I started about 3 replies. One from Romans
about Paul's struggles. One from real life examples of how people's
actions were contrary of their beliefs. One from what we know about
addictions. But I realize it will be fruitless. The voice that cries out
"if you fail, it's your fault! shape up or ship out! it's easy! read the
bible! just do it! no excuses! you worthless piece of ____" will
drown all. Love, Caroline
Where do I
assign fault Caroline? When I wrote I was merely saying "this is
the way it is" - are you into 'political correctness as well as
universalism?" Yes Paul had struggles with his own flesh but he
pursued righteousness
so that he
could write younger believers to "follow him as they observed him
following Christ" and yes, there is
a spirit of
'addictions' - it runs in my family and I know about it first
hand. That's the reality and the battle we find
ourselves in
and this is why the answer is not a powerless 'universalism'
judyt
Are you the
oldest daughter of an alcoholic father who never drank
herself?
Love,
Caroline
A MANS MORALITY DETERMINES HIS
THEOLOGY.....
The Princess of Wales was pretty messed
up too. A high power, high pressure marriage of convenience/love of
two wounded children. We all need saving - every single day of our
lives.
True, but she was manipulated and
duped into thinking it was a love match at least for a short
while.
While we're at it, I think the rest of
the family was pretty messed up too.
I agree and they have been for
generations, although Queen Victoria is said to have taken her faith
seriously.
But there is so much good and so much
glory in that tiny nation. Some of the greatest evangelists,
missionaries and theologians came from there. Some of the greatest
social reformers came from there. Our modern ideas which includes
no slavery, protection of workers, education for all came from there.
Remarkable. It has to be God.
They had
their day in the sun, along with Scotland each nation has a 'day of
visition' and I don't doubt that God
still has a
remnant in those countries in spite of how pagan they have
become.
I wonder if the Royal family is aware of
spiritual warfare? They are defender of the faith and the head of the
nation. Surely they must come in for more than the average person's
share of spiritual lies and attacks. I hope English Christians pray
for them daily.
Are you kidding? Philip and
much of the British aristocracy are Freemasons; Charles has resisted
so far, possibly because of the terrible relationship he has with his
father but he has not escaped. A close adviser by the name of
VanDerPost introduced him to pursuit of the occult many years ago and
he read these books on his honeymoon when he married Diana.
Later he went to Africa to investigate native religions.
Both Diana and Fergie were known to frequent psychics and astrologers.
Charles disdains Christianity
and has stated in the past that when he ascends the throne he would
like to be called "Defender of the
Faiths" - so there you go. The future King of England is
a true universalist. judyt
LOL Judy! I wonder what God said to
Isaac and Rebekah the morning after.
What would be wrong with
Isaac & Rebekah's union, they had the blessing of both
families and she went willingly.
For the longest time the State did
not govern or legislate marriage. They had to do that when our
societies got more complicated. I haven't done any research in
this area but when did State sanctioned marriages happen? Was it
because English law allows only legitimate sons to inherit with
the first born one getting the main title plus the lands that went
with the title?
They probably started it to
get some kind of tax, whenever the State gets involved it has to
do with power or money. However we know that marriage is ordained
by God and that the marriage agreement is the closest idea we
have in our generation to that of covenant. Under
Levitical law if a man lay with a maiden he had married
her.
Someone should write a book about how
primogeniture has shaped society. King Richard II became king by
declaring his brother's two sons illegitimate because it was
discovered that King Edward V was betrothed(!) to
another before his marriage. Apparently in those days,
betrothed people could have church approved sex and it was the
equivalent of marriage without the ceremony.
British Kings were for the
most part totally immoral and pretty much gave in to their
carnality and lust and did what they wanted to They were 'defenders of the faith' in
name only and took any female that appealed to them.
I can see why that tradition had
to change. I can imagine some cousin of Princes Will and Harry
saying, "your dad was betrothed to _____ before he married your
mom so you guys are illegitimate and I'm the heir apparent." and
they replying, "oh yeah and your grandfather......"
Love, Caroline
No kidding; there is already
speculation about Harry's paternity and Charles' behavior has been
disgraceful. Apparently some uncles of his messed him up big time.
One encouraged him to research the occult and another told
him to sow wild oats and play the field. This along
with his loveless childhood
produced an emotional wreck of a man who had nothing to give his
bride in 1981 but his infidelity. How tragic and what a
horrible example to his sons.
How does God
determine what is fornication and what is not? I
would think this would be
the important part
because fornicators DO NOT inherit his Kingdom. Adulterers
don't either. judyt
I don't know what I think
about living together without a legal ceremony. I
suppose that if the couple has made a conscious
commitment to one another they are "married." I
mean, the state does not tell them to
separate. It seems to me that there is a
difference between living together and shaken up.
I like what Caroline wrote, below.
Jd
In a message dated 4/11/2005
5:36:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Pros for legal marriage
1) legal protection and rights including
survivor benefits, inheritance, insurance etc.
2) tax breaks
3) teens can't contract serial
marriages/divorces behind their parents backs. Some are
probably doing it anyway but they know such marriages are
not accepted.
When teens fall in love they:
- honestly and wholeheartedly believe it'll
last forever
- honestly and wholeheartedly believe it's
God's will
- will believe that stats that say teen love
and teen marriage is temporary does not apply to
them
If the above three are not issues, then sure,
no reason to get marriage sanctioned by State. But then
again, we have to remember that everyone going to the altar
never thinks they'll need State protection from the person
they are swearing to love forever and ever.
Love,
Caroline
