What Do We Know Of Marriage From The Bible, Book Of Mormon, And Latter-Day Revelation?

[danielwoods]

Check a dictionary. Pipes can be married. The word refers to things coming together.

 

The context of this discussion is "The Bible, Book of Mormon, and Latter-Day Revelation."

 

Based on the context, where does it state that anything can be married? 

[HappyJackWagon]

 

The big reason I oppose same sex marriage is that the whole premise rest on the idea that people cannot choose to who they love.

 

This goes contrary to every commandment in the scriptures to love your neighbor, love your wife, etc.

 It presupposes that attraction is a prerequisite of love and that people are justifying their sin because they cannot help their attraction.  This Idea is very prevalent in heterosexual couples  "We just weren't attracted to each other anymore"  " the spark just wasn't there"  "I fell in love with another person"  and other such bovine manure.

Interesting approach to this question. There is a distinction between loving someone and being "in love" with someone. Marriages existed long before the romantic concept of love was considered the ideal, but don't we generally consider romantic love in marriage to be progress?

There are many cases where love grows out of arranged marriages but are you claiming that orientation is unimportant?

Much of the fuss I hear about SSM is based in using the term "marriage" as if it has always and only represented a religious union. I'm curious if there is documentation for that position. Are we to presume that marriage never existed outside the Judeo/Christian tradtion? Of course not. Did Pagan's "marry"? Why do we think we have ownership of the term "marriage"?

[Ahab]

The context of this discussion is "The Bible, Book of Mormon, and Latter-Day Revelation."

Based on the context, where does it state that anything can be married?

Do you really want to know what "can be" married or are you only interested in the types of marriage that God our Father approves of or will approve of?

Not everything that can be should be.

There are righteous types of marriages as well as abominable types of marriages and those that are abominations are not and never will be approved by God.

[jkwilliams]

Do you really want to know what "can be" married or are you only interested in the types of marriage that God our Father approves of or will approve of?

Not everything that can be should be.

There are righteous types of marriages as well as abominable types of marriages and those that are abominations are not and never will be approved by God.

You mean like marriages of divorced people, right?

[Danzo]

 

Interesting approach to this question. There is a distinction between loving someone and being "in love" with someone. Marriages existed long before the romantic concept of love was considered the ideal, but don't we generally consider romantic love in marriage to be progress?

 

 

I would consider romantic love a lower form of love than Charity.  The true progress is the Christlike love.

 

You you have true, Christlike love for your spouse, romantic love becomes both unnecessary and irrelevant.

 

My mother and father in law are about to celebrate their 50th anniversary of their arranged marriage.  Even though the did not "fall in love" and get married, their marriage is as strong, if not stronger than most marriages I have seen out there. 

[Danzo]

 

There are many cases where love grows out of arranged marriages but are you claiming that orientation is unimportant?

 

Orientation, if it even really exists, is just a starting point, not the end.

[Brian 2.0]

You you have true, Christlike love for your spouse, romantic love becomes both unnecessary and irrelevant.

 

that's sad to me.

[Danzo]

that's sad to me.

 

It really isn't.  Once one has experience the true love of Christ, everything else is pale by comparison.

 

This is my experience, anyway.

 

I have seen countless couples with great romantic love fall apart.  Romantic love just isn't strong enough.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Danzo

[Gray]

It really isn't.  Once one has experience the true love of Christ, everything else is pale by comparison.

 

This is my experience, anyway.

 

I have seen countless couples with great romantic love fall apart.  Romantic love just isn't strong enough.

 

How many couples do you suppose have split because they lost that romantic love?

[Ahab]

It really isn't. Once one has experience the true love of Christ, everything else is pale by comparison.

This is my experience, anyway.

I have seen countless couples with great romantic love fall apart. Romantic love just isn't strong enough.

I think you just don't understand what romantic love really is. I think you may be thinking it is just the beginning stage when a couple is just beginning to date and call each other or send little notes to each other and go places for the first time together. And just beginning to kiss and hug and smooch and get all wiggly giggly.

