty of breaking one of the commandments?

4. Its still not clear what rest means? Can I chop wood for my fire on Sunday or not? Can I chop wood for my neighbors fire on Sunday and ask him for ÂŁ10 as a contribution to my general well being? Is shopping rest if I enjoy it but not if I dislike it. What if I am ambivalent? If the rest can be any day of the week can I choose Wednesday and work on Sunday. Oh no, wait that doesn't work well because the church supports keeping Sunday special! Is it keep the day holy or just rest, do I have to go to church to be holy? I dont get it, its as clear as mud.

5. Do you really think this commandment means you must be honest, fair and act with integrity towards abusive parents? How is this tenable when a child might be in a situation where telling the truth will get them hit with a belt? Why should a child treat abusive parents fairly? So honour an abusive parent but not two loving women when they want to get married?

6. It does show where gods priorities are when he places following him above not killing someone or indeed gay marriage. You didn't answer the point about killing verses murder, because depending on which church you are in you will get a different answer and god doesn't tell us how we are supposed to figure out which church is describing the right god. And we can't decide it ourselves because you said in point 3 that would be blasphemy.

7. A partner cheating on me, yes I have experienced that, but still dont see why I have to wait up to five years (for a divorce) before the church allows me to have sex with another person? Why is God so cruel, it could have meant I would have never been able to have children.

8. I think we all know what stealing is Life isn't that black and white. Is health tourist stealing when they come to the UK? What if I 'temporarily' borrow my neighbors car because I really really need to go somewhere important? Does stealing refer to the legal definition or some moral idea? Whose moral idea? Was Sir Philip Green stealing millions from a pension fund even thought it was legal? Am I stealing if I avoid tax? Evading tax? I think some taxes are immoral so I dont pay them, I believe I am morally right, am I a thief?

9. So are white lies breaking a commandment or not? What if the truth hurts? Life is just so much more nuanced. Writing commandments in such a simple way is really counterproductive and causes problems like discrimination against gay marriage for example.

10. But what does wrongly desirous of wealth mean? Who decides what wrongly is? A person wants to grow up to marry a gay supermodel be 'rich', is that wrong? I work hard to earn lots of money, I live a life of luxury off the proceeds of my hard work, people envy me for being rich, is that wrong? Most people sometimes desire a more beautiful partner 'better' life, they envy those that have a better life. Why is that wrong?

I thought writing the ten commandments was to make divine law literally set in stone so it cant be misinterpreted. But this is exactly what has happened and an 'all-knowing' deity would have known that. Even within the Bible their are 3 different sets of ten commandments which are all different (leaving aside the Muslim ones). Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5. Which set should we follow and which churches interpretation of those 3 sets is the correct interpretation? Given you say you can't keep all ten rules then how hard should you try and which ones should you put most effort into trying? Again no one knows. As a parent I would never give my DC a set of rules that I knew they could never keep, its setting them up for failure and very bad parenting.

No one will have any excuse when it comes to judgement day How about, "you created a world where all the evidence points to you not existing, Duh!".

You'd be amazed at how people try to twist God and his word No I wouldn't because its impossible to pin down what gods word is. Almost every religion/sect/cult/church teaches a different view of 'gods' word

It's your choice! No one is forcing you to ... be open to God Except God of course. He has a cocked gun pointed at my head if I turn down his offer. Accept or go to hell he says. When the captain of a ship in the Atlantic asks people to worship him. "Its a free choice" he says, "get on your knees or get off my ship". Swim with the fishes anyone?

Opps, sorry for long post.

FreshStartIn2017 · 02/02/2017 19:09

1. If their is in fact, only One. True. God. Then why is it important to make one of his 10 demands relating to something that doesn't exist?

Mainly because He knew they would try to do exactly that. remember having a god "BEFORE me" can relate to absolutely anything that you put before God. People make jokes about that sort of thing, don't they? If you find x-box is impossible to put down, we say it is your god. Same goes for anything that stands between you and God as more important in your eyes.

2. If a second command is needed to backup the first, then maybe he should have made the first a bit clearer. So are you saying god was worried he wouldn't be believed? Then why didn't he back up all other nine demands with a supporting explanation? confused (He could easily have replaced this one with a marriage equality statement).

Two things here. One is that the second command is abut "idols" specifically, so it's the cousin of having "no god before me". It wouldn't be ok to make an image of God and worship that either. There are great verses in the bible about how people carve idols out of the tree, the same tree they chop up for firewood. It's meaningless and futile. SO it's the same and slightly different. Think of it as more of a "splitting hairs" detail.
Your second point is that you don't find anywhere in the bible supporting same-sex marriage, but you DO find verses placing it in the same camp as adultery, fornication, theft, lies, slander. It's not ok with God, nor will it ever be, and anyone saying it's fine has to cut those pages out of their bible because there is no other way to justify accepting it.

3. So taking the Lords name in vain refers to people making up their own mind what God means rather than accepting the truth of the Bible? Who is it that decides what the Bible means? So its ok for who, the church? to interpret the Bible but anyone else doing that is taking Gods name in vain? And the church is telling us that gay marriage is wrong and we just have to bow our heads and discriminate against some human beings, or be guilty of breaking one of the commandments?

Well like you said it's not actually one of the 10 commandments, and its also not about making up your own mind vs accepting the bible. This is nothing about taking God's name in vain. The here for vain is "shaw" which means vanity, falsehood, iniquity and emptiness. So it covers saying anything against God as well as making up things about him that aren't true.

4. Its still not clear what rest means? Can I chop wood for my fire on Sunday or not? Can I chop wood for my neighbors fire on Sunday and ask him for ÂŁ10 as a contribution to my general well being? Is shopping rest if I enjoy it but not if I dislike it. What if I am ambivalent?

I think you know when you're resting and when you're not. I think the better question about the man with the sticks is why would he pick them up, knowing the penalty was death? Here we see again, there was plenty of warning first.

If the rest can be any day of the week can I choose Wednesday and work on Sunday. Oh no, wait that doesn't work well because the church supports keeping Sunday special! Is it keep the day holy or just rest, do I have to go to church to be holy? I don't get it, its as clear as mud.

God just says 6 days to work and 1 day to rest. The church keeps Sunday special because most people have that day off. If weekends were moved to Wed and Thur then the church would no doubt move Sunday to a different day of the week. Remember Jesus said "Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".

5. Do you really think this commandment means you must be honest, fair and act with integrity towards abusive parents? How is this tenable when a child might be in a situation where telling the truth will get them hit with a belt? Why should a child treat abusive parents fairly? So honour an abusive parent but not two loving women when they want to get married?

You can still treat a person in truth and fairness, no matter how horrible they are. We all have our dark moments, you know, the things we say or do that we wouldn't want aired in public because we regret them. None of us is perfect. Abuse is not ok. But you can retain your integrity and not stoop to their level. It's hard but its possible, and this is what is Jesus did to those who tortured and killed him, and this is what is required of the Christian too.

6. It does show where gods priorities are when he places following him above not killing someone or indeed gay marriage.

I am not sure they're in any special order, but I do think that it's more important to follow God than anything else. You might say murder is more important, someone else might say honesty is.

You didn't answer the point about killing verses murder, because depending on which church you are in you will get a different answer and god doesn't tell us how we are supposed to figure out which church is describing the right god. And we can't decide it ourselves because you said in point 3 that would be blasphemy.

Deciding things isn't blasphemy, I didn't say that. Murder is wrong, some say defending yourself isn't. For example, Exodus 22 days "If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him, but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt for him. He shall surely pay. If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft." So it depends on the circumstances and motivation.

7. A partner cheating on me, yes I have experienced that, but still don't see why I have to wait up to five years (for a divorce) before the church allows me to have sex with another person?

Sorry you experienced that too. Why did you then say it's no one else business, when you know full well you can't help but be affected? Also the remarriage thing is allowed if someone cheats on you. The 5 year rule is a man-made thing and not a direct direction of God.

8. I think we all know what stealing is Life isn't that black and white. You can come up with all sorts of grey areas all night, but you still know when you've stolen and when you haven't. Like I said, if you steal, you must repay. So if you steal taxes, you end up paying them anyway! While we're on the subject of taxes, Jesus said "pay unto Caesar what is Caesars", meaning pay your tax!

9. So are white lies breaking a commandment or not? What if the truth hurts? Life is just so much more nuanced.

The bible says better are the wounds of a faithful friend than the kisses of an enemy, meaning truth hurts but if its said nicely and with best motives, then its much better than people putting on a show and saying what you want to hear but secretly thinking the opposite. If I say "does my bum look big in this" I don't want to be told "yes, go on a diet, you fat pig". I want to hear "yes in truth it does, but I love your bum anyway, and the last time you wore it you looked great, so don't worry"! OR maybe even, "yes, you've put on a lot of weight since you last tried it, are you happy about that? If not I'd happily support you making a change if that's what you really want".

10. Most people sometimes desire a more beautiful partner 'better' life, they envy those that have a better life. Why is that wrong?

Because no matter how much you get you always want more. It's a little thing called dissatisfaction, and it ruins marriages! It also makes people tread on each others toes to get to the top, and pushes people to lying and dishonesty, and all the rest.

Even within the Bible their are 3 different sets of ten commandments which are all different (leaving aside the Muslim ones). Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5. Which set should we follow and which churches interpretation of those 3 sets is the correct interpretation?

Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5 are identical. The Exodus 34 you've taken out of context. If you go back and read it you will find God gives some LAWS to Moses, around 15 of them, I think. Verse 10 shows that it was a part of God making a covenant with them. God was regularly giving laws, it's all through the OT interactions with Moses. But the 10 commandments specifically, are only referred to at the end of this encounter, AFTER the various laws had been given. It says how that Moses THEN, after 40 days, wrote out the 10 commandments.

Given you say you can't keep all ten rules then how hard should you try and which ones should you put most effort into trying? Again no one knows. As a parent I would never give my DC a set of rules that I knew they could never keep, its setting them up for failure and very bad parenting.

It is all there is the bible, you just haven't seen it yet. Jesus said that he has come not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it. The law was set up to show people they can't keep 10 rules, rules that SHOULD be kept, so just because you can't keep them doesn't mean you shouldn't make every best effort to. Its called moral living. We are supposed to live morally, even though we recognise we cannot attain perfection, which is what it would take to keep even just 10 commandments. You will be amazed at how many people through history have tried to say they don't ever sin, and this was God's way of saying, yes you do!

But, God provided us with an answer. Isn't that great? God doesn't bring us a problem and leave us there, he provides the solution too. Should we wish to take it.

FreshStartIn2017 · 03/02/2017 09:05

JamieXeed74 I read this, this morning, and I thought of you. It sums up pretty much everything about the laws God gave to mankind throughout the ages, and links to what I said about Jesus coming... not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

You are, if you love God with all your heart you won't want anything to come between you, least of all another god. And if you love God with all your soul you won't want to let your pride get in the way and decide you know best all the time, nor misquote his word. And if you love God with all your mind, you won't want to lust or envy, or murder, because your mind will be set on what's important to God first and foremost, and leads into the second command to love your neighbour as yourself. If you achieve that you won't want to nick his wife or his money or his anything else, because YOU most certainly wouldn't want that done to you.

That marriage can only be between a man and a woman.
MissMrsMsXX · 03/02/2017 09:15

I'm an atheist. But why should christians accept it? Or any religious group?

We should not be forcing people to accept views but tolerate them.

The church can and should make decisions based upon its own doctrines.

Why would someone homosexual wish to get married in a church? God hardly advocates for great sex does he? Not even for heterosexuals.

Legal marriage is enough.

BroomstickOfLove · 03/02/2017 09:27

Except that plenty of Christians aren't heterosexual and would like to get married in church and to have the opportunity to be priests. And plenty of other Christians are heterosexual and think that this sort of discrimination is wrong.

MissMrsMsXX · 03/02/2017 09:59

It never ceases to amaze me; the hypocrisy of people.
The church is a club, a man made club. They can and should be able to let in whoever they like. If they don't think two men or two women should be able to celebrate their union under God it's up to them. They're not saying that homosexuals can't get married, just not in their church.

Unless LGB groups want to thought control the church.... don't they know the church is already in that business?

boolifooli · 03/02/2017 11:32

We should not be forcing people to accept views but tolerate them.

We should not tolerate any discrimination based on someone's sexuality. I will fight for the right for a Christian to think what they want. But I will not tolerate any attempt to treat people differently based on their sexuality.

boolifooli · 03/02/2017 11:39

Your second point is that you don't find anywhere in the bible supporting same-sex marriage,

Biblical marriage ideals are horrendous. I wouldn't use it to work out what marriage should be.

That marriage can only be between a man and a woman.
boolifooli · 03/02/2017 11:41

So it covers saying anything against God as well as making up things about him that aren't true.

Well that's most Christians who believe him to be loving. The OT clearly shows otherwise.

MissMrsMsXX · 03/02/2017 12:58

Christianity is a belief system with rules. The rules are set. Honestly what is so tricky about this?

BIWI · 03/02/2017 13:24

Hmm. There's the slight matter of legality. It's illegal to discriminate against anyone on the grounds of their sexuality.

It's also a moral issue - why not have a bit of compassion, eh? What if you're gay but also a Christian?

FreshStartIn2017 · 03/02/2017 16:53

boolifooli your picture lifted from your atheist website is not an accurate picture (though I am sure that doesn't surprise you). Here's why.

You mention two points here; rape and polygamy. So lets see what the bible actually says, shall we?

First off, regarding rape. The culture of the day was that childless women who had lost their virginity, or widows at all, actually, had less rights than the women who were unmarried virgins. By the way, they didn't have many rights either, and so can you imagine the state you would have found yourself in if you were lower that than, socially?

I don't know what you think about arranged marriages, but it was the cultural norm back then. Some people say its actually a good idea because it removes the Hollywood expectation of romantic love and happily ever afters, and you have to LEARN to love the person you're with. Personally I prefer the idea of making my own choice, but even then, I have to make choices to love my husband sometimes (and don't FEEL like it, always).

God never said it was ok to rape. In fact, there was a punishment for it. Scholars say the punishment was to pay the family a lot of money, and to marry her WITH PARENTAL CONSENT. You would hope the father would not allow this unless the woman agreed, and he had nothing to lose because he got a good payment, so would be more likely to adhere to the Woman's wishes. IF, and only IF, the woman agreed to marry the man, he was forbidden to EVER divorce her, for HER protection. Women who were not virgins often had a hard life, and so this could be a reason for her to accept marriage for the long-term benefits and status she would get from that. Either way, the protection was for the woman, and the man did not go unpunished.

The same goes for Polygamy. God doesn't condone it at all, in fact the bible makes it clear He says his plan was for one woman and one man to get together, and that was IT. Nothing more, nothing less. But once again, the culture of the day was that women outlived men, and if men didn't have more than one wife, there'd be a lot of single and therefore unprotected women in a society that didn't treat them well. So perhaps this is why God let it happen? Who know? The bible doesn't give a direct reason for it, but the bible also clearly states God's intention was for ONE wife, and that is what Christian's follow today.

I'm sure we can at least agree that we're both glad to be born in this era, and not that one!

MissMrsMsXX · 03/02/2017 17:11

It's not actually illegal on many occasions to discriminate.

It's not illegal for a WOC group to exclude white women, for example.

You cannot ask people who think marriage is between a man and a woman to go against, what they perceive as, God's wishes and marry two men. Why should anyone think you should force people to do that?

BroomstickOfLove · 03/02/2017 21:16

But can you force people who want to marry two men not to do so?

themueslicamel · 03/02/2017 21:31

Honestly in the 21st century why is this even a thing?

Religion is a comfort blanket we urgently need to shed, I don't believe in a Devine being anymore than I believe in the tooth fairy or Father Christmas.
Some people are born gay, I am not but if gay people want to get married, who am I to say otherwise?!?

To be honest though, if I was gay , I really wouldn't give a toss what bigoted people trying to find a way of telling me my lifestyle was ok or not thought either way.

Swipe left for the next trending thread