Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

Hi everyone ...:D

Just thought I'd start a thread and try to get our brains going ... our fingers tapping ... and some real interesting conversation ...

I know this has been talked about before ... but since this is a new board it hasn't been talked about 'here' ... ;)

So, what does this mean ...

Will there be no marriage during the thousand year reign ... and/or after for those who die ...?

Love to hear your thoughts ... I have some of my own ... but am busy with some other stuff ... but will add them later ... hopefully after ya'll have posted yours ....:P;)

Lots of love to you dear ones ... your sis ... with love and hearts (can't wait til we get some added) BR:D

PS ... :D

I'm just making 'footsteps in the snow' ... as a wise sister said over at the cafe ... and it just seems to make the scenery that much prettier ... I guess it is because there is no 'pollution' ... or 'smelly car exhausts' and such to dirty it ... just lovely footsteps marking where are family is going and where they have been ... I too loved that illustration dear Malkah!:D

Was there marriage in Adam's day?

Certainly not in the way we have it today. For the last 5000 years, marriage was supposed to be a protection. What happens when we need no protection? As recently as 120 years ago, only about 20% of Americans actually "got married." Common law marriage was acceptable from sea to shining sea without the churches raising a big stink about it.

I know, I know...my friend Watcher wonders why we'd need it with an already full earth. I wonder why we would need it at all! When your "yes" means "yes," the commitment stands before God...and it's a lot cheaper. I don't know about you married folks out there...but children just aren't THE priority...they are the blessings of THE priority. Even without children, there's still THE priority.

gus

Yes Gus,

But I'm wondering what are you talking about when you say priorty???

I like to look at the animal kingdom, many animals 'mate' for life. The creation of man and woman and the bringing of them together was part of the creative days. As for the purpose of children, if the earth does get 'full' we will just stop having children! Not like now, with man not able to care for his brother and yet we just keep having kids...Being married is about more than just being taken care of and having children, but for 1000's of years this was the main way for a woman to be cared for.

Digging

Dear Gus,

As a former wedding photographer, I got to see firsthand the ridiculous amount of money that goes into throwing a wedding. The clothes, the site of the wedding, the site of the reception, the minister, the photographer, the videographer, the flowers, the cake, the food for the reception, the dj for the reception, the gifts for the bridesmaids and groomsmen, the honeymoon, the limo, the airplane to take you to the honeymoon.....

It is simply absurd.

This is just my own personal opinion, but I think that marriages in the future might commence with something like the following:

The bride wears a simple dress- her best/favorite one, and waits either at her house or her parents' house, perhaps with friends and family. At a pre-arranged time, the groom comes to the door, and asks her to come with him. She then goes with him to his house, and they are now married. There is no need for a minister to preside over any ceremony, no need for "witnesses", as God and everyone in heaven is in attendance, and nothing can take place in opposition to his will.

Anyway, this is just my jaded, materialistic-weary view.

I think everybody needs to decide for themselves what manner of pomp and ceremony they all need to express their eternal love. After all, its the marriage that counts, not the wedding.

Much love to all,
Sis Micah

Micah, it seems a shame that after such a showy display everything seems to go downhill. I hope that it doesn't sound too depressing, but what an awful way to start a life together! I'd rather invest 10K in my daughter's retirement account than throw it at a couple hundred drunken revelers.

Digs, THE priority? Completeness! Filling the earth was a secondary consideration.

Common law marriage is still legal in Montana. I'm a believer.

gus

Hi,

In one way people who believe that all persons go to heaven when reading the words of Jesus in Luke 20:34 and 35 and apply this to themselves… it makes it easier. But for some of us who have belief in living on earth, that same scripture in Luke makes it hard to decipher whom Jesus is referring to
Jesus’ answer was direct and devastating. He speaks of two ages, “this age” and “that age,” which are very different from each other.

Sis BruisedReed this subject is soo interesting and I'd love to read your thoughts afterwards.


Hi Gus,

Lovely to catch up with you here. I'm in agreement re common law marriage. Here in Australia it's equal to being legally married. It's outlawed in the JW community these days although many years ago (if I remember correctly) a couple could take a vow in front of the elders to remain faithful until they could make arrangements to legally marry. It's difficult for me to see how love can be legalised though.

Tessa

Bang on guys!

Ever notice how the bible does not say when the Jews or Christians got married they went before a priest! The man went & got his wife and brought her home, then the first dinner they had as a new family was shared with others. Funny YHWH didn't use the word marriage in Genesis??

Digging

Its 3 am here, and I was lying in bed, trying to go to sleep, but a thought wouldn't let me sleep, so I decided the only way to get rid of it and get to sleep was to post it. So here it is:

I'm 32 years old and a virgin. I want to get married. I want to have kids. But I don't want to do it in this crummy old world.

To say that if I don't do it now, I will miss out on the joys of marriage and having and rearing children FOR ALL ETERNITY, is NOT FAIR!!!

And for those of you who say, "We'll fill up the earth", I say, "Duh!"

That was God's charge to mankind: "Become fruitful, and fill the earth." That was only the first charge. What would have come next if Adam and Eve hadn't sinned? We don't know- right now! But we will know in the future when it is accomplished.

The next charge may be to become fruitful, and fill that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet, or that planet.............you get the point, I'm sure.

The universe is huge, bigger than you or I can even comprehend. To say that our one, lonely little planet is the only one that will ever be inhabited would leave the rest of the Universe empty, barren. If that is the case, then what the hell is all that space for????!!!!!!

Sorry to resort to bad language, but this short-sightedness on the part of those who think all of humanity has to be confined to planet earth for all eternity really drives me buggy.

To quote "Contact": "Seems like a waste of space." Literally.

Anyway, these are the thoughts that kept me awake. I go now to the land of slumber, perchance to dream of that future world(s), and my future life, where I live happy, in eternity, fulfilled.

Much love to all my brothers and sister,
Sis Micah

Well I have a further question. What was going through Jesus disciples' heads when after he said, "I say to YOU that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery,” that they said to him: "If such is the situation of a man with his wife, it is not advisable to marry???" (Matthew 19:9, 10)

:crazyeyes:

For the longest time marriage was an agreement between 2 people, and it was considered appropriate. It was not a "religious ceremony". Then, The Catholic Church took control of it:............quote
[That Christian marriage (i.e. marriage between baptized persons) is really a sacrament of the New Law in the strict sense of the word is for all Catholics an indubitable truth. According to the Council of Trent,   http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15030c.htm , this dogma has always been taught by the Church, and is thus defined in canon i, Sess. XXIV: "If any one shall say that matrimony is not truly and properly one of the Seven Sacraments of the Evangelical Law, instituted by Christ our Lord, but was invented in the Church by men, and does not confer grace, let him be anathema." ]

The early Puritans were so anti Catholic that they forbid any religious ceremony associated with marriage. By now, even Jehovah's Witnesses' have adopted the Catholic ritual......................e--m

Hi Folks

First, we must remember the context. Who was Jesus talking to, and for what purpose?

"On that day Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came up to him and asked him:..." (Mathew 22:23)

So Jesus was speaking to the Sadducees, a Jewish sect that did not believe in a resurrection.

Their question was to catch him out in regard to the resurrection. They didn't believe in it in the first place!

"Consequently, in the resurrection, to which of the seven will she be wife? For they all got her." (Mathew 22:28)

Jesus' answer was primarily about the resurrection, not about marriage. That is why he said to them:

"You are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God." (22:29)

The scriptures spoke of a resurrection of the dead (including passages in Isaiah, Ezekiel and Daniel), so this was why Jesus said, "you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God."

Luke's account clarifies which resurrection Jesus is referring to:

"Jesus said to them: “The children of this system of things marry and are given in marriage, but those who have been counted worthy of gaining that system of things and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. In fact, neither can they die anymore, for they are like the angels, and they are God’s children by being children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:34-36)

That they have been "counted worthy", and "neither can they die anymore" sounds exactly like those in the first resurrection.

"And I saw thrones, and there were those who sat down on them, and power of judging was given them. Yes, I saw the souls of those executed with the ax for the witness they bore to Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had worshiped neither the wild beast nor its image and who had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand. And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and will rule as kings with him for the thousand years." (Rev 20:4-6)

Jesus could not have been describing the second resurrection, because that is a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.

So I guess there is a trade-off. Those in the first resurrection don't get to marry, but rule with Christ as kings and priests.

Those in the second resurrection do get to marry, but don't "come to life" until the thousand years are ended.

Or something...

:D

Goooood morning ... :D

Love the comments so far ... interesting views and questions ...

Well, before I run upstairs and start making breakfast for the family I wanted to try to jot a couple of quick thoughts down as I share my first coffee of the day with ya'll ... hmmm hmmm good ... can't wait until we get more emoticons up ... hopefully today ...:P

It is interesting what some have said about saying their vows before our "God" ... and that others said about 'walking to the home of the groom like it was practiced in Israel's time ... (wonder if they still do it that way?) my son has mentioned such things to me as well ... considering 'handfasting' is closer to what the Bible teaches than the modern day practice of the 'legality' stuff ... the only thing I guess that comes to mind in the case of 'common law marriage' ... is that (at least for most states and provinces) it is the 'law' to be 'legal' ... and would that fall under ... 'obey Caesar's law' ... and 'having a good testimony from the outside' in the case of our 'morality'?

Anyway ... to my thoughts ...;):crazyeyes::P

When Jesus was speaking to ... to those crafty old Sadducees who were seeking to trick him as usual ... to make him look foolish in the eyes of the people ... to cause them to doubt his love for 'law' (old law covenant) ... by using questions and scenarios that pushed credulity to the limit ... Jesus IMHO had to be 'cautious as a serpent' and yet innocent as a dove'... which he surely was was he not my dear family!!

The answer he gave at Matthew was another, no doubt in long list, of examples of our Lord having to chose his words with care ... to shut the mouths of the opposers ... while at the same time doing so in the hopes of reaching their hearts if possible ... and hopefully causing others who were listening to WANT to know more ... to ask questions ... to dig into the deeper meaning of his words to see what was under the surface ...

Matt. 22:30 ...

30 for in the resurrection neither do men marry nor are women given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.

One thing that perhaps is worth considering in this verse is the TIME being spoken of ...

It is 'THE RESURRECTION' is it not ... I looked up the word for 'IN' in strong's and this is some of the definitions ... there is a lot so I will just put up the hopefully relevant ones ...;)

The word for 'in' is ... en ...

denoting (fixed) position (in place, time, or state), and (by impl.) instrumentality (medially or constructively), i.e. a relation of rest (intermediate between 1519 and 1537) .... Often used in compounds, with substancially the same import; rarely with the verbs of motion

1519 eis ... ice ... to or into (indicating the point reached or entered), of place, time, or (fig.) purpose (result, etc.)

1537 ...

ex ... a primary prep. denoting origin (the point whence motion or actrion proceeds), from, out )of place, time, or cause; lit. or fig.; direct or remote)

Soooo ...

Now comes my pondering ... This idea of NOT MARRYING ... doesn't 'seem' to be for an EXTENDED period of time ... but rather ONLY DURING THE RESURRECTION PERIOD ...

Now I guess comes the questions ... of WHEN does this 'resurrection' occur ... and how long is it ...??

From my readings and studies ... I have been mulling over the ideas that the resurrection may not perhaps occur as I had thought from what I have been taught ...

It would 'seem' to occur WHEN JESUS ARRIVES ... and then the RIGHTEOUS and the UNRIGHTEIOUS are JUDGED ... those who are alive at the time ... and those who will be resurrected ... then we have the 1000 years to do whatever Jehovah tells us that period of time is for ... probably some of what the scrolls might be for?

Anyway ... I DO NOT think that Jehovah would withhold ANYONE ... resurrected or not ... from the GIFT of sharing their lives with a loving companion ... as that was what he obviously intended when he created Adam and Eve ... and what his Son reiterated by sticking to our mates ...

And yes, gus ... I tend to agree that there is TWO purposes to marriage ... a COMPLETENESS ... and a CREATIVE ... both are BEAUTIFUL are they not!!

Well, I gotta go ... didn't really say very clearly all I wanted to say, but I need to feed those hungry people upstairs ... before they eat me ...:D;):P

Love to all ... check back later ... your sis BR ...:D:D

Hi brother interpretum ... so good to see you ...

I just HAD to quickly say something ... I know ... the hungry people ... oh well ... don't think they'll mind waiting the couple of extra minutes while I post this ...

Loved your reasonings ... will mull it over while cooking ... however just a thought as to your ending ...

Isn't that Scripture in Revelation ... 'and the rest of the dead didn't come back to life' .... an INTERPOLATION ... that it WASN'T in the original writings but was added by the Catholic church?

When you ADD that verse ... it makes SO MANY other Scriptures NOT MAKE SENSE ... but when you TAKE IT OUT ... things become LESS muddy ...?

Just a thought ...

Your sis with luv as always ... BR :D ... gotta run ...

If I may give a thought, and it's just a thought, there are no scriptural support for what I believe.

I believe that earth is the only planet inhabited by intellegent(?) life. While it is possible that in the future when the earth is filled, humans will be able to travel to other planets and begin the whole process again in populating the universe.

It is my opinion, that when Christ's Kingdom has accomplished what it was set up to do, reconcile man back to God, so that God can be all in all.

the Church (the 144,000) who will be "unemployed" after the 1,000 year reign, will each be given a galaxy to create life and populate.

Hopefully we'll all be human, and not look like something out of a Star Wars cafe or Star Trek.

RR