Quote:

---

That's an odd position to me. That God has defined marriage, that we have an example of what it should look like, and to then punt by claiming it's about what is fair and right to those that don't believe. If you know what is good and right and you fail to observe or encourage it, are you loving? Why would you concede something just because the secular world views it differently? God is part of the union, it is what He has brought together. How is it not an inherently religious ceremony?

---

Because non-religious people get married all the time? It's not about conceding anything. They've simply copied it into their culture and made it their own. Society and culture at large accept this. No one refuses to recognize someone's spouse if they non-Christian.

Maybe easier put: their wedding and marriage are different than mine, but I can recognize that. It doesn't need to be defended. It is literally something else.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying you're for open communion, simply stating the idea of being 'loving' is what some pastors and priests are using to contradict actual biblical teaching. So I ask the same here, are you using the idea of being 'loving' to support that which is against what is right and should be done? Let's say one of your kids is gay and it's a same sex wedding? Forget pagan rituals, that is more realistic.

---

I would have no problem being a part of my son's same sex wedding. Again, it's not the same wedding as I believe in. It's something else completely.

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

That's an odd position to me. That God has defined marriage, that we have an example of what it should look like, and to then punt by claiming it's about what is fair and right to those that don't believe. If you know what is good and right and you fail to observe or encourage it, are you loving? Why would you concede something just because the secular world views it differently? God is part of the union, it is what He has brought together. How is it not an inherently religious ceremony?

---

Because non-religious people get married all the time? It's not about conceding anything. They've simply copied it into their culture and made it their own. Society and culture at large accept this. No one refuses to recognize someone's spouse if they non-Christian.

Maybe easier put: their wedding and marriage are different than mine, but I can recognize that. It doesn't need to be defended. It is literally something else.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying you're for open communion, simply stating the idea of being 'loving' is what some pastors and priests are using to contradict actual biblical teaching. So I ask the same here, are you using the idea of being 'loving' to support that which is against what is right and should be done? Let's say one of your kids is gay and it's a same sex wedding? Forget pagan rituals, that is more realistic.

---

I would have no problem being a part of my son's same sex wedding. Again, it's not the same wedding as I believe in. It's something else completely.

---

k2 and I are discussing how Christians should view marriage, not how the secular world should view it. I don't think you're ignoring that but it's hard not to take it that way because you seem to be engaging in a detached analysis of the ceremony and approaching your participation based on that. I'm not sure that arguing secular perception justifies your participation is a biblically defensible view. That seems to be in stark contrast to letters in the NT addressing how christians should live their lives.

You both seem to coming from this from a "Christianity defines marriage" perspective. It today's society, it does not (and probably never did). Atheist people get married. Christians get married. Pagans get married. You can dress it up in whatever religious ceremony you want, but socially speaking - it's not a religious rite. We know this because people will literally only set foot in a church to get married. Taking this further into the point, there are literally no requirements on those who are in the wedding party other than agreeing to wear a specific thing and standing in a specific spot. That's it. There aren't really even planning norms really anymore.

Now, you may lament that society has "*******ized" weddings and you're upset that they even use the word "wedding" or "marriage" to describe their union. I don't think this is a hill worth dieing on. No one is trying to say that their wedding/marriage is the same as the Christian one. Therefore, we look like lunatics trying to say they aren't real marriages or weddings or whatever.

diehard03 said:

---

You both seem to coming from this from a "Christianity defines marriage" perspective. It today's society, it does not (and probably never did). Atheist people get married. Christians get married. Pagans get married. You can dress it up in whatever religious ceremony you want, but socially speaking - it's not a religious rite. We know this because people will literally only set foot in a church to get married. Taking this further into the point, there are literally no requirements on those who are in the wedding party other than agreeing to wear a specific thing and standing in a specific spot. That's it. There aren't really even planning norms really anymore.

Now, you may lament that society has "*******ized" weddings and you're upset that they even use the word "wedding" or "marriage" to describe their union. I don't think this is a hill worth dieing on. No one is trying to say that their wedding/marriage is the same as the Christian one. Therefore, we look like lunatics trying to say they aren't real marriages or weddings or whatever.

---

I don't think you understand my point if this is your response. God defines marriage for all and says who it involves and what it should look like. How humans define it is irrelevant to that truth for a Christian. We are accountable to God, therefore we live differently and may be limited in our participation of rites because of it.

Things done socially do not alter truth or it's purpose but to participate in them as such may degrade that truth and hamper your ability to share it with others.

Edit: I'd argue the people getting married in these scenarios do not view their marriage as different from a Christian one (by your own admission that it's simply a social rite). Would one look like less of a lunatic explaining afterwards what God thinks of marriage and trying to explain that it's different rather than simply saying, sorry son I can't support your wedding?

My wife and I got married in a Methodist church by a catholic deacon. All of this was approved by the bishop of our diocese.

Quote:

---

I don't think you understand my point if this is your response. God defines marriage for all and says who it involves and what it should look like. How humans define it is irrelevant to that truth for a Christian. We are accountable to God, therefore we live differently and may be limited in our participation of rites because of it.

---

Sorry I am late in getting back to this.

I think we are just going to disagree. I fully understand your point. I just don't agree with it. I agree with you on all the points about Christian marriage. I just don't think it applies to non-Christian ones. I also don't think God judges us on what we say/think about non-Christian marriage. It's a wholly different thing that we only link together because we use the same word: marriage. While I know there are a great many people that would say "thank you! we've been trying to get THEM to change their word for marriage forever!", I would disagree and say that 1 word is fine. We are the ones who are trying to their marriages are invalid because of our rules.