That's the romantic part but it doesn't have to be at just the beginning stage of the relationship. It can and should go on forever, occasionally. My wife still likes it and I still like it too, even though not much is really "new" anymore.

[The Nehor]

It really isn't.  Once one has experience the true love of Christ, everything else is pale by comparison.

 

This is my experience, anyway.

 

I have seen countless couples with great romantic love fall apart.  Romantic love just isn't strong enough.

Wrong. Charity augments and deepens all other kinds of love: the affection of parents for children, the love of friends, and even the desire for romance and physical affection. It does not supplant them. If I ever acquire perfect charity I will love all people. I will love my sister as my sister, my father as my father, and my spouse as my lover.

[danielwoods]

Do you really want to know what "can be" married or are you only interested in the types of marriage that God our Father approves of or will approve of?

Not everything that can be should be.

There are righteous types of marriages as well as abominable types of marriages and those that are abominations are not and never will be approved by God.

 

You stated that anything can be married. I countered with where in the Bible et al does it state that? 

 

Now you are claiming that some are righteous types and some are abominable types... 

 

Maybe we are agreeing, in the sense that a marriage that isn't approved of God (according to the Bible et al), isn't really a marriage. 

 

You mean like marriages of divorced people, right?

 

Where does it state that divorced peoples marriages are abominable to God? 

[danielwoods]

Wrong. Charity augments and deepens all other kinds of love: the affection of parents for children, the love of friends, and even the desire for romance and physical affection. It does not supplant them. If I ever acquire perfect charity I will love all people. I will love my sister as my sister, my father as my father, and my spouse as my lover.

 

Exactly right. It makes us more loving, and more giving and more self-less. 

[Stargazer]

I don't believe that there will be no need for some form of sustenance, but that is a completely different discussion.

 

Who's to say what is perfect? I know a man that is a wonderful individual and the nicest person there is. He has trisomy 21. He does not want to be different than he is. I do not think that perfection is different than he is. He is awesome and functions just fine. I do not believe that you will be different than you are. Personality and "self" will not be "fixed" because you die or go to heaven.

 

Yes, that's a different discussion.

 

But you seem to have this notion that resurrection does not confer some exaltant form of perfection, and that we continue on as we always have, but in a perfect and immortal body.  I believe you are being extremely short-sighted in this.

 

When the Lord said, "This is my glory, to bring to pass the immortality and the eternal life of man," he was not just referring to that part of us which is physical.  He was referring to the whole person.  We are not, in this life, whole.  We are mortal, limited to a very constrained existence (and ability to understand), and when we are resurrected this will change.  We will still be us, but that part of us which is constrained by our mortal bodies will be set free in an immortal and perfected body, and we will rule over it, not the other way around, as it is presently.

 

I get extremely frustrated when people assume that the resurrection is a relatively minor makeover.  Your friend with trisomy 21 will no longer have trisomy 21.  My friend, who was born with vestigial lower legs and arms, will have fully functional limbs.  The little girl born with Down's Syndrome to a couple in my ward, will be perfect in every way, mentally and physically.  An old landlord of mine, who was born sighted, but whose genetic condition blinded him by the time he was an adult, will be perfectly sighted and will remain so.

 

As to a man with trisomy 21 feeling that he doesn't want to be anything else, is he is in such a different boat that those deaf-born people who would not give up their deafness because of their familiarity with it, and because of their social and cultural attachments to the deaf community?  Is God going to resurrect all of them as they were in mortality?  The promise is that He will not! 

 

If we are to be exalted as HF is, which is His goal for us (even though we may still fall short), then how can we reach that pinnacle while still clothed in the mortal limitations of the mind or body?  The answer is that we cannot.  When it was said in 1 John 3:2:

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is."

This speaks of a post-resurrection appearance when we will be like Him. Will He be imperfect (aside from the Signs of the Crucifixion)? Not hardly. And neither will we.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Stargazer

[Danzo]

How many couples do you suppose have split because they lost that romantic love?

 

Many, when they didn't have the Love of Christ

 

That is why the love Christ is so much more important.

