No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers *** No Politics
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: yotetrapper30] #7278993
06/03/21 08:14 PM
06/03/21 08:14 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
Originally Posted by yotetrapper30
Originally Posted by loosegoose
Jesus said that if a man divorces his wife except for sexual immorality and married another woman, he commits adultery with her. Every single day that couple wakes up married, they are commiting adultery. If that couple is aware of what the bible says about divorce and remarriage, then they make the conscious decision every single day to continue to live in sin. They consciously decide every day to live in opposition to one of the 10 commandments. The only cure for that sin is for that couple to dissolve their marriage.

And J Station, I see you can't show anywhere that I've defended sin
I'm glad we were able to clear that up.


I think that you're assuming that the man who divorced his wife for a reason other than adultery remarried without first being forgiven for the sin of the divorce.



It's not the previous divorce that needs to be forgiven I this situation, it's the choosing to live every single day in an adulterous relationship that's the issue. Jesus himself said that to do so is adultery. We may not like it, but that's the cold hard truth.

Last edited by loosegoose; 06/03/21 08:16 PM.
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: loosegoose] #7278995
06/03/21 08:16 PM
06/03/21 08:16 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 9,264
Oakland, MS
yotetrapper30 Offline
trapper
yotetrapper30  Offline
trapper

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 9,264
Oakland, MS
Originally Posted by loosegoose

Well, I'm f that man is choosing every day to live in an adulterous relationship contrary to the words of Christ and Gods will, if that couple chooses every day to continue in their adulterous relationship despite knowing full well that violates the very word and f God, would they've forgiven?

It's not the previous divorce that needs to be forgiven I this situation, it's the choosing to live every single day in an adulterous relationship.


I don't agree. I think it is the sin of the divorce that CAUSES the next marriage to be adulterous. If the man repents for the divorce and is forgiven, I believe he would then have a clean slate.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: yotetrapper30] #7278998
06/03/21 08:17 PM
06/03/21 08:17 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
Originally Posted by yotetrapper30
Originally Posted by loosegoose

Well, I'm f that man is choosing every day to live in an adulterous relationship contrary to the words of Christ and Gods will, if that couple chooses every day to continue in their adulterous relationship despite knowing full well that violates the very word and f God, would they've forgiven?

It's not the previous divorce that needs to be forgiven I this situation, it's the choosing to live every single day in an adulterous relationship.


I don't agree. I think it is the sin of the divorce that CAUSES the next marriage to be adulterous. If the man repents for the divorce and is forgiven, I believe he would then have a clean slate.

Sorry, I edited my comment for clarity. But to your point, that's not what Jesus said. He didn't say it's okay as long as you repent. He said it's adultery, plain and simple.

What would be your scriptural basis to negate Jesus's words saying remarriage is adultery? What scriptural evidence would you put forth to show that there's a clean slate after divorce?

Last edited by loosegoose; 06/03/21 08:19 PM.
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279011
06/03/21 08:40 PM
06/03/21 08:40 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
J
J Staton Offline
trapper
J Staton  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
So an unsaved person that is a divorcee but becomes saved commits adultery if they remarry? Being unsaved how did he/she know they were committing a sin to begin to begin with?

Last edited by J Staton; 06/03/21 08:43 PM.

1 Samuel 17:45-47
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279012
06/03/21 08:41 PM
06/03/21 08:41 PM
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,367
Bismarck, North Dakota
grumley701 Offline
trapper
grumley701  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,367
Bismarck, North Dakota
So loosy there's no remission of sin through the death burial and Resurrection of Christ?


Trump won....
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279014
06/03/21 08:48 PM
06/03/21 08:48 PM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
F
Foxpaw Offline
trapper
Foxpaw  Offline
trapper
F

Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
I guess we just discovered the second unpardonable sin. If you have remarried and are in an illegal marriage and a couple of kids, I can almost 100% for sure Jesus is not going to to tell you that you are living in sin and you need to get a divorce.
I am not in a situation where that has an influence on me. I have never even kissed another woman besides my wife, so in one sence I have no dog in this fight.
Looks to me like we've not come to a crossroads but a fork in the road where it seems like Jesus is saying bind them up instead of set them free.
When you get high jacked and have no choice then you know you just met a thief.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279040
06/03/21 09:17 PM
06/03/21 09:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
Its pretty easy to tell somebody else they are living in sin.

