Andrew Wilson Tells Lauren Chen That Marriage Is a Sin?!? Wut?

[@TheSilverJedi]

This Andrew fellow is a gift from God to me. I’m a 50 year old widower who’s been struggling to back into the dating scene. I have sons who’ve been struggling even more to meet good young women. I was dabbling in the Whatever podcast/red-pill/manosphere content to get a sense of what the modern dating scene was like, maybe gain a little perspective. All the while praying and looking to God for guidance. Andrew is such an off-putting person with such ugly and wrong spiritual views that I’ve stopped watching all of that stuff altogether. I firmly believe that God used his terrible character to save me from going down a bitter path. Now I pray for others to be saved from this garbage as well.

[@HaleStorm49]

That is not the direction I thought you were going at the onset... At all. I appreciate your raw honesty and sympathize with anyone who is in the dating scene in 2024. My sons will begin to date soon and my wife and I discuss our concerns/observations frequently. The adversary has been hard at work not just destroying families but preventing them from forming. Re: Andrew. It's a good reminder for those like myself that tend to come off as arrogant and/or lacking humility. It's a fine line and the holy Spirit must be able to participate & deliver the message effectively. Thank you.

[@CryoftheProphet]

Yeah, Andrew does not talk or act like any Christian I have ever met. If anything, he makes Christians look weak.

[@elibennett6168]

Good for you! "8 Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable-if anything is excellent or praiseworthy-think about such things.Whatever is good whatever is pure is a phrase from Philippians 4:8 in the Bible, which urges Christians to think about things that are true, noble, right, lovely, admirable, excellent, or praiseworthy" Philippians 4:8

[@PB_324]

💯 true. He's awful. There's NOTHING godly in this " man" . And his wife is just as bad. I've dirt on them that I won't say here BUT I'll say both are hypocrites. More importantly, Condolences on your wife. That's so hard and I'm sorry. 🙏 For you and your family.

[@hanng1242]

I was only about to get through half of the stream before quitting in disgust. I had expected a reasoned discussion, but Wilson just bullied Chen until she just went along with what he said to be agreeable. This is *not* the sort of Orthodox apologetics that we need. To give cover to the caddish "Red Pill movement" with Orthodoxy is shameful. Wilson's fundamental error here is that he has sharply divided the world into "Christians" and "Secularists" as though different rules apply to each. Perhaps we could call one the Dar al Islam and the other the Dar al Harb wherein rape is bad *unless* it is done to sex slaves taken in Jihad. Christianity is not the rejection of creation; it is its renewal. It is not the condemnation of non-Christians; it is an invitation to them to accept salvation. Marriage pre-exists Christianity and the Church; heck, it pre-exists the Fall. Marriage, therefore, is good - just as everything God created is good. From a secular standpoint, the purpose of marriage is to ensure that the children are raised by their biological parents. The pleasures of sex exist to encourage procreation, and the comforts of companionship in marriage exist to encourage people who procreate to stick around and assume the responsibility for raising the procreated children. What Christianity does for marriage is to take the pre-existing institution and transform it into a sacrament, that is, to make it an instrument of salvation. It is sort of like how the Church takes bathing and transform bathing into Baptism. Does bathing only clean a person if the Holy Spirit in involved? Is it wrong to eat bread unless it is the Eucharist? The sacrament of marriage takes the pre-existing institution and makes it an icon of the Church. The sacrament means that the married couple are not only responsible for raising the children but are now also enjoined to help each other work out their salvation with fear and trembling. It takes an institution about parentage only, and both requires, and enables, the couple to incarnate God's covenant with Israel as it out to have played out. The husband, as the icon of Christ, must love his wife as God loves His people; it seems to me that this means that the husband may not divorce his wife *even for adultery* because God continued to seek after Israel despite its unfaithfulness to Him in seeking after other gods and breaking his commandments. This refusal to abandon His people and love for them is so deep that God sent His Only-begotten Son to die on the Cross to save and renew Israel as the Church. This is what loving one's wife as Jesus loves His Church means. Dying for her physical safety (by, say, stopping the burglar) is presupposed; the love is realized by the husband completely forgiving the wife regardless of how much she hurts him. As for the wife, she must submit to her husband as the Church submits to Christ. This means trusting his judgment even over her own feelings just as Christian should trust that God will be with him even if he is called to do something that the world will deem foolish. It means respecting the husband and doing what she can to bolster his authority and reputation (such as at least not complaining about him, but preferably to speak well of him, to her friends). It does *not* mean that she must tolerate actual abuse any more than a parishioner is required to accept spiritual, physical or sexual abuse from the hierarchy. Wifely obedience does not mean that a wife must steal something if her husband orders her to; it does not mean that she must allow her husband to abuse their children; it does not mean that she is prohibited from speaking up if she observes her husband do wrong. It is not that a marriage outside the Church is sinful, but rather that a marriage within the Church calls the couple to perfection. Talk of validity and invalidity sounds kind of Roman Catholic, not Orthodox, to me. We are not interested in cramming the Mysteries into an Aristotelian framework with distinctions between form and matter, valid vs licit, or things like that. Incidentally, according to Roman Catholic sacramental theology, a marriage outside the Church *is* valid (but perhaps not licit) because the matter of the sacrament is the agreement to be married, and the ordinary minister of the sacrament is the couple itself. For us, the test is simpler. Does the Orthodox Church require a married couple to be re-married if they convert to Orthodoxy - even if akribeia, not economia, is applied? The answer, of course, is no. Thus, whatever nomenclature one wants to use to describe the extra-ecclesial marriage, it is nevertheless something that accepts as real; it cannot be sinful because the Church is not an accomplice to sin. Because the Church will accept the reality of a pre-existing extra-ecclesial marriage when it is brought into the Church, said marriage cannot have been sinful.

[@HaleStorm49]

Excellent articulation. I appreciate your insights. I've had some Trent Horn videos earmarked for responses for a while. Hopefully when I get around to one I'll get feedback of this quality.

[@truegravee]

2:10 Two things! 1. Debate andrew on this. He debates anybody regardless of the size of the channel. 2. Secular marriage is not the same as religious marriage. Marriage is a sacrament done through the church. A legal contract through the state is not the same and doesn't carry the same weight without the church. We have abused the sacrament of marriand now the nuclear family is falling apart.

[@HaleStorm49]

How is it different and more importantly how is it sinful?

[@truegravee]

@@HaleStorm49 With state marriages, you're bound by the state, which accepts homosexual marriage. Furthermore, you're not participating in the apparatus of the church and the body of Christ. As a sacrament , we give the church authority over our union. With state marriages you give the state authority over your marriage. A state doing everything in its power to destroy the Is nucular Because it's not a legitimate marriage it's fornication. Sex out of marriage is always A sin.

[@HaleStorm49]

You didn't really outline any meaningful distinctions between state marriage and church marriage - which is why I made the video. Re: sinning What other examples are there of sinning where it results in people being happier, more fulfilled, statistically well rounded, and where there are more mutual benefits to society that result? Does this happen with abortion? With h*m*sex**lity? With bank robbing? With adultery? With corn addiction? Which of the ten commandments can you break and life gets better for everyone? I'd love to see even one example. Both of your arguments (and Andrew's) are essentially "because we say it is" which is fine if that's your belief system - bit it doesn't manifest like every.other.sin and there is an obvious reason for that. it isn't a sin. That's the debate Lauren and Andrew should have had but didn't. I think if Lauren (and modern christianity) understood the highest ideal of marriage it would have been a much more insightful and productive conversation. Andrew's right the the Christ pillers don't have the remedy - but neither does Andrew. The church of Jesus Christ does - and more people need to hear it.

[@michaelnewswanger2409]

@@HaleStorm49 I see no place in the epistles where secular marriage is treated as invalid, it is certainly not treated as sinful. Saying a "non sacramental" marriage is sinful condemns the majority of marriage throughout history. Jesus says that marriage was from the beginning implying that there is a design for all people for all time. Paul says that the pagan is capable of following the law written on his heart. Thus marriage, if it is a man and woman committed to each other, cannot be a sin. Even if they are pagans when they follow the design of God they are doing something righteous. I have no idea what these people are smoking but their arguments against marriage seem very ad hoc.

