Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,432 Year: 3,689/9,624 Month: 560/974 Week: 173/276 Day: 13/34 Hour: 0/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Marriage – What is it and what’s the point?
Larni
Member (Idle past 185 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 61 of 80 (559099)
05-06-2010 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by DPowell
05-06-2010 2:43 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
You do know the Code was written be fore Gen, don't you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by DPowell, posted 05-06-2010 2:43 PM DPowell has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Rahvin, posted 05-06-2010 3:08 PM Larni has not replied
 Message 64 by DPowell, posted 10-04-2010 10:49 PM Larni has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4039
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 8.2


Message 62 of 80 (559101)
05-06-2010 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Larni
05-06-2010 3:03 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
He thinks Genesis describes the beginning of time, so I rather doubt he knows any such thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Larni, posted 05-06-2010 3:03 PM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by DPowell, posted 10-04-2010 10:54 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 80 (559103)
05-06-2010 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by DPowell
05-06-2010 2:55 PM


Re: Marriage is a Sacred Thing
Marriage exists as a covenant before God and is a reflection of the Christ-Church relationship.
Interesting. Makes me wonder though why marriage existed long before Christ if that were true and why people marry for entirely different reasons.
I do have to agree with you that outside of the sacred context, I see no overt reason for marriage itself in terms of purpose.
I think maybe for purposes of rearing children. Either that or, as you said, designed to mirror a covenant between Christ and the Church.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by DPowell, posted 05-06-2010 2:55 PM DPowell has seen this message but not replied

  
DPowell
Member (Idle past 4938 days)
Posts: 48
Joined: 04-27-2010


Message 64 of 80 (584987)
10-04-2010 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Larni
05-06-2010 3:03 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
Sorry, I haven't checked on this thing in a while, heh. I do know that the Code was penned before Genesis, but in terms of raw chronology (the actual events), the events of Genesis 2 would precede the Code of Hammurabi by over 2,000 years. Moses did not make up the contents of the book of Genesis but was rather compiling the oral history of much earlier times.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Larni, posted 05-06-2010 3:03 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Larni, posted 10-06-2010 5:42 AM DPowell has replied

  
DPowell
Member (Idle past 4938 days)
Posts: 48
Joined: 04-27-2010


Message 65 of 80 (584989)
10-04-2010 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Rahvin
05-06-2010 3:08 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
I may be some psycho-conservative-Christian wacko in your mind, but I try to be respectful to you guys. I have a degree in history to balance my second degree in divinity, so I am in fact familiar with the Code of Hammurabi. I will not personally slam any of you guys for your views; a little reciprocity would be nice. I think a good, honest discussion on this stuff is a great thing.
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Rahvin, posted 05-06-2010 3:08 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 185 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 66 of 80 (585148)
10-06-2010 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by DPowell
10-04-2010 10:49 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
Moses did not make up the contents of the book of Genesis but was rather compiling the oral history of much earlier times.
You can't do that.
The date of something that is actually written is a different to events that are purported to have taken place 2000 years before they are written down.
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by DPowell, posted 10-04-2010 10:49 PM DPowell has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by DPowell, posted 10-06-2010 10:42 PM Larni has not replied

  
DPowell
Member (Idle past 4938 days)
Posts: 48
Joined: 04-27-2010


Message 67 of 80 (585255)
10-06-2010 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Larni
10-06-2010 5:42 AM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
You are right in saying that, but it is irrelevant.
The point is this: Marriage goes back a minimum of 3,000 years before the Code of Hammurabi. Moses' penning of Genesis (whether you think he wrote it or not) did not institute marriage. It was in existence 3,500 years or so before this. Moses was merely reporting what had been passed on to him as to its origins. The Code of Hammurabi was a new codification of law, sure, several hundred years or so before the penning of Genesis...but it was several thousand years after God's institution of marriage...from the Biblical perspective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Larni, posted 10-06-2010 5:42 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by jar, posted 10-07-2010 5:46 PM DPowell has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2587
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.5


Message 68 of 80 (585277)
10-07-2010 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee
03-24-2010 12:51 PM


From Thermodynamics: An Entropic view of marriage
JUC writes:
One of the reasons why I've raised this topic is because my best friend is going through a divorce. It's quite a messy affair, as they often are. He and his wife are fighting over money, rights to access to the children, and paying large amounts of money to lawyers of course.
They are both suffering from depression and a general feeling of failure. They both seem bewildered and dazed by the whole thing. Neither of them are religious and it seems to me that they never really thought about or understood why they "got married" or what it meant to "be married". It seems that they were pushed into it by society's expectations, signed a pre-fabricated legal agreement that neither of them had any hand in, and they are now being dictated to by people and a system that doesn't care for them at all. It's just not right!
Seems this is the moment where I should reveal my entropic theory of marriage, from the Laws of Thermodynamics.
Consider that entropy, which we also have heard never decreases in the universe, is a measure of disorder. Things tend to progress from an orderly arrangement to a disorderly arrangement. In order to make something progress to a more orderly state, surrounding things must become more disordely. There can be a rough measure of how much work it takes to go from one to the other.
A common example given is a building. To demolish it requires a few legal hoops and a few hours of planning and a few more to carefully plant the charges, then a few seconds to demolish it. Contrast that with the amount of time & effort it took to build that buiilding, or a new one in its place. The building is overwhelmingly regarded as being in a more orderly state than the rubble after the demolition.
Now let's look at marriage. How hard is it to get married compared to how hard is it to get divorced. You can get married in 2 minutes in Las Vegas. Divorce takes years and costs a lot, requiring more effort on each part.
Therefore being divorced is a more orderly state than being married.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 03-24-2010 12:51 PM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 185 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 69 of 80 (585283)
10-07-2010 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Taz
03-27-2010 1:21 AM


And that old belief that husband and wife have to argue to make the marriage work? It's a load of bullshit.
Just read you post.
I agree totally. My wife and I have lived together for 5 years now and we have never raised our voices to each other once.
Again, my wife is brutally honest at times to me. I've heard her criticize me about everything from me being inconsiderate to my breath smelled. None has ever turned into a fight. I've only had a couple criticisms of my wife, and one of them is her being a little too emotional at times. Again, neither of us understand why people have the need to make such a big deal out of the tiniest things.
I have a rotten temper and she is very forgetful and untidy but we file this under 'little things', as you seem to do.
Even when I was dragged to see that boring movie Brokeback Mountain, I went anyway without making a scene and endured almost 2 boring hours of gay cowboys kissing *shudders*.
You think that's bad? I had to sit through '27 Dresses' but then she actually came to cinema to watch 'Predators', with me.
It does not feel like compromise because of the buzz I get when she smiles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Taz, posted 03-27-2010 1:21 AM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 10-07-2010 12:54 PM Larni has not replied
 Message 72 by onifre, posted 10-07-2010 1:35 PM Larni has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 70 of 80 (585316)
10-07-2010 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Larni
10-07-2010 5:54 AM


Larni writes:
It does not feel like compromise because of the buzz I get when she smiles.
You, sir, have discovered the meaning of life.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Larni, posted 10-07-2010 5:54 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Omnivorous, posted 10-07-2010 1:04 PM ringo has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3985
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


Message 71 of 80 (585317)
10-07-2010 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by ringo
10-07-2010 12:54 PM


Amen.

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio
Real things always push back.
-William James

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 10-07-2010 12:54 PM ringo has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 72 of 80 (585321)
10-07-2010 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Larni
10-07-2010 5:54 AM


It does not feel like compromise because of the buzz I get when she smiles.
Is that a line from the movie, "How To Turn A Guy Gay In 10 Days"...?
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Larni, posted 10-07-2010 5:54 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Omnivorous, posted 10-07-2010 2:47 PM onifre has replied
 Message 76 by Larni, posted 10-07-2010 5:51 PM onifre has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3985
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


Message 73 of 80 (585332)
10-07-2010 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by onifre
10-07-2010 1:35 PM


Now don't scorn marriage, oni.
I like it so much, I did it three times.

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio
Real things always push back.
-William James

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by onifre, posted 10-07-2010 1:35 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by onifre, posted 10-09-2010 4:31 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4726 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 74 of 80 (585345)
10-07-2010 3:50 PM


Yeah, some people have no problem with commitment. The just can't get enough of it.

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 75 of 80 (585363)
10-07-2010 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by DPowell
10-06-2010 10:42 PM


Re: The purpose? Good question!
The point is this: Marriage goes back a minimum of 3,000 years before the Code of Hammurabi. Moses' penning of Genesis (whether you think he wrote it or not) did not institute marriage. It was in existence 3,500 years or so before this. Moses was merely reporting what had been passed on to him as to its origins. The Code of Hammurabi was a new codification of law, sure, several hundred years or so before the penning of Genesis...but it was several thousand years after God's institution of marriage...from the Biblical perspective.
I'm not sure that there is any evidence that the source of the Code of Hammurabi is any different than the source for the mosaic laws.
In either case, the institution of marriage was not some divine coupling but rather property rights.
Marriage was about who would own the land, the animals, the productive hands. It was about establishing ownership of the women so that it cut down on fights.
Marriage, particularly in the Bible, is about ownership, inheritance, welfare and conflict reduction.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by DPowell, posted 10-06-2010 10:42 PM DPowell has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024