Those old jews were sure a hateful bunch.


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: grumley701] #7279046
06/03/21 09:32 PM
06/03/21 09:32 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
Originally Posted by grumley701
So loosy there's no remission of sin through the death burial and Resurrection of Christ?

Sure there is......if you repent of sin. If you choose to continue to live in sin, such as homosexuality or adultery,that's a different story.

Last edited by loosegoose; 06/03/21 09:35 PM.
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: J Staton] #7279048
06/03/21 09:34 PM
06/03/21 09:34 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
Originally Posted by J Staton
So an unsaved person that is a divorcee but becomes saved commits adultery if they remarry? Being unsaved how did he/she know they were committing a sin to begin to begin with?

1st question...yes.
2nd question.....same as any other sin (such as homosexuality for example). that an unsaved person commits. Whether they knew they were sinning is irrelevant.

If you ha e a problem with it, your problem is with Jesus, not me. He's the one who said it's adultery.

Last edited by loosegoose; 06/03/21 09:35 PM.
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Foxpaw] #7279051
06/03/21 09:37 PM
06/03/21 09:37 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 3,723
Beatrice, NE
Originally Posted by Foxpaw
I guess we just discovered the second unpardonable sin. If you have remarried and are in an illegal marriage and a couple of kids, I can almost 100% for sure Jesus is not going to to tell you that you are living in sin and you need to get a divorce.
I am not in a situation where that has an influence on me. I have never even kissed another woman besides my wife, so in one sence I have no dog in this fight.
Looks to me like we've not come to a crossroads but a fork in the road where it seems like Jesus is saying bind them up instead of set them free.
When you get high jacked and have no choice then you know you just met a thief.

Who said it's unpardonable? All sin is forgiven with repentance.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279054
06/03/21 09:39 PM
06/03/21 09:39 PM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,216
Iowa
T
trapdog1 Offline
trapper
trapdog1  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,216
Iowa
So I guess if you're an adulterous homo you're really in trouble.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279058
06/03/21 09:42 PM
06/03/21 09:42 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
Truck driver I knew had been calling home for several days but no one was answering. ( before cell phhones) When he got there his young children were crying and laughing at the same time they were so glad to see him. Grabbing his legs making it difficult to move They had been eating dog food for three days. Scared to answer the phone cause they were young enough they would be in trouble for it. Mom was off on a meth bender. They didnt know where she was. Truck driver divorced her but I guess now that was sinful of him? The mom was murdered about 11 years later. So I guess now that she is dead the truck driver is no longer a sinner for running her off and getting on with his life?


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: WiscoNate] #7279071
06/03/21 10:07 PM
06/03/21 10:07 PM
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,484
MN
D
Donnersurvivor Offline
trapper
Donnersurvivor  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,484
MN
Originally Posted by WiscoNate
Originally Posted by Donnersurvivor


Because the equitable sharing of women has and will lead to peaceful cultures, Children from two parent households tend to have many fewer issues and a higher percentage of them tend to be responsible citizens.

Why would the Govt not incentivize the institution that has proven to make peaceful cultures and responsible citizens?


Why does government need to be involved in the equitable sharing of women? Why would government need to incentivize anything? Might it be because government needs to control? Can't I get married without having Uncle Sam as an unwanted middleman?

Is the U.S. a peaceful culture? Is it full of responsible citizens?


Government is involved in the equitable sharing of women because it provides peace and long term stability. Every society and culture that has not had the equitable sharing of women has crumbled or lives in near complete irrelevance. Throughout Human history one man and one women together was NOT the norm, genetics tells us most men did NOT reproduce but nearly all women did. The cultures that eliminated infighting by equitably sharing women came to dominate the ones which did not. Govt incentives the equitable sharing of women so that our culture and country can continue.

