"Til Death Do Us Part", ...huh?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Ask Jesus : One Thread

What exactly does that mean??

"Til death do us part".

..........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004

Answers

It means till death kills both or one of them.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 26, 2004.

Does it mean...

1) until one spouse actually dies?

2) until one spouse dies spiritually--loss of faith?

3) until one spouse no longer recognizes their marriage--loss of love?

How can a third party make a marriage valid or invalid, if the married couple have already made up their minds about the status of their marriage?

.........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


Funny, in a serious way, or until the marriage kills them, one or the other, or both of them.

.........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


I am not considering those obvious seperations of couples who are too weak to continue in a marriage (probably when this doctrine exists). I am talking about hardcore believers in "marriages last for ever" types who have hit that turbulent disaster of divorce. Those model married couples who fall hard from grace and leave everyone scratching their heads, mouth wide open. I think of those who had no choice, but to give into the other's demands and divorce.

Frankly, St. Paul and St. Matthew had to of interjected their personal doctrines, or perhaps didn't consider those who were caught in the wave of errivocable demise. Poor souls they are to have suffered and the hands of their better half, later to be sliced away like an unwanted petal.

........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


Some have argued "Moral code". How much moral code is needed? Sure, people bouncing around from lover to lover is wrong--spouse to spouse. But, some of these divorced people never had it in their moral code to go around having multiple marriages, one after another. Bad things happen to good people. Should that cause these people to be locked into a life of never remarrying because their divorce does not fit into the regulations set by somebody's interpretations of the Scriptures? Some marriages can be annulled while other cannot? Moral code? How much moral code does one require?

How about having the highest moral code possible? Don't ever get married, don't ever have children, don't ever ever ever never...this way, one doesn't ever have to worry about a broken marriage. Be St. Paul. Be fruitful and multiply......uh, but not with kids....make that with the Gospels. A little catch there, huh? Welll, if they can play catchy phrases, why can't the rest of us?

"Death" does have different meanings in Scriptures. Why can't it be applied to "death do us part"?

Something is very wrong.

.......

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.



Which sin is forgivable?

Murder or Divorce (outside the permissible)

I think there are many murderers who are forgiven. I'm not so sure about those divorced and remarried ones, though. Moral codes, again.

............

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


Jesus cared about #1, Rod. Mark and Matthew have a similar view on that. until one spouse actually dies except for fornication (meaning sexual immorality in Mark,apostasy in Matthew).

The Apostle Paul cared for #2 until one spouse dies spiritually-- loss of faith

The Jewish (Moses) was when the woman did not satisfy the man, or she was no longer a virgin.

The Catholic Church follows a variation of # 3 until one spouse no longer recognizes their marriage--loss of love,. An example was the recent marriage of the Prince Felipe of Spain with Letizia Ortiz, a commoner. Letizia had been married in a civil union. Since the Church doesn't accept civil unions, the Prince was able to marry her. Letizia had divorced her husband.

What will Jesus say about his marriage of Felipe and Letizia? It was adultery. For Jesus there was no distiction between marriage by the state, by the Church or living together.

For Paul: The question is if the person no longer follows a common faith with the spouse.

What do I have to say on the subject- Ground for divorce: -Unfaithfulness - violence - Threats -Verbal and physical abuse (year or more) - bygamy, polygamy - bisexualism - different faith when that faith becomes oppressive - quasi-slavery (don't allow the partner to talk to others, or leave the hose unaccompanied) - sterility when one partner can't have children and cannot agree with the other about adopting or insemination. ..... to name a few.

Yahweh our God wanted us to have long lasting relationships, but , it is not always possible.

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


For me ,

marriage is legal before God Yahweh when:

a) they were married by a Church b) They were jined in a legal civil union c) couple chose to cohabitate even though their agreement is not valid in court. (see the case of the samaritan woman. She was cohabnitating with a man. Jesus call him her man).

I only have one inconvenience: If a man leaves his wife (or viceversa) to marry or live with the one with whom he is cheating, I won't marry them until after 7 years have passed. I consider this an abomination before God. A man or woman should be separated from each other before they get invo9lved in another relationship. The idea of 7 years is because of the weekly rest. A cpiple who cheated should give the offended person time to recover (rest).

By this time, this abomination before God has run its course. If they still care for each other, and the cheating spouse has taken care of the children of the previous union, then, I could marry them.

The offended spouse I would marry within a 1 year period at least. She must leave all bad feelings behind. Otherwise, the second marriage will fail.

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.


Wedding of Felipe and Letizia

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.

Hmm....interesting article. The first marriage was not recognized by the Catholic Church because it was not performed in a church. Who should we see as role models of the "idea" marriage? We can't even consider Adam and Eve. They fell from Grace. So, there really isn't an ideal marriage. Even a marriage that stays together until "death do us part" is inflicted with problems, which may eventually manifest themselves as sins, yet they manage to stay together--ideal?

............

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 26, 2004.



As for Adam and Eve, Rod, who married them? No one was there to do it. Adam and Eve had no choice about getting together. They were the only choice. Which was no choice at all.

Now you understand what I mean that also living together means as marriage before God Yahweh?

Couples which stayed together (1 to 1 relationships) are rare in the Bible.: Isaac and Rebeccah.

Abraham had 2 at the same time. Jacob 4.

Maybe Joseph only had one. Moses maybe had 2. One was a Mdianite, the other a Cushite?

Jesus we are not sure. That is why Jesus is not a good role model as to how a family should be. If he was God as most trinitarians believe, then God failed to show us how a perfect marriage works.

If Jesus was human in nature, as I presuppose, then, If Mary the Magdalene was his real wife, where are the children?

Then in that respect I don't have a model as how to rear children.

Maybe that is why in Tomothy the pastors (episkopoi=bishops) have to be maried men. So also the deacons. Only evangelists like didn't have to be. The evangelist brings people to God. The episkopoi trains in the real world.

That is why I am more lenient than Jesus and Paul as marriage is concerned. Neither Paul or Jesus are good role models for me as to what constitutes a good marriage.

As for Peter, no references about his wife exist in the Bible. We don't know her name, children,....

That is why Rod, Christian Yahwism will be an answer for those who realized they made a mistake in marrying the wrong person.

If 50% + of marriages end in divorce, Rod in the United States, what will happen to not only to the divorced, but also their children? I believe God Yahweh wants them to redo their life.

The Christian Yahwist

The Man of Yahweh

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Among the varied radio preachers I listen to every Sunday morning, Bob Thiemes makes some very interesting comments in doctrine. He once made the bold assertation that one man and one woman unite as of becoming one and should become as one. That union is a marriage whereby the church has no business in getting involved with that marriage. In other words, the church has no business in the union of man and woman. Thiemes makes the conclusion that such a union is forever, until "death do us part". Never mind the absence of a J.P. or marriage license. "Let no man bring asunder".

..........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


So, my belief is that when a man and women become infactuated with each other, including lust for each other, they enter into that union. Call it love or call it "we just got to have each other'. That union manifests itself way before the pastor, priest, or justice of the peace recites their prescibed rituals for the final vows of eternal marriage, til death do us part, of course. But, what if the church steps in and postpones or denies matrimonial rites? "Let no man put asunder" does seem to take on an applicable significance for the church, even. I know of couples who've left the Catholic Church for those reason inflicted on the matromonial rites. The couples could not or would not conform, so they got "hitched" elsewhere, thank you very much, you can keep the deposit.

...

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Such was my case, Rod.

I did a lot of the stuff required by the church. Then someone objected to my beliefs. Back them I was still more than 90 % Catholic Rod. I only objected to some Marian Apparitions and I still wasn't sure about the relationship between Jesus and the Father.

Now I am probably about less than 40%.

So the Baptists came to the rescue. I wanted to be married with someone pronouncing words before God.

My mother and in-laws still think we are not marrried.

Figure that one, Rod!!!

Since I had to travel a road less traveled by, this has made ask God for an answer.

No dreams about it yet, Rod, but what I wrote before I also was able somehow to deduce from scripture.

So, I was refused marriage.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Very honestly, Elpidio, I am still angry at my Catholic Church. The men(not all) in that church, who call themselves "prists", have abandoned me and I have abandoned them. I guess I'm 90% Catholic, even now, in my thinking and beliefs, but not in the men of the Church. There are many stories to be told. The one that stands out, for me, is the story of the political person from another faith system who was allowed to partake in the Holy Eucharist. It was a political gesture, heck; it was a blasphemy when some are denied, yet have faith, and some are offered , yet are not "Catholic". I don't blame the Church; I point fingers at the corruption. I don't ever want to suffer as a victim of corruption or error ever again, if that's really possible not to.

.......

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.



I know what you mean.

Clinton and Bush receieved the eucharist even though those two men don't believe in the true presence of Christ there.

Even powerful people get divorces. Remember Carolina of Monaco, daughter o Princess Grace?

The list goes on. Only Henry VIII coudn't because his wife was the aunt of Carlos V, and the Pope was under his control. Henry chose to create a new Church.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


"Priest" should have been the word. I don't want to corrupt any words here.

You too? I'm married to a heretic; she's a non-Catholic Protestant married to a Catholic (me) standing in the doorway of the Church. I have successfully steered her away from the "Sola Fide" idea and have re-introduced her to James 2:18. My family doesn't make a fuss about our null wedding vows "sans" the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, but I know how they must suffer with their doctrinal views about us.

When I'm stumped on some Scriptures or at a loss for the right verse, my wife usually can point me in the right direction. She knows the Scriptures. I'm also teaching her the Deuterocanonicals along with "the other gospels", and pertinent Christian History.

....

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Henry VIII's wife was Catherine/Katherine, yes? The Church offered her the option of her becoming a nun. Such an option would allow her seperation/divorce from Henry. She refused. She believed in "til death do us part", so she stayed married to Henry while he continued to remarry. Oh, and Henry also believed in "til death do us part"...literally and with frequency. Chop, chop, chop...

........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Does your wife read what we write?

What does she think of us? Me?

My wife does.

Good thing she is a Yahwist now. But not because of me, but her revelations.

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


She'll read some stuff, but generally, I have to talk her into reading. I do tell her about the people here.

Honestly, she knows about David and me clashing.

We've spent some time talking about Kevin's doctrine.

But, the most talking we've done deals with some of our similarities--you and I. We do share some eerie characteristics; those dreams are so much a part of our lives. Of course, our theology is like two equal poles of two magnets. I don't get it;though, we read some of the same stuff, yet get different meanings. Oh, well...

.........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Rod, she knows about you and Eugene Chavez. He thinks Chavez is too hard on me.

As for theology, well, it's tough to disasociate ourselves from 1800 years of trinitarianism, dogmas, believing the Bible to be God's literal word,...it took me 20 years.

After talking to God, and listening to my wife about how he talked to her, then I get a good picture as to how the prophets of Old talked to him.

So I try to read between the lines, trying to see what truly is from God, and what is commentary.

John's Gospel is 60+ % commentary.

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Actually, of all the Catholic Posters, Chavez still manages to leave the church door propted open just a tad for your return. I don't think he dares closing the door on you. But, he is a rough and tough "hombre" of his faith. I could never get him ruffled up. I wasn't a real threat to him or the forum....hee..heee.

.............

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Not even Gecik's Rod.

Chavez still holds the door open thinking I am sort of loonie right now.

The problem is that after he got the best of me at the catholic Forum, I ended up too far away from my Catholic roots that now I believe there is no return.

What most people fear in Catholicsm is that the Church holds the keys for salvation....

What if someone else also have them, like the Syria Church, then we are screwed since others also have keys.

They are even older than the Church...!!!! ...Ayayayayayaayaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!!!!! p

Quien tiene razon?

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


Yes, remember by Syria Church interest? I also looked into the Greek Orthodox. (Theotokos)

....................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004.


rod..,

I think the whole point of Scripture is that we are all sinners and fall short of the glory of God. We cannot stand on our own. All sin is forgivable when we are in Christ. And no sin is forgivable if we are not.

Sin is sin--whether it is murder or adultery., or simply that we are liars and cheaters. It all leaves us without a leg to stand on.

The only forgiven sinner is the sinner who belongs to Christ.

-- (faith01@myway.com), May 28, 2004.


Was it the "heretic" comment about me marrying my wife?

I didn't mean to sound like she was some bad person for not being Catholic. I was only making a comment from the Church's view.

My view is a little more accepting. I stand by my views with strength and power! My wife said so, so it's ok. :)

...................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.


If I may, I'd like to answer/contribute:

"Jesus we are not sure. That is why Jesus is not a good role model as to how a family should be. If he was God as most trinitarians believe, then God failed to show us how a perfect marriage works. "

Ephesians 5 (which is part of the wedding vow) gives us the template for the perfect marriage. Our marriage on Earth to our spouse should be like the marriage of Christ to His Church. He cared for her, bathed her, and ultimately gave his life for her. She, in turn, was supposed to follow his leadership.

Realistically, we know that although God never changes, mankind does, which is what ends us up in divorce. We either don't lead, or lead poorly or refuse to follow the leader. That leads to tension and conflict.

As for the living together being a marriage, you are not far off the mark. Paul asks, "Do you not kow that when you join yourself (have sex with) a prostitute, you are making yourself "One flesh" with her?

The sexual act marries you in the eyes of God (that "one flesh" is the same found in Matthew and Ephesians AND Genesis).

Adam and Eve? Who married them? Wrong question and a moot point. Eve was formed from Adam. She was the ultimate in "One flesh".

Thank you for listening, and God bless!

-- Rev. John Harper (revjtharper@earthlink.net), June 02, 2004.


Reverend Harper, which AME church do you represent?

I remember you from the AME forum. You have password protect it. I think is Tom/Akobadageth still at work destroying threads.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), June 02, 2004.


I don't represent any A.M.E. Church. :)

I am on staff at First A.M.E. in Los Angeles.

The views I presented were my own, having been raised CoC, and counseling couples as part of my current ministry.

Yes, I had to password protect our board. "Ako" trashed about 15 threads that I am trying to restore.

How do you know his name is Tom?

-- Rev. John Harper (revjtharper@earthlink.net), June 04, 2004.


What does "A.M.E." stand for??

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), June 04, 2004.

Because that is what he post as here. Tom/ooga used the same scripts, and both claim to be "programmers". I don't know if Tom/ooga are the same as AKO though...

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), June 04, 2004.

AME = African Methodist Episcopal. (It is now a denomination).

The Methodist movement came from John Wesley, who was Anglican. Eventually the groups split. I think the AME was originally a part of that movement, but I don't know for sure. Wesley was from the 1700s.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.


Rod,

Do you think Paul was talking about forsaking marriage partners in 1Cor 7:29?

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.


To Rev. John Harper..,

Are you saying that the marriage ritual that we perform is not necessary?

Then how can one have sex outside of marriage??

If sex marries us--does no-sex after a time--divorce us?

-- (faith01@myway.com), June 04, 2004.


Rev. Harper, my former supervisor is from AME Zion, her name, Esther Martin, at Compton, CA.

I went to school with Andre Young, known now as Dr. Dre.

The only Harper I know in LA is Henry Harper, a teacher.

As foe Tom/ooga/the oracle/.... he attaches either pictures, links, or words which don't allow us to work with the threads.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.


"Are you saying that the marriage ritual that we perform is not necessary?

Then how can one have sex outside of marriage??

If sex marries us--does no-sex after a time--divorce us?

"Whew....

We have limited examples of the wedding ceremony/ritual illustrated in the Bible. We know that in most cases, the parents found a bride for their son, from within the Israelite tribes. We know that in order to divorce a woman, the man had to give her a "get" (as in 'get out of my house'), which was an official document witnessed by the priests, that allowed the woman to re-marry without fear of committing adultery (which was punishable by DEATH). Then we know that the wedding party (we would call it the reception) could last several days.

Outside of that, we don't have much to go on. But, since mankind has a habit of doing what we want to do, and in order to keep track of things, the church (and we won't say who) found it necessary to make marriage a "holy institution", and to create some basic rules regarding the ceremony.

The wedding vow itself is a combination of Scripture from Genesis, Matthew, and Ephesians.

That being said, the ceremony is a technically a legal formality, to please the state that you reside in, the government, and your church IMHO. But it is necessary because it gives you a warning about what you are getting into (you will never make another promise to a human that is more solemn that the marriage vow), and it gives you a chance to say "no" and leave.

In that vow, you made a promise to forsake all others and cleave only to your spouse. You, therefore, would be guilty of infidelity (breaking your promise) by having sex with someone who is not your spouse. You would, by the letter of the Word, be marrying someone else without getting a divorce.

No sex, after a time, will cause tensions (Paul says not to deny our spouses, unless it is to devote ourselves to mutual prayer, and then to come back, lest Satan (temptation) gain a foothold), which can lead to infidelity, and hence divorce.

-- Rev.John Harper (revjtharper@earthlink.net), June 04, 2004.


A.M.E. is a denomination, true. Here is the brief history:

The African Methodist Episcopal is an offspring of the Methodist which was founded by John Wesley in England and America in the eighteenth century.

It is unique in that it is the first major religious denomination in the Western world that had its origin over sociological rather than theological beliefs and differences. The immediate cause of the organization of the A.M.E.Church was the fact that members of the St. George's Methodist Episcopal Church in Philadelphia Pa., in 1787 segrated its colored members from its white communicants. The Blacks were sent to the gallery of the Church, to use the venerable Richard Allen's own words. One Sunday as the Africans, as they were called, knelt to pray outside of their segrated area they were actually pulled from their knees and told to go to a place which had been designated for them. This added insult to injury and upon completing their prayer, they went out and formed the Free African Society, and from this Society came two groups: The Episcopalians and the Methodists. The leader of the Methodist group was Richard Allen. Richard Allen desired to implement his conception of freedom of worship and desired to be rid of the humiliation of segregation,especially in church.

Richard Allen learned that other groups were suffering under the same conditions. After study and consultation, five churches came together in a General Convention which met in Philadelphia, Pa., April 9-11, 1816, and formed the African Methodist Episcopal Church. The name African Methodist came naturally, as Negroes at that time were called Africans and they followed the teaching of the Methodist Church as founded by John Wesley. The young Church accepted the Methodist doctrine and Discipline almost in its entirety.

The other "M.E."-related denoms are A.M.E. Zion and C.M.E.

-- Rev. John Harper (revjtharper@earthlink.net), June 04, 2004.


Rev. Harper, from the Catholic Forum, Ed, many people are trying to report this individual to his ISP, but with no luck. However, they DID find out where this creature resides and hails from. Henderson, Nevada. The Police Chief there has been looking for this lifeform for his postings of racism and all kinds of pornography. I just pray that this person is brought to Justice for his crimes on the 'Net and in real life.

-- Garret Ford (Parallax281457689@Yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.

Garrett, who are you referring to? Are you talking about AKOBADAGETH (racist)? Or are you referring to Ooga (vulgarity)? Both have been a concern to this forum recently.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), June 04, 2004.

Akobadageth. But the REAL ooga doesn't post that kind of garbage. Must be an impostor.

-- Garret Ford (Parallax281457689@Yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.

Maybe this is our suspect.

The Christian

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), June 04, 2004.


I am overjoyed to say that he has been reported, and his Internet access should be revoked by Cox even as you read this. If it is not, let me know, and I will phone a detective in Henderson, and this will end.

All it took was explaining to Cox that if I knew how to trace an individual, they certainly could, and I would show them how if they could not. That, and threatening to escalate the matter to the Attorney General for the state of Nevada.

I thank all of you for your help and prayers and advice in silencing this creature.

-- Rev. John Harper (revjtharper@earthlink.net), June 05, 2004.


Hi everyone.

Yes, it was only a matter of time before the poster was/is stopped.

Uh....the birds start singing up here at 4 in the morning!

Good posts, Rev.

..............

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 05, 2004.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