[@BazedPhilosophy]

@@HaleStorm49 Secularists have no good reasons for marriage. All the reasons for marriage that you mention may be good reasons for why one should get married, but the secularists denied that very framework at the outset by being a secularist. So they aren’t left with any good reasons for why they should get married.

[@elibennett6168]

For those who are non LDS and love Jesus - Christ is very clear that marriage ends with death and no one will be married in heaven since we will be like the angels (Mark 12:25). This was in answer to the "who's wife is the woman who marries again after previous husbands die), so pretty straightforward. If you teach something other than this you are teaching something anti Christ.

[@HaleStorm49]

This is incorrect. This is the result of common core christianity. IE Doctrine by committee.

[@elibennett6168]

@@HaleStorm49 It is indeed correct. If you would like to argue using Christian scripture, I'll hear your points, but I do not accept LDS writings. They teach a different gospel. Death as a boundary of marriage is likewise in 1 Corinthians 7: "A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord." 40 In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is--and I think that I too have the Spirit of God."

[@HaleStorm49]

@@elibennett6168 Sure. You mean creedalist when you say "christian" but it's not just an argument of which words are inspired but how they are interpreted. For example using Mark 12: 23 In the resurrection therefore, when *THEY* shall rise, whose wife shall she be of *THEM*? for the seven had her to wife. _The question is not about what happens to everyone, it's about what happens to the individuals in this very specific (and ridiculous) example meant to trip up the Master. The pronouns are they/them_ 24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? _How well do you need to understand the scriptures and discern God's power to comprehend that marriage ends at death? Zero. Zilch. Nada. Christ is criticizing them, not for suggesting there is marriage in heaven, but for failing to understanding the doctrine well enough that they asked the question in the way that they did. They should know that under the law of Moses the additional marriages are just to provision for the wife and children and ensure the family name is preserved. Only the original marriage would have been sealed/bound on Earth and in Heaven._ The Sanhedrin did not understand or teach the doctrine correctly, despite understanding it better than 4th century creedalists. 25 For when they shall rise from the dead, *THEY* neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven. _Nowhere does Christ even imply this anecdote applies to anyone other than *THEY*. The only marriage still in force is to the original husband. The sibling marriages served a purpose in mortality only. Believers don't even pause to question how weird it is that you have to marry an in law under the temporal law? Absent the understanding or eternal and temporal marriages this policy is ...how do the atheists say it? Weird. Misguided and uninspired (but well meaning) Pastors and Priests who do not possess authority beyond the power vested in them by the state have decided at their councils that these verses apply to everyone. It tells you more about the pastors than the doctrine._ Paul was clarifying how the policy of temporal marriage worked now that they non longer adhered to the law of Moses. The LDS doctrine has a more nuanced view of those same verses which takes into account the scriptures and the power of God. Modern creedalism takes that verse out of context and and applies it at scale to everyone, everywhere, all at once. With God all things are possible.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@elibennett6168 I should add that there is some Tomi Lahren "my truth" irony in the doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. God will not force you to accept any doctrine against your will. God is pro choice. If you are convinced there is no marriage in heaven - then you won't be. Your marriage will be aborted at death and God will honor your choice.

[@elibennett6168]

@@HaleStorm49 It is NOT creedalism to argue from scripture. Creedalism has to do with sayings outside of scripture, which is not at all what is being done. You have not proved that the Christian scriptures state marriage goes on in heaven; therefore, there is no compelling evidence you are correct in what you say The marriage situation that they attempted to trip up Jesus on was Levirate marriage, and it is a real marriage - otherwise it would not be called a marriage nor would children be legitimate. Only the first born son was raised in the name of the deceased brother so that the name and property rights would continue throughout the generations. However, the other children were indeed the issue of brother who engaged in the Levirate marriage. It was used to argue with Jesus because there was a duty to provide for the deceased brother's lineage. What they did not understand is exactly what Jesus indicated: angels do not marry and believers will be like them in the after life. They were so focused on physical life, they missed the spiritual, and the resurrection to imperishable bodies that do not marry. This syncs up nicely with the other scripture I cited that indicates a woman is no longer bound to her husband when he dies, as well as the corresponding scripture that shows a man is likewise bound. They are free to marry again because the bond ends at death as shown in scripture. And It IS a marriage because it is the same Greek word root that all the marriage scriptures use.

[@ericrumsey4789]

From a Catholic: this is a crazy idea that would suggest all marriages pre Christ are sinful, entailing that God himself encouraged sin. Marriage is not necessarily sacramental on the Catholic view. It is sacred, but only sacramental within a Christian sacramental context.

[@nemanjamirkovic7584]

Marriage in Genuine Orthodox Churche is a Holy Mistery - Holy Spirit is involved. It can't be compared with secular marriage which is not a marriage in God's eyes. Real marriage can start only through real genuine Orthodox priest or bishop, who can give them the God's Grace of the Holy marriage sacrament.

[@HaleStorm49]

Orthodox might be the closest thing I've seen to Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints doctrine which is that marriage is for all time and eternity when performed by someone with authority to "bind and seal" on Earth and in Heaven. Marriage was not designed to end or be affected by death.

[@CryoftheProphet]

This idea that non Christians cant get married is insane.

[@elibennett6168]

The bible clearly recognizes non-Christian marriages. Did not Pontius Pilate have a wife?

[@CryoftheProphet]

@@elibennett6168 Jesus clearly talked about non believers in the context of having wives and husbands. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman.

[@elibennett6168]

@@CryoftheProphet We agree - and there are specific, non-debatable examples such as Pilate and his wife that nullify the claim marriage is not valid if not done in a church. I am aware the Catholic church does not recognize civil (justice of the peace) marriages but protestants do, generally speaking. I would say there are some distinctions between government sanctioned marriage licenses and the Christian ceremony as a religious commitment. Christians making vows before God should be doubly careful.

[@CryoftheProphet]

@@elibennett6168 the government has nothing to do with the vows two people take. Regardless of whether they are Christians or not. We wouldn’t tell no. Christians it’s a sin when they don’t steal because they reject God. There is no law against righteousness.

[@elibennett6168]

@@CryoftheProphet I'm having trouble following your sentences (steal?); however, you are incorrect that government has nothing to do with marriage. Marriage vows are public, to be recognized by society as well as by God. The government does indeed have a vested interest in recognizing legal elements of marriage for the care and protection of children, and addressing marital assets and inheritance rights. This goes along with obeying earthly authorities whom God sets in place to govern. For the Christian couple, marriage as a religious ceremony is simultaneous with the legal union. The religious ceremony is of greater meaning, but they would not dispense with the lesser. It is critical that there is public consenting and no coercion claim possible.

[@IntoAllTruth.]

As always, very well reasoned. Of course, marriage is never a sin and is always the very best arrangement, whether secular or no. The difference is that marriage reaches its highest eternal purpose in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Or, as the Savior said, it becomes more abundant and fruitful, not having an end like the marriages of the world.

[@HaleStorm49]

This has started to irritate me more as Red Pillers and Manosphere content is raging. Fresh and Fit, Whatever, Pearl, etc. They are riding the marriage animosity wave & when they do have "christians" on the show...even the articulate guests come off as feckless. Andrew was right about the "Christ pillers" having no solutions. But neither does he. The answer is eternal marriage.

[@JC-pi9em]

Are you serious, did you even think through what you're saying? If marriage is a holy sacrament between a man and a women, why should people who reject the existence of Jesus Christ take part in it? And if it isn't a holy sacrament why can't anyone get married? And if a secular person gets married and has a kid or kids, how is that okay in your book. The secular will force their secular beliefs on the kid, condemning them to hell. That kid will be taught to disbelieve in God; don't you think that's immoral?

[@HaleStorm49]

@@JC-pi9em Did you not watch the video?

[@JC-pi9em]

@@HaleStorm49 Yes, on 1.5 speed. By the way do you believe the ends justify the means, this is a question on top of the other.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@JC-pi9em Yes you don't understand the doctrine. Marriage and family bring people closer to God and his design for his children. You have it exactly backwards. yes I'd prefer that every kid has a mother and father - that's how God designed the family. Yes I would prefer them to be married by God's priesthood for eternity, but if not - then in a sectarian church with religious support, but if not then by the state authority where they are committing to each other and making a lifetime vow for the sake of their children. Everything after that is a worse option. Why would God or anyone want those for people they care about? The fact that Andrew (and you, presumably) don't understand the highest order of marriage doesn't mean you will be damned to hell either. Its a foolish assumption.

[@elibennett6168]

Marriage is part of common grace - of course the marriage is valid. People got married before there were churches and preachers to marry them (isn't this obvious?). Marriage is declared good before the fall. Even if the marriage fails, any children born are legitimate. Even if the marriage fails, you can honor God through your witness of how you handle difficult life events. And you may be among the (moderate) majority where the marriage doesn't fail, meaning you have a partner for life. Just because parents are secular, does not mean the children won't come to faith - why would anyone assume that? Same goes in the opposite direction, children of Christian marriages may turn from the faith. That's not for anyone else to presuppose. The reality is, people generally live better lives to build a future for their children, than they would without children. Not hard and fast in cases, but there it is.

[@PsychoBible]

I expect better from Lauren. That was painful seeing her fall for that trap.

[@HaleStorm49]

💯

[@bagonza9593]

We were all gentiles (secular) at some point in time. Secular people can also change and their posterity can be religious

[@MikeyForLife]

The consciousness of sin is the issue. Hebrews tells us we should not have a conscious of our sin. Jesus took our sin in his body, that body was crushed with sin in it, the body resurrected SIN DID NOT. If God no longer remembers my sin when I’m saved why should I???

[@gandalfthegamer4067]

1 Corinthians 13 spoke it said love from God is an agreement to do some things all the time and some things so long as it's not provoked which is not easily accomplished, while unprovoked Love is a kindness that enacts to preserve and protect you and it never lies to you. I remember one time I had a dream out of the 8,000+ times I've been asleep a dream that has not happened before it has not happened since, and I've had the recipe to make it hundred a days before it happened and hundreds of days after it happened. I could have dreamed about anything, I dreamed about a dog, which is a symbol of unbelief in the Bible and Jesus part of Matthew 7:6 give not that which is holy unto the dogs, a dog could have done anything it dug a hole, it could have dug any kind of hole, it dug a very deep hole and anything could have been at the bottom of that hole but a few verses in the Bible come to mind and anything could have happened when I climbed out of that hole but part of Romans 10 said that you must believe that Jesus has been raised from the dead to be saved. In the beginning was the word and the Word was God in the word was with God John 1:1 the word" or the message of God" was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld the glory of the only begotten of the father full of grace and truth. John 1:14 Wisdom is the principal thing therefore get wisdom in and all that getting get understanding proverbs 4:7 Understanding is a Wellspring of Life unto him that has it but the instruction of fools is folly proverbs 16:22 I found it important that if somebody comes to me and says "there's nothing worth fighting for" "that doesn't require a fight." That to know their heart I would have had to stay the whole time and not just for the first part It is also the case that the hundred of days I prayed for help and saving have I ner been led to any other name. Not Buddha not ba'hai, not Shinto not Jehovah by himself, not Muhammad, not Hindu, none but he who sits at the right hand of the father. I also want you to study to see how deception can be so subtle. How one word missing or one word altered from the original idea and intent can change a conversation. But numbers 12:6 and if there be a prophet among you I shall make myself known to him and in a vision and in a dream. If you believe God's real like I believe God is real why don't you just start talking to Jesus and find out.

[@aviator037]

Marriage is NOT mandatory. The Bible says if you are single do not seek to be married and if you are married then do not seek to be single. It also says that it’s better for a man not to get married.

[@HaleStorm49]

the Bible says? Who was Paul speaking to and in what context? Paul contradicted this teaching in other epistles. Obviously there is a reason for this.

[@staciebrooks2583]

LDS is not Christianity. They believe in a different Jesus.

[@HaleStorm49]

Different...meaning better? A more loving and more powerful Jesus ftw!

[@staciebrooks2583]

@@HaleStorm49 no the Jesus of the Bible is the Jesus that every knee will bow to and confess he is Lord. Every demon in hell is in subjugation to him. Only his life, death, and resurrection is able to grant people eternal life in Heaven. He is the word of God personified. What is more loving then laying down your life for another and what could be more powerful then what I just described?

[@HaleStorm49]

@@staciebrooks2583 sounds like we believe the same thing. Why so hostile?

[@staciebrooks2583]

@@HaleStorm49 i haven’t been hostile. If Jesus is the only way to inherit eternal life and someone perverts that then it’s important to call that out because they’re preaching a Jesus that can not save. Scripture says that Jesus is the only mediator between God and man so it’s important we get him right. Muslims claim to believe in Jesus too. “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed” Galatians 1:8

[@HaleStorm49]

​@@staciebrooks2583the Galatians couldn't keep it straight 1925 years ago with Paul in their presence. Its changed quite a bit since then and not because of angels. You are right to be concerned. Modern Christianity is a shell of what it once was.

[@ceej6851]

Marriage is a gift from Our God Jesus Christ Father. Our Heavenly Father when we accept Jesus Christ as Our Lord and Savior.

[@kevinmac8629]

Either a secular marriage is valid in the eyes of God, or its not. Either its a sacrament or its not.

[@HaleStorm49]

Render unto Caesar... It's valid under the authority that it was executed. The state has the power to delcare _unto death do they part_ but no further. Most churches' authority is equivalent to that of the state.

[@kevinmac8629]

@HaleStorm49 So you're appealing to the current laws of the State as what a marriage is arbitrary. As the laws of the State could change. So it begs the question, what is a marriage? If it's not a sacrament,as was always held by the apostolic Church, then it's just a legal contract.

[@kevinmac8629]

@@HaleStorm49 You're begging the question. What is marriage?

[@HaleStorm49]

@@kevinmac8629 No I am answering your question. If a marriage is performed by the authority of the state then it's bound by the power of the state and the legal contract would end at death. My marriage was for all time and eternity...as God intended. Bound/Sealed on earth and in heaven, as the scriptures say. Modern pastors don't even pretend to have the authority to bind in heaven and will even tell you that Christ said marriage doesn't exist after this life. Creedal christianity is a mess.

[@kevinmac8629]

@HaleStorm49 Are you recognizing that the apostolic Church held and still holds the view that marriage is a sacrament? Making it in and of itself a path to salvation?

[@truegravee]

13:40 hahaha hahaha haha L D S are not christians.

[@HaleStorm49]

It's peak Christianity.

[@truegravee]

@@HaleStorm49 You literally believe Jesus and Lucifer Are brothers To unknown mother and God. Also you believe if you do enough good works on earth you can become a God. Name any other christian group that believes as such?

[@Veevslav1]

@@truegravee And I am willing to bet you do not believe in the Bible. You also believe God is Crazy since he references himself as Our... Having to adopt pagan beliefs to make the doctrines you hold to fit with the narrative established by the blending of paganism and Christianity... But a man that lives in a house made of glass loves throwing stones... All of that happens in the first 2 chapters of the Genesis. Did you know you do not even know the names of the Apostles? Do you believe the Bible is perfect? Why does it reference missing books? Why was it assembled by a body of educated men voting? I think you are right, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does believe in a different Jesus Christ. They believe in the one that came to save man from his sins born of Marry. You believe in a blending of pagan doctrines and the real Jesus Christ. It is time for you to repent and come unto Jesus Christ. FYI, might be time to start studying history as well, ignorance is bliss for the bug until the car runs into it. So to will your ignorance be... A bliss until the truth hits you, then it will be too late for you have had the chance to learn the truth and refused.

[@IntoAllTruth.]

We believe that we all lived as spirit children of Heavenly Father before coming to earth. Lucifer, a son of the morning, was among them. He rebelled, sought the throne of God for himself, and was cast out of Heaven and lost all inheritance. In other words, he's not part of the family anymore. This ideas of Satan and Jesus being brothers was invented by antis like you to attack us. We believe in salvation by grace. All are saved from death through resurrection and all may have eternal life by coming to Christ and relying on Him. And Christ determines who are His disciples. In fact, you guys aren't Christian because you believe in a nebulous, nonsensical, Trinity that is nowhere mentioned I Scripture and was decided by the vote of an apostate council under the direction of a pagan Roman Emperor. And as long as you believe in that abomination, you will remain in apostasy.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@truegravee If there was an Apostasy (there was and still is)why would the expectation be that the apostate creedal beliefs would be the same as the gospel of Jesus Christ? Who is Satan and why did God create an evil being strictly to torment, afflict, and try to pull souls down to hell? That's not a good look for God. Don't criticize my version for being more logical and coherent than yours when don't even have one. That is what atheists do.

[@MeanieKuyaSteven]

Orthodox marriage is not till death. It is an eternal union, and widows/widowers are still married.

[@HaleStorm49]

I've been doing some reading on the Orthodox position and I'm still not clear on the position for marriage after this life or theosis for that matter. I don't claim to understand it that well but I would sum it up in the words of one article that said the answer was, "sort of" Are they still married in the resurrection and thereafter or no?

[@MeanieKuyaSteven]

@@HaleStorm49 Yes, by any teachings I've heard. It is not the same learning about the full teachings of the Orthodox Church as it is in Western Christianity. The west took a scholastic route and tried to codify and explain every aspect of everything. The Eastern Church didn't tend to dogmatize teachings until there was a heresy or great confusion and the matter was essential to salvation (nature's of the Trinity, understanding of Jesus, etc). You find the greater teachings more randomly mentioned or in the experiences of living in the Church. Orthodoxy is handed down from spiritual father to spiritual son, through the liturgy and the words/actions of the sacraments. To some degree, that might mean that you will hear contradictory understandings of certain topics, but becoming Christlike and having the full knowledge is something that comes with faith and continual pursuit.

[@HaleStorm49]

​@@MeanieKuyaStevenThat's consistent with what I'm learning... There have been many contradictions. Overall I believe they are based but on both marriage and Theosis they seem reluctant to take them to their logical extreme as LDS doctrine does. In reading feedback that includes, _sort of_ _yes and no_ _not exactly_

[@MeanieKuyaSteven]

@@HaleStorm49 One strong resource for understanding what the Church teaches can be found in the prayers and sacraments themselves. Remember that some of these have been passed down since even before most people could read or had access to something as valuable as a hand written compilation of Scripture. I'm referencing the ceremony from the Greek Orthodox Church. Near the end of the service, the priest says the following: Priest: O Lord our God, Who came to Cana of Galilee and blessed the marriage there, bless also these Your servants, who through Your Providence, are joined in the fellowship of marriage today. Bless their comings and goings and fill their life with all that is good. Receive their crowns into Your Heavenly Kingdom preserving them pure, unstained, and above reproach to the ages of ages. People: Amen. The crowns in the Greek Church are symbolic of the husband and wife being the monarchs of their house (in a traditional idea of both ruler and servant, for a good monarch would serve their population (children) and their rule would be for the good of them. The crowns happen to also be tied together with a ribbon, signifying that the two crowns are also one. Both the bodies and souls are joined. I haven't been to an Antiochian, Russian, or other version, but understand that at least some don't use a ribbon to connect the crowns, but rather tie their hands together. That aside, the prayer of the priest explicitly calls for the crowns to be received into Heaven.. If marriage ended at death, then those crowns would symbolically be worthless/void at that point. I have, personally, never heard any priest or even Church member say that marriage ended at death. Also, the Church websites that I've glanced through to find the service have so explained that marriage continued into the Kingdom.

[@TruLuan]

​@@HaleStorm49There is no marriage in the after life. Marriage is only for this earth. This is clear on Luke's gospel. Marriage is for having children, which is why contraception is a sin.