Modern Marriage And Christianity

[just_George]

I know the bible says that sex should only be between a man and a woman and within a marriage. Translated into modern times can a person remain a true christian and have sex with a partner in a commited relationship that is not a legal marriage?

[Old_Geezer]

Bible or no bible, the definition of marriage concerns two genders. It is simple PCism that allows the definition to be changed so single gender couples can claim to be in something they don't fit the criteria for.

Religion changes over time. I don't see single sex relationships being an issue for anyone but traditionalists. I doubt there is much problem with unmarried folk at all for most Christians.

[Hopkirk]

There's plenty in the Bible that doesn't fit with modern attitudes.

For instance Exodus tells me it is OK to sell my daughter into sexual slavery.

[IggyB]

Sex before marriage, the Bible isn't too keen.

Deuteronomy 20 If...no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death

[just_George]

In modern times do we still see marriage as only those that have the legal ties of a certificate or are long term committed relationships just another form of marriage. The bible says when a man and a woman come together they become as one person, in this day and age can that include a relationship without a marriage certificate?

[agchristie]

Well, the amount of people that dismiss marriage as 'just a piece of paper'. Such a trite phrase...

[woofgang]

I am not sure why you are asking us? There are many many many definitions of being a “true christian” You can pretty much pick the church that will allow you to keep your own beliefs.

You also shouldn’t confuse the law of the country that you live in with what the church of your choice expects. Legal marriage is not a religious concept, its a civil one. In many churches, being married in church does not marry you legally; conversely a civil ceremony may not be recognised by your church.

[Mamyalynne]

It rather depends who is doing the deciding of true or not true - for me each person knows within themselves where they stand.

Society or the rest of their chosen congregation may think differently, but we each live our own lives.

[Cloverjo]

The Rev Richard Coles (formerly of The Communards) and his male partner - also a Rev - have a civil partnership. They don't seem to have a problem with being Christians and not being in a legal 'marriage'.

[goodlife]

The Maker of marriage tells us what we need to know about successful wedlock. No human knows as much. The Bible is always right, and the only way anyone can direct attention to sound counsel on marriage is to stick to the standards set out in the Bible.

For one instance, the apostle Paul wrote under inspiration: “Let each one of you individually so love his wife as he does himself; on the other hand, the wife should have deep respect for her husband.” (Eph. 5:33)
There is nothing about such Biblical counsel that mature Christians cannot understand.
The question is, Will they apply God’s Word? They will if they really appreciate his gift of marriage.

[Old_Geezer]

Things change. No reason why it should be still upheld as a relevant criteria.

[Old_Geezer]

Marriage is a ceremony not a gift. The word isn't proven to be a God's but from those claiming to know one. It is pointless save to have a 'knees up' as part of a public announcement. It's just a pity the government uses it to discriminate against one couple and in favour of another.

[andy-hughes]

goodlife - // There is nothing about such Biblical counsel that mature Christians cannot understand. //

There you are - if you don't understand, it's because you are not mature, or Christian enough.

Hard luck just_George!

[scooping]

People confuse the Old Testament with Christianity. They're not the same thing.

[andy-hughes]

People confuse belief with fact - they're not the same thing either.

[naomi24]

The bible was written long before UK legislation so if you’re happy to regard the bible as the ultimate authority, there is no conflict. Be happy.

[Cloverjo]

My OH and I have been together for 20 years. We are not married, and nor can I be bothered with the whole faff of it all. I call him my husband-type-person. I don't know what the writers of the Bible would think, but legally if you're not married you're not married.

[goodlife]

Hopkirk/ As you do not know your Bible.
Slavery that has been common in many lands even today, Leviticus 25:39, 40 says: “In case your brother grows poor alongside you and he has to sell himself to you, you must not use him as a worker in slavish service. He should prove to be with you like a hired laborer, like a settler. So this was a loving provision to care for Israel’s poorest,not like today.

[beso]

Old_Geezer //Bible or no bible, the definition of marriage concerns two genders. //

That is just your preconception. But you would be alone.

In fact, in Australia, a few years ago the legal definition was changed because it originally never mentioned two genders and the government of the day wanted to prevent same sex marriage. It was done by a simple act of parliament.

Now that most Australians support same sex marriage, while the conservative wing of the government vehemently opposes it, their policy is for a plebiscite, "because everyone should have their say".

Funny how they don't ask the people about many other things we would like to "have a say" on.

[just_George]

In the bible it says a man must give a piece of paper to his wife to end the marriage,not that it is a legal document. To relate that to modern times I have text and a letter from my husband telling me he no longer wants or loves me, does that leave me free to form a new relationship without breaking my Fathers rules?

[Old_Geezer]

People can opt to misuse words in the hope that they take on a new definition, but it doesn't stop them having been misused. I am 100% certain I am not alone in knowing the definition of marriage, even if lots of PC folk wish to claim a different changed definition and pretend it was always that way. It's a not uncommon trick some use to try to change history. That can include the Australian legal system. All you indicate is that the Australians assumed folk knew what a marriage was and only in recent times realised the attempt to change the definition meant they had to spell it out.