So are low Protestant marriages just meaningless ordinances that don't convey any grace? Can Protestants even claim that their marriages have greater validity than secular ones in any way?
So are low Protestant marriages just meaningless ordinances that don't convey any grace?
Jews
Marriage is the only way to have sex without being in sin. Marriage is not a "rite" or "sacrament" and does not "confer grace".
>Can Protestants even claim that their marriages have greater validity than secular ones in any way?
Never did.
>b-but that's not what I believe!
Don't care.
>Marriage is the only way to have sex without being in sin. Marriage is not a "rite" or "sacrament" and does not "confer grace".
So is there a difference between a Protestant marriage and a secular or Muslim one?
No. Is there in your religion? Would you have a convert couple remarry?
So if the state performed a gay marriage is it valid if they join a church? Shouldn't they marry women?
You dodged my question.
Because what I am trying to get an answer to is whether marriage is a matter of religious or civil authority. According to Paul, Christian marriages are of a different validity than non-Christian ones:
>And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwiseyour children would be unclean, but now they are holy.But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in suchcases.But God has called usto peace.
1 Corinthians 7:13-15
If a secular marriage is to be considered no different from a Christian one would Paul give this accommodation?
Therefore there is no gay "marriage" in the eyes of God and a church should have free rein to remarry gay men who have repented to women, regardless of what civil authority says, no?
Abandonment is already a legal grounds for divorce.
>Therefore there is no gay "marriage" in the eyes of God and a church should have free rein to remarry gay men who have repented to women, regardless of what civil authority says, no?
Their "gay" "marriage" was never valid, but as far as marrying women afterwards, I don't think churches marry people without the state's permission.
>Abandonment is already a legal grounds for divorce
But is it biblical grounds?
Yes. The only biblical grounds for divorce are abandonment and adultery.
proofs?
Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Orthodoxy does
>low
What do you mean by that?
In contrast to groups like the Anglo-Catholics
High/low is a liturgical distinction
Anglo catholicism isn't necessarily one or the other
High churches use the terminology of sacrament while low churches favor ordinance
All marriages have grace. God instituted it for all humanity.
>meaningless ordinances
More atheist false flag spam.
When did Papists decide marriage should be elevated to the level of Baptism and the most Holy Eucharist? Must have been fairly recent considering that for the vast majority of history marriage was conducted almost wholly by the landed nobility.
>So are low Protestant marriages just meaningless ordinances
as meaningless as the courts decide they are when they divide up all the husband and wife's assets during a divorce
>So are low Protestant marriages just meaningless ordinances
Protestants, Catholics and the Orthodox are all israelite worshippers lol.
You are all evil idiots.