I would emphasis again, one man and one women is not the norm, traditionally a guy like Elon Musk/Bill Gates would have hundred's or even thousands of wives which leaves hundreds or even thousands of men with nothing to do but cause war/trouble in society.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: loosegoose] #7279077
06/03/21 10:17 PM
06/03/21 10:17 PM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
F
Foxpaw Offline
trapper
Foxpaw  Offline
trapper
F

Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
Originally Posted by loosegoose
Originally Posted by Foxpaw
I guess we just discovered the second unpardonable sin. If you have remarried and are in an illegal marriage and a couple of kids, I can almost 100% for sure Jesus is not going to to tell you that you are living in sin and you need to get a divorce.
I am not in a situation where that has an influence on me. I have never even kissed another woman besides my wife, so in one sence I have no dog in this fight.
Looks to me like we've not come to a crossroads but a fork in the road where it seems like Jesus is saying bind them up instead of set them free.
When you get high jacked and have no choice then you know you just met a thief.

Who said it's unpardonable? All sin is forgiven with repentance.


Well you were insinuating that if a woman is remarried and with kids then she is living in sin and the only way out is to get divorced and then what ? Her and the kids live on the street? You don't have a solution for that do you?
I know you are looking for a place to teach a lesson about allowing the gays marring in the church, then they can teach the kids in Sunday school and then worm their way into the pulpit. Alexander was great but he didn't end that way! Lesson=don't take short cuts.
So go a head and give the gay marriage thing another best shot. Just don't tie up a bunch of people with no escape in the process.

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279080
06/03/21 10:21 PM
06/03/21 10:21 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
J
J Staton Offline
trapper
J Staton  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
Was Jesus referring to man putting away(divorcing) his wife in order to marry another committing adultery? Is Jesus also saying then a man putting away(divorcing) his wife for abusing his children but remarrying another committing adultery?


1 Samuel 17:45-47
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279105
06/03/21 11:02 PM
06/03/21 11:02 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,402
Anchorage, Alaska
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,402
Anchorage, Alaska
Regardless of what Jesus did or didn't say--and Loosegoose is right, his meaning was clear--the Supreme Court has said that gays have a Constitutional right to marry.

But some people still want to take away someone else's Constitutional rights, just like for certain other issues in our society.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279120
06/03/21 11:31 PM
06/03/21 11:31 PM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
F
Foxpaw Offline
trapper
Foxpaw  Offline
trapper
F

Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,262
Southern Illinois
Just bake a cake to the "Queen of Heaven" and see how God approves of that !

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279127
06/03/21 11:37 PM
06/03/21 11:37 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 9,264
Oakland, MS
yotetrapper30 Offline
trapper
yotetrapper30  Offline
trapper

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 9,264
Oakland, MS
Here guys. This explains the passage in Matthew 19 about divorce. It's long, but you'll understand it better.

http://www.bereanpatriot.com/what-jesus-meant-by-adultery-in-matthew-chapters-5-19/

Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: Sprung & Rusty] #7279157
06/04/21 05:03 AM
06/04/21 05:03 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,872
williamsburg ks
sounds like "proper translation" is the key here along with "interpretation".


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Defense of marriage act [Re: yotetrapper30] #7279176
06/04/21 06:37 AM
06/04/21 06:37 AM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
J
J Staton Offline
trapper
J Staton  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,399
Arkansas
Originally Posted by yotetrapper30
Here guys. This explains the passage in Matthew 19 about divorce. It's long, but you'll understand it better.

http://www.bereanpatriot.com/what-jesus-meant-by-adultery-in-matthew-chapters-5-19/

Context of the statement is usually important but remember LG is trying to justify homosexual marriage. He got a confirmation from an unbeliever/lawyer James so it's settled. Lol.


1 Samuel 17:45-47
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread