Three Lesbian Women 'marry' Each Other, Claim To Be World's First 'throuple'

[Great Fiction]

in regards to this thread, i'd like to respond to three comments.

first, i want to say to Great Fiction, i can tell, in your comment, you enjoy writing as your medium of communication. i see this because i also prefer this expression. as i read your comment though, i was completely unable to follow your 'train' of thought. i respect your intelligence and am very interested in what you have to say. could you explain to me what you meant? i would appreciate it........

so nice to meet you three here....

Your incessant kindness and complementary encouragement is most prodigious cyberlink - thank you

I gave further explanation above but am happy to answer any questions to furthering specificity

 

[Mitspa]

Please forgive my poetic nature

Can it be that your suggestion that my analogy secures a message of invasion against the church is amiss, for the analogy moves to spiritual grounds regarding an analogous infestation? Please qualify how the analogy is applicable to a worldly invasion upon the church?

Shall the great mountain of old provide the proper descriptor for the invasion you propose, yet what enabled Zerubbabel to accomplish the construction of the Lords house in spite of the mountain's towering size? Shall it be by natural might or power, or by the Spirit of the living God who balances the earth upon its axis and maintains the universe with a glance?

For what moves the heart to repentance? Shall it be a legislator’s pen or the goodness of God? For Christ said that upon this divine revelation of faith that He would build His church?

For where is Paul’s position regarding the law when he charges lawful compulsion to be of none effect, and admonishes that if that same Spirit which raised Christ from the dead shall dwell, then it shall also quicken? For is it not in His transforming power that the heart is changed?

Is there a scriptural mandate in the NT covenant with Christ to legislate society to ambiguous moral positions using an ethic of socialistic violence, or shall our mandate be one of love that moves the good-news of Christ, Him crucified, His resurrection, and His transforming power into the highways and the byways?

Can the church be known for its love, or regrettably for its compulsory legislated violence coming from the belly of wretched socialism?

For when is violence supported scripturally in our NT covenant with Christ to intervene outside the boundaries of despotism? For when is arbitrary violence supported at all?

Please know that I deeply respect your position, example and contributions in Christ and only wish to rationalize to scriptural truth.

Well I can just pick up points of logic here and there in your post..so I have some trouble believing that you desire "to rationalize scriptural truth"..lol You seem to be saying that the Holy Spirit does not need the truth to be declared? Its it the truth that the Spirit came to teach us and the truth of the gospel that is the power of God to save.

 

[polarbear95]

Lol, sounds hilarious because it's weird. I laughed at those news... But it's sickening... Kind of scary. Too bad it's not a joke.

 

[ixoye_8]

Three Lesbian Women 'Marry' Each Other, Claim to Be World's First 'Throuple'
MASSACHUSETTS – Three women in Massachusetts claim they are the world’s first lesbian ‘throuple,’ after they all exchanged...

polygamy is illegal (a felony) in the USA since the 19th century ..

July 1862 - Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, which made polygamy a misdemeanor offense in US territories and other areas where the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction.

it passed both houses and the President signed it ..

March 1882 - Edmunds Act, which reinforced Morrill by making polygamy a felony in the jurisdictions covered by Morrill; also prohibited "bigamous" or "unlawful cohabitation" as a misdemeanor offense, which removed the need to prove that actual marriages had occurred in order to obtain convictions on polygamy related charges.

it passed both houses and the President signed it ..

Polygamy is defined as the practice or condition of having more than one spouse at the same time, conventionally referring to a situation where all spouses know about each other, in contrast to bigamy, where two or more spouses are usually unaware of each other.

 

[polarbear95]

Or what if these 3 women were just very very very best friends to each other so they decided to marry only to mantain the friendship? Just wondering.

 

[Euphemia]

Marriage is not a vehicle to maintain friendships.

 

[polarbear95]

Marriage is not a vehicle to maintain friendships.

Ok, I see.

 

[Euphemia]

Ok, I see.

I think my post was rather terse...please allow me to add to it.

Marriage is a contract between partners who are at the very least friends, but are coming together to experience all that life brings them as a one entity. They share all of life's trials and joys together, which will include the natural outflow of that loving partnership---children. God commands married people to "be fruitful and multiply". Only opposite genders can comply and only opposite genders can please God in their joining.

So, as we are now witnessing an in-your-face insult against God and His basic blueprint for mankind in general, we are seeing this move now on the secular level to accept this kind of complete immorality and are forced to contend with these people detouring around God's parameters for family and trying to establish a kind of pseudo-family which includes the false fruitfulness of bringing children into the mix.

It's diabolical, and it is only the beginning.

 

[ixoye_8]

how to slur semantics 101 ..
marriage vs civil union ..

a marriage is a union in the eyes of God (of a man and woman Mat 19:5) with the authority of God (Mat 16:19) yet that authority vested cannot trump God's will ..
(see Rom 1:26-37 & 1Cr 6:9 & Jud 1:7)

a civil union is a union in the eyes of a government (between two people but varies in states) with the authority of the government (hence the name "civil union") ..

so first of all they are not legal in God's eyes (even if only two) ..
second of all they are not legal in the governments eyes (if more then two) ..

 

[Great Fiction]

polygamy is illegal (a felony) in the USA since the 19th century ..

July 1862 - Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, which made polygamy a misdemeanor offense in US territories and other areas where the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction.

it passed both houses and the President signed it ..

March 1882 - Edmunds Act, which reinforced Morrill by making polygamy a felony in the jurisdictions covered by Morrill; also prohibited "bigamous" or "unlawful cohabitation" as a misdemeanor offense, which removed the need to prove that actual marriages had occurred in order to obtain convictions on polygamy related charges.

it passed both houses and the President signed it ..

Polygamy is defined as the practice or condition of having more than one spouse at the same time, conventionally referring to a situation where all spouses know about each other, in contrast to bigamy, where two or more spouses are usually unaware of each other.

I agree with your premise that U.S. law is documented to precision, yet may I offer perspective regarding the merit of civil law?

A a prerequisite, shall it be obvious with most Christians that the acts of polygamy and bigamy are not scripturally supported, yet can we examine the "role of civil law" in relationship to the church?

Shall U.S. law be clear about bigamy and polygamy, thus the Christian is duty-bound deontologically to adhere to civil law according to scripture, but also is burdened to condemn the very same laws during obedience if the laws themselves cast violence upon the head of the non-aggressor.

For what is just law regarding civil government, and what makes it just?

How did Christ address such laws of violence coming from government and the church?

For these laws of bigamy and polygamy cast violence upon the head of the non-aggressive sinner. Shall the church be wise to morally reject laws of arbitrary violence and support just-law in civil government that supports no ambiguous violence. Shall just law, which reacts to acts of despotic ('aggress') then properly separate the despotic from the non-aggressor with much success.

Shall the virtuous decision of marriage being between one man and one woman be the individual duty of each person, while avoiding the despotic socialism for which laws of violence are manufactured in the confines of legal plunder.

 

[Great Fiction]

I think my post was rather terse...please allow me to add to it.

Marriage is a contract between partners who are at the very least friends, but are coming together to experience all that life brings them as a one entity. They share all of life's trials and joys together, which will include the natural outflow of that loving partnership---children. God commands married people to "be fruitful and multiply". Only opposite genders can comply and only opposite genders can please God in their joining.

So, as we are now witnessing an in-your-face insult against God and His basic blueprint for mankind in general, we are seeing this move now on the secular level to accept this kind of complete immorality and are forced to contend with these people detouring around God's parameters for family and trying to establish a kind of pseudo-family which includes the false fruitfulness of bringing children into the mix.

It's diabolical, and it is only the beginning.

Your description of contractual marriage is moving, and also depicts its sanctity, yet may I be allowed to add perspective regarding societal deterioration?

When vile things pollute in the spirit, what is the superior method to retaliate?

Shall we push back the wickedness in high places with the sword of the spirit, also standing strong in courageous faith to show our Lords bountiful love, or shall we resort to the law? What is your opinion?

 

[Euphemia]

Your description of contractual marriage is moving, and also depicts its sanctity, yet may I be allowed to add perspective regarding societal deterioration?

When vile things pollute in the spirit, what is the superior method to retaliate?

Shall we push back the wickedness in high places with the sword of the spirit, also standing strong in courageous faith to show our Lords bountiful love, or shall we resort to the law? What is your opinion?

Stand on the word and Jesus Christ first and foremost. Laws are the reflection of the conglomerate heart of the people. Where there is complete degradation, you will see law deteriorate---and we are seeing that all before us now. We have before us great opportunity to put our very real and powerful faith to work, but I don't see it happening. The one thought that brings me some comfort is that we would have been completely overrun by the enemy in law and culture but for the grace and power of God already at work among us to hold him back. You know---the restrainer is at work.

 

[ixoye_8]

How did Christ address such laws of violence coming from government and the church?

For these laws of bigamy and polygamy cast violence upon the head of the non-aggressive sinner.

Peter and the Apostles said they must obey God rather then men ..

but I disagree with your last premise ..

also I think you will find that the bible supports monogamy not polygamy ..
even though you may find it in there . .. the same as Jesus saying divorce is not what God intended, but allowed it (in cases of adultery) for hardness of heart ..

by hardness of heart (sin) there is divorce and was David's and Solomon's polygamy .. so why would you think starting off a marriage/civil union in sin (if not repented is a BIG problem) is a good idea ???

the only violence connected would be God's wrath of condemnation ..
and that would be their own free-will choice knowing God's Word on it ..

 

[Great Fiction]

How did Christ address such laws of violence coming from government and the church?

For these laws of bigamy and polygamy cast violence upon the head of the non-aggressive sinner.

Peter and the Apostles said they must obey God rather then men ..

I agree ixoye_8, yet will you also agree that civil governmental control was the empowered theocratic church moving to four primary factions who had delegated civil authority from Rome, and this civil theocratic system was then wisely chastened by Christ when they resorted to violence in the law to be administered upon the adulterous woman?

For your wisdom to point out our highest authority is noted, yet is it not He who also authored a mandate of non-violence and also to stand in the gap for the non-aggressor by His many examples? For our duty to be pure is our contract from Salvation and the sinner who rejects it, rejects their own life; yet shall free-will not be abolished upon earth by despotic men using perverted law that pollutes the delegation.

but I disagree with your last premise ..

also I think you will find that the bible supports monogamy not polygamy ..
even though you may find it in there . .. the same as Jesus saying divorce is not what God intended, but allowed it (in cases of adultery) for hardness of heart ..

by hardness of heart (sin) there is divorce and was David's and Solomon's polygamy .. so why would you think starting off a marriage/civil union in sin (if not repented is a BIG problem) is a good idea ???

I shall confirm its a problem and a bad idea, yet I argue not the measure of sin which is manifest in our society today which leads to much deterioration, but instead the scriptural deontological role of the church for how to deal with it. For we are duty bound to obey the scripture in rejecting the arbitrary violence of men.

For I am no advocate of scriptural sin, yet I am in contrast advocating a proposal for a non-violent deployment in the body of Christ in accordance to our blessed Masters example; an example of non-violence to all non-aggressors in the world, who avoid the aggressive and despotic personality traits of Satan himself, who moves to steal, kill and destroy all things.

the only violence connected would be God's wrath of condemnation ..

and that would be their own free-will choice knowing God's Word on it ..

I will agree that God in that day will move to wrath, yet until his wrath manifests can we agree that free-will moves the soul to choose virtue or sin, and upon each choice shall the realm of unseen spiritual occurrence move the soul to calamity or blessing till that time, or till the corporeal ceases to live?

For love is the current mission, love that covers a multitude of sin, love that is measured by His exemplar demonstration for which we are to emulate. Thus, is it not the churches obligation to avoid supporting modern Sadducean violence to legal-plunder, or modern Pharisean violence to legal-condemnation, but instead instill within our spirit all courage to stand in the gap for the non-aggressive sinner when despotic men hurl arbitrary violence toward them?

If we are commissioned to stand in the gap, are we not also required to challenge the lines of morality in the law, just as Christ did? For the law is force, and force violently overwhelms all who resist it when its unjust. Let us agree in wise vigilance that to stand up benign in advocation for the non-aggressor, when the law is unjust, while also submitting in personal obedience to Christian fundamentals of love, then requires much bravery causing us to be vulnerable lambs standing up to wolves who shred with violence.

 

[ixoye_8]

Thus, is it not the churches obligation to avoid supporting modern Sadducean violence to legal-plunder, or modern Pharisean violence to legal-condemnation, but instead instill within our spirit all courage to stand in the gap for the non-aggressive sinner when despotic men hurl arbitrary violence toward them?

so you think it is not the church's duty to preach what is sin ???
and in doing so it is "legal condemnation ???

then you must think John the Baptist, Jesus and the Apostles were Pharisees
and so is anyone who tells them of the path of destruction they are on ???

NAY .. it is NON LOVE to say nothing ..
MAKE STRAIGHT THE WAY OF THE LORD !!!

I see NO violence from Christians towards those who engage in what God lists as "an Abomination" .. I see Love in telling them the truth ..

 

[CCW95A]

These kinds of things happening in this world today are only manifestations of failure in the spiritual real. Outward actions are based on we believe as truth. If you believe wrong then our actions will also wrong. The physical world can only be changed from with in the spiritual world. This is the war fare we are engaged in, casting down imagination and every high thing that is trying to come against the knowledge of God. Spiritual weapons are our only choice to use in combating this evil.

 

[Great Fiction]

so you think it is not the church's duty to preach what is sin ???

Quite the contrary, for I believe it is the church's duty to execute by example a standard of purity unto demonstration, also by decree, and even to verbal challenge to reject sin, as love remains the motivator. For if we as the body of Christ do not hold to a standard of purity, and challenge for that purity, have we not gone amiss?

For if we fail to warn of the coming death that results from sin, are we not then removed from a demonstration of love? Thus the church has a duty to preach about sin

and in doing so it is "legal condemnation ???

Quite the contrary, for I believe that our Christian communication in love, is to warn, to encourage and to reprove, but would say quickly these verbal obligations are not “legal condemnation" but instead "verbal responsibilities”, yet when “civil law” is used or supported unto violent compulsion to force punitive punishment upon the non-aggressor, then it becomes “legal condemnation” or "legal judgement".

then you must think John the Baptist, Jesus and the Apostles were Pharisees
and so is anyone who tells them of the path of destruction they are on ???

Quite the contrary, for I believe that John the Baptist used no civil law to force violently the baptism of water unto repentance, nor did Christ create or use civil law to force compulsory salvation, and can it be historically accurate that John, Christ and most all of the Apostles were instead “killed by civil law” instead of Christ or John the Baptist using civil law to kill or harm the sinner.

Can history serve immeasurable examples of despotism coming from civil law, and can Oliver Cromwell’s purification of the land serve as a pure despotic example? Can we agree that Oliver's violence in the name of Christ is abhorred all over the world?

NAY .. it is NON LOVE to say nothing ..
MAKE STRAIGHT THE WAY OF THE LORD !!!

I could not agree with you more here my friend.

For we are on a mission in Christ to be bearers of His eternal good news, the truth that sets the spirit free, and to hold every line that should remain pure according to His word; yet can we do so without supporting civil perversions in the law that manifest from the old order of authoritarianism or the modern violent Hegelian ethic?

I see NO violence from Christians towards those who engage in what God lists as "an Abomination" .. I see Love in telling them the truth ..

If a Christian in a spirit of love, then challenges, warns or admonishes the sinner to repent, then no violence is committed.

Yet what of civil law coming from compulsory men using wretched socialism or authoritarianism to bend the ambiguous sinner to penalty, harm and plunder? Shall they be quick upon every opportunity to curtail ambiguous sinful behaviour to their authoritarian gain, and using arbitrary violent despotism to manifest every kind of punitive judgement? For which man in any civil law system is worthy to judge ambiguous sin, and what church is worthy to support the legal judgement? For this judgement unto condemnation belongs to God and God alone; for arbitrary violence is not the church's mission but in contrast a mission of Christ's love to spread the gospel of His saving power.

Can it be plain that like in the days of Christ, John the Baptist and the Apostles, the church is always at a decision-point to repeat the wretched compulsory legacy of the Sadducees and Pharisees using civil law to violently plunder and harm, or in contrast by Christs example, to become a vessel for the blessed power of the Holy Spirit to achieve conversion, edification and maturity unto pure works and spiritual transformation? For if that same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead shall quicken, shall change, shall transform, then what is our virtuous method to change our societies?

Let us resonate to wisdom that our ethic must be consistent using purity as you wisely suggest, yet also let us resist all temptation to succumb to the arbitrary violence of men, less our ethic move away from scripture altogether.

Know this with confidence ixoye_8 that I do not accuse you, or anyone else on this thread of exercising compulsory punitive judgment, and would only hope to offer perspective for how we the church should not support the methods of compulsory men in the confines of evil socialism or authoritarianism.

 

[CCW95A]

The entire world in under condemnation and guilt. They are in pain those who do not know Jesus Christ as their Saviour. Adam and Eve used all the technology they had available to them to try and get rid of it. They sewed fig leaves together, and tried to hide from God thinking it would take away their shame and guilt. Nothing worked, because only the blood of Jesus Christ can take away the guilt, shame, and condemnation that sin brought. Today the world is trying other methods in an attempt to do exactly what Adam, and Eve tried.

Eph 4:17 This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,
Eph 4:18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:
Eph 4:19Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

Those in the world have turned to lasciviousness in an attempt to relieve them selfs from their guilt.
The word, “past feeling” in Eph 4:19 is, “apalgéō;” means, “to feel pain” From this word we get the English word, “analgesic” An analgesic is a drug used in the medical profession to “take pain away”

The word, “ lasciviousness” means, “ license, debauchery, sexual excess, absence
of restraint, insatiable desire for pleasure, perversion.

Homosexuality, and lesbianism is only a part of the perversion the world is using as a analgesic to
try and take their pain away. It is not working, and never will. The only true peace comes from
Jesus Christ and only by his blood is the true analgesic that has taken away our guilt, and shame away
for ever.

The reason most homosexual, and lesbians act this way is because they think, and believe it is OK.
Wrong thinking and wrong believing causes wrong actions. They need prayer and Jesus.

 

[Great Fiction]

These kinds of things happening in this world today are only manifestations of failure in the spiritual real. Outward actions are based on we believe as truth. If you believe wrong then our actions will also wrong. The physical world can only be changed from with in the spiritual world. This is the war fare we are engaged in, casting down imagination and every high thing that is trying to come against the knowledge of God. Spiritual weapons are our only choice to use in combating this evil.

Shall a tangible transition manifest in society from vigilance, to heed your wise assessment that power is indeed shifted in the spirit; yet to add further what is the natural obligation also for the church? Is there not also a natural obligation beyond our personal conditioning of purity and love extended toward the sinner? I should think unto obedience to reject the despotism of men in Christs exemplar example to defend the ambiguous sinner from despotic earthly condemnation, to work hard in our honorable exchanges, to follow the Spirits lead, and minister to those in proximity?

Thus let us reject the despots offer to save society with a myriad of violent laws; yet also let us do so not for political gains but ethical ones, while demonstrating the irreproachably love of Christ. Let us agree that this is a duty of non-violence in the natural to stand benign, but unto massive violence in the spirit to empower angels to humiliate demons, where devilish rulers of darkness in the spirit will no longer have liberty to compel the prisoners of lust to move their pens to broad despotism?

For what incredible courage the disciples demonstrated in boldness, yet brutality from the condemning church would overwhelm the corporeal for a simple benign stance of virtue.

 

[CCW95A]

Shall a tangible transition manifest in society from vigilance, to heed your wise assessment that power is indeed shifted in the spirit; yet to add further what is the natural obligation also for the church? Is there not also a natural obligation beyond our personal conditioning of purity and love extended toward the sinner? I should think unto obedience to reject the despotism of men in Christs exemplar example to defend the ambiguous sinner from despotic earthly condemnation, to work hard in our honorable exchanges, to follow the Spirits lead, and minister to those in proximity?

Thus let us reject the despots offer to save society with a myriad of violent laws; yet also let us do so not for political gains but ethical ones, while demonstrating the irreproachably love of Christ. Let us agree that this is a duty of non-violence in the natural to stand benign, but unto massive violence in the spirit to empower angels to humiliate demons, where devilish rulers of darkness in the spirit will no longer have liberty to compel the prisoners of lust to move their pens to broad despotism?

For what incredible courage the disciples demonstrated in boldness, yet brutality from the condemning church would overwhelm the corporeal for a simple benign stance of virtue.

You took the words right out my mouth, what ever it is you just said. It sure sounds good. I do agree that violence in the physical is not the way to go, as the problem is in the spirit where the battle between light, and darkness, truth and error are raging using only spiritual weapons that are mighty through God.