[Danzo]

I think you just don't understand what romantic love really is. I think you may be thinking it is just the beginning stage when a couple is just beginning to date and call each other or send little notes to each other and go places for the first time together. And just beginning to kiss and hug and smooch and get all wiggly giggly.

That's the romantic part but it doesn't have to be at just the beginning stage of the relationship. It can and should go on forever, occasionally. My wife still likes it and I still like it too, even though not much is really "new" anymore.

 

I have been married for quite a while and I think I understand what romantic love is.  Its not a bad thing, its rather nice.  But it is not the same as the love of Christ, not by a long shot.

[Danzo]

Wrong. Charity augments and deepens all other kinds of love: the affection of parents for children, the love of friends, and even the desire for romance and physical affection. It does not supplant them. If I ever acquire perfect charity I will love all people. I will love my sister as my sister, my father as my father, and my spouse as my lover.

 

I don't think so.  

 

What happens when you can no longer love your spouse as a lover? You just dump her at that time and find someone else?

 

Will you be one of those people who, when the romance dies says she was just the wrong one?

Edited September 11, 2015 by Danzo

[The Nehor]

I don't think so.  

 

What happens when you can no longer love your spouse as a lover? You just dump her at that time and find someone else?

 

I have never known a situation short of complete paralysis that removes all options for the expression of romantic love.

[Danzo]

I have never known a situation short of complete paralysis that removes all options for the expression of romantic love.

 

Yet the loss of romantic love seems to happen to a lot of people, so situations must exist.

[The Nehor]

Yet the loss of romantic love seems to happen to a lot of people, so situations must exist.

 

They do. Good people continue to love their spouse as best they can and try to reignite that love. It fades in all relationships and then is jump-started back up so you get to experience falling in love again. Seems like a good system to me.

[Danzo]

They do. Good people continue to love their spouse as best they can and try to reignite that love. It fades in all relationships and then is jump-started back up so you get to experience falling in love again. Seems like a good system to me.

 

My experience in marriage is that pure love of Christ we develop makes the whole "are we in love? are we out of love?" become unimportant..

 

perhaps your experience is different.

[Stargazer]

They do. Good people continue to love their spouse as best they can and try to reignite that love. It fades in all relationships and then is jump-started back up so you get to experience falling in love again. Seems like a good system to me.

 

My experience in marriage is that pure love of Christ we develop makes the whole "are we in love? are we out of love?" become unimportant..

 

perhaps your experience is different.

 

Eh, I think you two are just talking past each other.  I.e. I think you agree in essence, you just haven't coordinated your words yet.

[carbon dioxide]

The sin of Sodom was inhospitality. Think about that next time your in-laws visit. 

Why would God destroy a city over inhospitality?   God will put up with anything else but just don't be mean?  Sodom was destroyed for one simple reason.  God could not find 10 righteous people living in its boundaries.  When a city, society, or nation become so wicked (ripen in sin) so that hardly any righteous people are left, they are ready to be destroyed.  The same sins that happened in Sodom occur in every town in America.  The difference is simply scale.  There are cities in the book of Mormon that were also destroyed when Christ came to the Nephites for the same reasons. 

Edited September 12, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[carbon dioxide]

Within the framework of the current standard works, I can't see even one verse where SSM could be compatible.

[Ahab]

You stated that anything can be married. I countered with where in the Bible et al does it state that?

Now you are claiming that some are righteous types and some are abominable types...

Maybe we are agreeing, in the sense that a marriage that isn't approved of God (according to the Bible et al), isn't really a marriage.

Yes we pretty much agree except where you say an abominable type of marriage isn't really a marriage. It is a marriage even if it an abominable marriage, just as a church that isn't the true church of Christ is still a church even if it is an abomination to the way the true church of Christ is.

And I think people who argue that an abominable marriage isn't really a type of marriage just end up making their argument look silly. Anyone who can read a dictionary can know what it means to be married. We should just concede that a same sex marriage is a type of marriage even though it is an abomination to the type of marriage God our Father approves of.