arunangelo Posted November 29, 2012 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 149 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 166 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/30/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted November 29, 2012 Marriage is not about getting; it is about giving-giving oneself totally to other as an expression of unconditional love. God, therefore, created us as male and female so that in marriage husband and wife may complement one another through procreative union, as an expression of total giving. This union can’t be broken, because it is sealed by God (Mark 10:7-9). In addition, because procreative union is an expression of marital union, to have procreative union without marriage is to abuse the procreative act for selfish purpose. Furthermore, since this union is reproductive in nature, to contracept or to procreate without procreative union ( in-vitro fertilization), goes against the sanctity of marital love and human reproduction. Your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 i disagree with about half of what you said. sex is a GIFT from God, NOT just for procreation, but for the expression of LOVE. it is a 2 dimensional reflection of the 3-dimensional character of God. (do not misunderstand that, i'm not saying anything about sexuality in the trinity.) what i am saying, is that when two people join together in love within a marriage, they are becoming one in unity. THAT is a reflection of God's triune nature... and we are made in His image. i get so tired of hearing the whole garbage that God created sex specifically for procreation. that is an important aspect but it is certainly NOT any more important than any other aspect, such as the one i just finished laying out. but even that is not the sum total of what sex was designed to be. God also gave sex as a gift of PLEASURE within a marriage. yep, good old fashioned physical enjoyment. and that aspect of His gift to us is every bit as important and equal to the emotional unity and the procreative aspects. family planning, whether we're talking about finding a way to have children when the parents are not able to conceive, or whether we're talking about the use of non-abortive methods of postponing pregnancy do not in any way invalidate God's purpose for sex. because if it did, then the following statements would be equally valid: married couples having children when the couple is not ready (emotionally or financially) to have them interferes with the aspect of emotional unity, and therefore invalidates God's purpose for sex. married couples with young children often can't find time to enjoy the pleasure of sex, therefore having children invalidates God's purpose for sex. being unable to bear children in the natural way thwarts God's purpose of marriage, therefore the refusal to use invitro or other methods as a way of having a child when necessary invalidate's the sanctity of a marriage. see how ridiculous those statements sound? that's EXACTLY the way it sounds when one claims that family planning goes against the sanctity of marital love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Robinson Posted November 29, 2012 Group: Senior Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 22 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 903 Content Per Day: 0.20 Reputation: 516 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/01/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/03/1952 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Totally agree with the above! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kat8585 Posted November 30, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 1,360 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 7,866 Content Per Day: 1.24 Reputation: 26 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/22/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/18/1946 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Then there are those couples who can't have children. Maybe the wife has had a hysterectomy. God doesn't expect these couples to not have sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinky Posted December 2, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 200 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,602 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 291 Days Won: 8 Joined: 10/24/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/01/1986 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Furthermore, since this union is reproductive in nature, to contracept or to procreate without procreative union ( in-vitro fertilization), goes against the sanctity of marital love God created sex to express love between a husband and wife - not just to reproduce. If it were for reproduction only, it would become a neglected duty. It would also discriminate against poor couples who can't afford to have children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted December 2, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.81 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 2, 2012 Furthermore, since this union is reproductive in nature, to contracept or to procreate without procreative union ( in-vitro fertilization), goes against the sanctity of marital love God created sex to express love between a husband and wife - not just to reproduce. If it were for reproduction only, it would become a neglected duty. It would also discriminate against {the} poor couples who can't afford to have children. Good perspective Tinky! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted December 2, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.81 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 2, 2012 i disagree with about half of what you said. sex is a GIFT from God, NOT just for procreation, but for the expression of LOVE. it is a 2 dimensional reflection of the 3-dimensional character of God. (do not misunderstand that, i'm not saying anything about sexuality in the trinity.) what i am saying, is that when two people join together in love within a marriage, they are becoming one in unity. THAT is a reflection of God's triune nature... and we are made in His image. i get so tired of hearing the whole garbage that God created sex specifically for procreation. that is an important aspect but it is certainly NOT any more important than any other aspect, such as the one i just finished laying out. but even that is not the sum total of what sex was designed to be. God also gave sex as a gift of PLEASURE within a marriage. yep, good old fashioned physical enjoyment. and that aspect of His gift to us is every bit as important and equal to the emotional unity and the procreative aspects. family planning, whether we're talking about finding a way to have children when the parents are not able to conceive, or whether we're talking about the use of non-abortive methods of postponing pregnancy do not in any way invalidate God's purpose for sex. because if it did, then the following statements would be equally valid: married couples having children when the couple is not ready (emotionally or financially) to have them interferes with the aspect of emotional unity, and therefore invalidates God's purpose for sex. married couples with young children often can't find time to enjoy the pleasure of sex, therefore having children invalidates God's purpose for sex. being unable to bear children in the natural way thwarts God's purpose of marriage, therefore the refusal to use invitro or other methods as a way of having a child when necessary invalidate's the sanctity of a marriage. see how ridiculous those statements sound? that's EXACTLY the way it sounds when one claims that family planning goes against the sanctity of marital love. Great post LadyC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted December 3, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.81 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 3, 2012 For everyone who has posted in this thread: This member never, ever comes back to a thread they start to reply to any posts. They start a thread every few months and do not come back to it. They do not interact with anyone, nor do they post in other threads, as a general rule. The threads are always about marriage and almost always condemn either divorce, or sex outside of the sole purpose of procreation. So anything you try to say directly to this member is falling on deaf ears. Forewarned is forearmed...yet what if this is an exception? What if God has transformed their heart? What about my history and Jesus? What about my history and you? What do I possibly lose or gain by simply responding honestly and from faith to the question asked, by you or the most incorrigible? The question may help to sharpen iron with iron: do I forsake such an opportunity to deride the poster? Where is the gain in such activity? Do not judge. As seemingly accurate as Cobalt may be regarding this person, what is the point of bringing up their past? Perhaps it is to protect us from embarrassment and betrayal? Sorry, but in spirit and truth, nothing can harm me. Besides, embarrassment and betrayal is none of my concern: my peace is in Christ. He is my rest. Who are you saying is incorrigible numenian? Incorrigible - Adj. (of a person or their tendencies) Not able to be corrected, improved, or reformed. Synonyms: irredeemable - irreparable – irreclaimable Regarding judging... You Will Know Them by Their Fruits Matt. 7:15-20 15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. What are the fruits of the Holy Spirit? Gal 5:22-23 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. God bless, GE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 perhaps the phrase "the question asked, by you or the most incorrigible". the problem is not with anyone's reading comprehension. the problem is how you worded it. how could anyone possibly NOT think incorrigible was referring to a person? nowhere in that sentence did you indicate that you were referring to behavior. "you or the most incorrigible" can't be misconstrued to mean treatment. YOU refers to a person. OR the most incorrigible refers to an unnamed person. if it helps though, i thought you were just generalizing and not trying to point fingers at any specific person on these boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts