Pocky Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by Moose Pocky, The reason I get so pissy, is your claim about marriage exsisting before the Bible was written doesn't hold water. The word of God was here long before anything else ever was. The Bible is God's word......marriage couldn't of exsisted before the very word of God. That's why I'm compelled to challenge you....... I'm not attempting to change your opinion of what you believe and I know that nothing I say is going to make any difference because you will never, no matter how much evidence there is, disbelieve anything you currently believe. Below is a list of anthropological evidence collected regarding the concept of marriage with an estimation of time periods. You may very well, and more than likely will, find fault in the list - I expect it. I'm not here to debate the merits or break each point into bits in order to prove its validity. My point is merely that while you claim the Bible is the ultimate in factual evidence there are many, even Christians, that accept alternate facts that can't be validated in the Bible. The earliest writings in the Bible dates c. 1500 -1450 BCE, which is 2500 years after evidence of marriages are found in various cultures. I'm sure my list is a poor example of how much information has been obtained by anthropologists regarding early evidence of marriage. Sumerian Civilization (4000 BCE)- The sexual union of Inanna and Dumuzi ( Sumerian Gods/Goddesses) was the prototype of the Sumerian custom of the "sacred marriage." Ancient Egypt: 3000-2999 BCE or around 2980 Regent Queen Neithotep of Egypt. Chief wife was Queen Berenib, but Neithotep was the mother of his heir, Djer. Around 2500 BCE Possible Queen Khent-Kaues I of Egypt. She was daughter of Menkau-Ra during the 4th dynasty, and married her brother Shepses-Kaf who succeeded his father to the throne. Around 2295 BCE Regent Dowager Queen Iput of Egypt. She was the last of the 5th dynasty and married Faro Teti of the 6th Dynasty. Around 2250-45 BCE Regent Dowager Queen Ankhesenmeryre I of Egypt. Together with her sister, Ankhesenmeryre II, she was married to Pepi I. Ca. 2180 BCE Queen Nitocris of Egypt. She was daughter of Pepi II in the 6th dynasty, who became Queen, while her husband Meren-Ra II was not the pharaoh, at least for some time. 1939/38-1909 BCE God's Wife of Amon and Queen Neferu of Egypt. Neferu was the consort and Queen of Pharaoh Amenemhat I. Around 1800 BCE Politically Active Queen Sabitu of Mari (Egypt). Also known as Szibitu, she acted as a regent during her husband, king Zimri-lim's numerous wars. 1594-after 1550 BCE Politically influential Queen Tetisheri of Egypt. She was a Queen during the 17th Dynasty in Thebes, and was the commoner wife of pharaoh Senachtenre (1594-1592). [/list=1] Code of Hammurabi, c. 1780 BCE - Book written by the King of Babylonia - discusses marriage and its purpose within society. Link to post Share on other sites
quankanne Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Below is a list of anthropological evidence collected regarding the concept of marriage with an estimation of time periods your interesting fact-filled post raises makes me curious: was the entity we describe today as "marriage" in all its legal, social and spiritual definitions considered as such before the Sumerians of 4000 BCE? Foremost, we consider marriage a legal state, but what about those folks who were just becoming cognizant of things/started truly thinking rather than acting on impulse? ... also really needed to see this post bumped because of it's proximity to the "parade your penis here" post .... Link to post Share on other sites
EnigmaXOXO Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Thanks Pocky. I was surprised as well that anyone in this day and age would actually believe that. You need only study your history books and do a little research in cultural anthropology to discover that all over the world even the most primitive of cultures practiced ceremonial matrimony l-o-n-g before the Christian crusades and the introduction of the Bible. And still are. Link to post Share on other sites
ReluctantRomeo Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Since, in biblical terms, marriage dates from Adam and Eve and this obviously precedes the writing of the bible, I'm not sure what point Moose is making. Maybe the man himself (Moose, I mean) should clarify? Originally posted by EnigmaXOXO l-o-n-g before the Christian crusades. You makin' a point here, or just being randomly offensive in an offtopic kind of way? Link to post Share on other sites
EnigmaXOXO Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 "Christian Crusades" is an historical term. Not my own. If someone is off-handedly offended by that, I'm hardly the one qualified to handle the complaints. Anyone is free to look it up and come to their own conclusions. My point? - The same as our thread starter. (I think? ) That marriage, in both its ceremonial and spiritual context predates the Bible and Christianity. And continues to exist all over the world even in non-Christian cultures. It existed on this very continent in which we live among the indigenous people long before the arrival of Christopher Columbus, the white settlers and Jesuit priests. Whether a marriage is sanctioned by church or state (relatively new concepts in historical comparison) matters little to those ancient cultures still thriving in New Guinea, Asia, Indonesia, Amazon, ect. who are so far removed from the influence of modern-day society, organized religions and biblical standards. Not only did "marriage" exist before the bible…but it still exists in absence of the bible, today. No single religion, belief system, culture or race can stake claim or ownership over the concept of "marriage." Only their own individual interpretations of it. Did I somehow misunderstand the topic??? Link to post Share on other sites
Author Pocky Posted July 27, 2005 Author Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by EnigmaXOXO Did I somehow misunderstand the topic??? Not at all. Link to post Share on other sites
ReluctantRomeo Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by EnigmaXOXO Did I somehow misunderstand the topic??? Lol no, just that the crusades didn't seem relevant to marriage to me.... just like the atheistic genocides of the 20th century Link to post Share on other sites
BlockHead Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Pocky What was the purpose of these ancient marriages? I get the impression they were political marriages, and that seems like a far cry from homosexual love. The Code of Hamurabi doesn't seem to explain the role of marriage. It all centers around property rights. EnigmaXOXO You need only study your history books and do a little research in cultural anthropology to discover that all over the world even the most primitive of cultures practiced ceremonial matrimony l-o-n-g before the Christian crusades and the introduction of the Bible.What purpose did ceremonial matrimony serve? Link to post Share on other sites
alphamale Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by BlockHead What purpose did ceremonial matrimony serve? the same exact role it serves today BLOCKHEAD Link to post Share on other sites
EnigmaXOXO Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 What purpose did ceremonial matrimony serve? Same as it does now. Only MORE importance was/is placed on family…the continuation of future generations (survival of the people.) Primitive cultures were/are deeply rooted in their spiritual and religious beliefs. Their very lives revolve around ceremony and prayer. Giving thanks EVERY DAY and creating ceremony to honor even the most mundane…the slaughter of an animal for food…the planting, the gathering, the birth of a child, the death of an elder, the right of passage into adulthood. Prayer, belief and daily worship/homage to a celestial creator responsible for their very existence was central. "Marriage" was a right of passage just as important as the birth of a child, the crossing-over into the spiritual realm of an elder, or the puberty rites of a boy/girl entering into adulthood (which in many cultures even included circumcision just as it does with many Christian religions.) Applying "ceremony" to matrimony was essential in beseeching the spirits or Creator for blessings. That the couple be prosperous and bare children (again…because baring healthy offspring was paramount to the survival of the people.) Also, in a more practical sense… Just as in modern day society, rivalry and jealousy naturally existed between individuals vying for suitable mate (bride). Ceremony also served to formally recognize two individuals as a married "couple" within these cultures and/or tribes thus eliminating (as much as possible) the potential for aggression, competition and "in-fighting" which could divide and separate the community in which your very existence depended on. Link to post Share on other sites
Moose Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 We see things differently Pocky.....as do a lot of people on this forum. From my perspective: Everyone is missing the most obvious point here. Man didn't exist until God created him. (Argue with me or not, that's what I believe) The first man and woman was joined together by God. (For this cause shall a man leave his mother and father and cleave to his wife) The first man and woman were here long before your history books, long before the Bible, long before Christianity.......what part of this do you not understand? Besides, nothing would exist, PERIOD, unless God created it. You waisted loads of time posting your dates and your historical facts, because they are null, and void. You yourself wouldn't be here unless God made it possible. He is the creator of ALL things......I can't believe this is so hard for you to understand. Just because we see things differently, and believe in a different time line, doesn't make either one of us a bad person, or a jerk like you called me earlier......just means our opinions differ. One day, we will all know the truth. And I'll make a deal with you if we're able to communicate with one another on that day. I will kiss your ass if I'm wrong.......how's that? Link to post Share on other sites
A Fly onThe Wall Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by Moose He is the creator of ALL things......I can't believe this is so hard for you to understand. I don't think she wasted her time Moose.. The statements you make are YOUR OPINION and are not fact based.. They are belief based. Therefore they only apply to you and not everyone else Almost everybody has a different belief system and opinion Link to post Share on other sites
Moose Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by A Fly onThe Wall I don't think she wasted her time Moose.. The statements you make are YOUR OPINION and are not fact based.. They are belief based. Therefore they only apply to you and not everyone else Almost everybody has a different belief system and opinion That's the whole reason I posted that as, "MY PERSPECTIVE"......you don't have to remind me..... Link to post Share on other sites
westernxer Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by Moose You waisted loads of time posting your dates and your historical facts, because they are null, and void. You yourself wouldn't be here unless God made it possible. Wish I could see things as simply as you do, Moose. But I can't... Link to post Share on other sites
Author Pocky Posted July 27, 2005 Author Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by BlockHead Pocky I get the impression they were political marriages, and that seems like a far cry from homosexual love. Homosexuality has nothing to do with this post. It's not about homosexual marriage. Originally posted by Moose Just because we see things differently, and believe in a different time line, doesn't make either one of us a bad person, or a jerk like you called me earlier......just means our opinions differ. Having different opinions isn't a problem. I'm perfectly comfortable with your position regarding Christianity. You're not the first or the last Christian I will come in contact with as I complete my studies in religion. However, what does make you a jerk, like I called you earlier are moments like this: --------------------------------- Originally posted by TineeTam I'm saying that MARRIAGE is an instution sanctified by God. HE created marriage. Originally posted by Pocky God did not create the concept of marriage. Marriage existed far before the Bible was ever written. Originally posted by Moose Originally posted by Pocky God did not create the concept of marriage. Marriage existed far before the Bible was ever written. This is only your opinion......it's not fact, you don't know, you weren't there, quit assuming you know this as fact......where is your proof? We have ours.....it's documented fact by God Himself. This is only our opinion too, and we admit that....why can't the rest of you? God put MAN and WOMAN together, for this cause shall a man leave his Mother and cleave to his wife.....it's in the Scriptures, this is our proof. You're a living example of how the world twists this concept......hence, what is this world coming to. ---------------------------------- I've made my point - there is nothing more I need to elaborate on. Link to post Share on other sites
Moose Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by westernxer Wish I could see things as simply as you do, Moose. But I can't... And that's ok. I wish everyone could, and someday they might. I realize people on here get upset with me quite easily with my beliefs. And that's ok. It's something that I have to put up with. I need to realize that most people are conformed to the world now, and won't see things as clearly as I do. Or, should I simply say, "the way I do?" I'm saddened by the situation, but it doesn't mean that I'm going to back down on what I see is the truth. And I don't expect anyone else to do so either. It only becomes, "Moose's opinion", when it doesn't fly with the general concenseus on this forum. Others are allowed to post their statements that, "God didn't create marriage", "Homosexualtiy is Ok", and they won't be challenged by their statement, nor would anyone remind them that it is only their opinion.......and that's where I come in, because their so called, "Intelligience", won't intimidate me. So I hope noone expects me to change my belief system just to get along with all the LS'rs.....it won't happen. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Pocky Posted July 27, 2005 Author Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by Moose I realize people on here get upset with me quite easily with my beliefs. And that's ok. It's something that I have to put up with. I'm not asking you to change your belief system nor would I have the audacity to think that I could. I'm merely pointing out that you're biased when it comes to religious debate and I grow tiresome of your melodramatic outbursts that continuously distract from the obvious double standard you have. As a Christian I can say: "Marriage is an institution created by God. God created man and created marriage and this is written in the Bible." And you have no problem with this because you believe it. You find it perfectly acceptable to write this statement and no one should get bent out of shape or say anything about it. However, as a non-Christian if I say: "God didn't create marriage. Marriage existed before the Bible was written." You have a fit. You get overly emotional and you make pissy comments and you imply that what I've written is lies and not fact and if I can't support it then I need to stop making these comments because they don't hold water. That's really the only issue I have. The funny thing is you'll never get it because all you see is - I'm persecuted for my beliefs. Link to post Share on other sites
Horse Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I don't believe the same thing that Moose does, but I agree that this is something that is generally pointless to argue about. You can use reason and historical facts to argue your case all day. You can provide an air tight case, but it won't matter. Faith requires that people disregard physical evidence and reason when it contradicts the word of god. Faith, to a certain degree, is based on the absence of reasonable thought because if there was a reasonable explanation based on facts, it wouldn't be called faith. It would simply be the truth. So you can bring up facts and dates all day and Moose will just disregard them as irrellevant. I don't fault Moose for his opinions on homosexuality or marriage either. If I believed what he believes I would argue the same thing, although more vehemenently. Link to post Share on other sites
Outcast Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 and won't see things as clearly as I do. Believing in something despite all evidence to the contrary is the polar opposite of 'seeing clearly'. It's unfortunate that you don't understand the difference. In fact, your vision is obscured by your refusal to accept any but your own opinion. And opinion is not the same as fact. I'm persecuted for my beliefs. Wrong. You are not 'persecuted' at all. You are merely disagreed with. You insult every human being who has truly suffered persecution by your blithe use of a very serious word. Next you'll be claiming you're a victim of Holocaust. It is deeply offensive that you refuse to understand that to disagree with your stubborn insistence that you know all is not 'persecution'. Link to post Share on other sites
d'Arthez Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Horse, if I believed that the sun revolved around the world, I can also believe that on basis of faith. People can gather all kinds of evidence, but I disregard that, I do so because my faith compels me to do that. It does not prove my faith is valid or correct. It only proves that my faith exists. A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. - Friedrich Nietzsche Link to post Share on other sites
Outcast Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything Exactly. David Koresh was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that he was God. Nobody could have told him otherwise and he, too, would have said he wished others could see as he did. Conviction is proof of nothing other than that someone's mind is closed to the possibility of his own error - a very troubling and dangerous condition, IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites
ReluctantRomeo Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by d'Arthez A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. - Friedrich Nietzsche Lol and Nietzsche was definitely in a position to know this... Link to post Share on other sites
Moose Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 You have a fit. You get overly emotional and you make pissy comments and you imply that what I've written is lies and not fact and if I can't support it then I need to stop making these comments because they don't hold water.And you don't do the same if I were to claim: "God created marriage. Marriage existed long before history books". You can't have it both ways Pokey. It's pointless, and that's what I'm trying to say. You only challenge me because the majority is behind you. And that's ok.....I'm merely pointing out that you're biased when it comes to religious debate and I grow tiresome of your melodramatic outbursts that continuously distract from the obvious double standard you have.Explain my double standard.....please......Wrong. You are not 'persecuted' at all. You are merely disagreed with. You insult every human being who has truly suffered persecution by your blithe use of a very serious word. Next you'll be claiming you're a victim of Holocaust. It is deeply offensive that you refuse to understand that to disagree with your stubborn insistence that you know all is not 'persecution'.Where did you get that quote from? "I'm persecuted for my beliefs.".......huh???? Link to post Share on other sites
Horse Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by d'Arthez Horse, if I believed that the sun revolved around the world, I can also believe that on basis of faith. People can gather all kinds of evidence, but I disregard that, I do so because my faith compels me to do that. It does not prove my faith is valid or correct. It only proves that my faith exists. A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. - Friedrich Nietzsche That's exactly my point. In my opinion the difference between faith and delusion it just what society is willing to accept. It's funny that you brought up the sun revolving around the earth, because Galileo was imprisoned as a heretic because he proved that the earth revolved around the sun. Back then, people chose to disregard or subvert galileo's evidence that the earth revolved around the sun, because it contradicted the teachings of their faith. Today if you seriously argued that the earth is the center of the universe and that sun and everything else revolved around it, most people would think that you are crazy. Link to post Share on other sites
d'Arthez Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 What is crazier, is that 1 in 6 Europeans still think that the Sun revolves around the Earth. Don't know the statistic for Americans, but it probably will be similar. It would be crazy to make any decision in astronomy on basis of a faith that is proven incorrect. Those, who have the faith that the Sun revolves around the Earth, would in all likelihood make mistakes on basis of that faith. And where would the blame fall, for these mistakes? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts