# Developing Better Relationships



## Glen1 (Nov 8, 2006)

Jesus taught us to love one and other. He meant for a man to love a woman. Not for a man to love another man or a woman to love another woman. By this I mean to have a marital relationship with a member of the same sex. This essay will be on developing friendships between a man and a woman.
Early in life, we recognize that there are girls and there are boys. When they reach the age of 13 or 14, they want to go to places where they can find members of the opposite sex.
This then leads them to start social relationships. But remember our friends must ideally be members of the same Church. At least that is what this writer was taught in his early life.
In our High School days, we are taught subjects that develop our minds and help us to grow both psychologically and mentally. We also learn to develop our interests through our High School courses. There are also clubs, sporting events and dances that help us to develop socially.
After High School, going to College further stimulates our social growth. Some people choose to enter the work force after High School, which is fine. While others go into the military to serve their country.
As young men and women reach the age of 21 or 22 they become mature. At this age, they usually find someone with the same interests, same goals and the same religion. They date and each time they see each other they begin to grow closely together. They also become fond of each other. After awhile, they stop seeing their other friends and see only each other. They then become familiar to each other and then the man asks the woman to marry him. The girl accepts and then the next step is the actuality of becoming totally familiar with each other. They then set the date for the Wedding. The Catholic Church doesn’t allow sexual intercourse or sleeping together outside the state of wedlock. The couple then visits the Church six months before so that the arrangements for the Nuptial Mass might be made. Also a month before the ceremony the banns are published in the Parish Bulletin. The next month, the ceremony is performed.
Then the couple’s relationship is blessed before God. They exchange rings and pronounce the vows. Then the priest pronounces them husband and wife. They then kiss each other and leave the Church as husband wife to begin their life together.
In summary, relationships are developed they don’t just happen. I have only presented relationships between a man and a woman. I’ve also discussed briefly dating and the marriage vows. Also remember that the courts will probably declare marriages between two men or two women unlawful. Jesus also told us, “No greater love hath a man than that for a woman.”
490 Words


----------



## Nikatu (Nov 9, 2006)

Well, according to the Bible, yes... most of your points are ok... how you are supposed to react to that is... well, if you accuse someone of sinning (even if they are) then you too are guilty of a sin right?

And this isn't really about developing better relationships even slightly, this is an essay about anti-gay marriages and how some Christians feel that relationships (and specifically marraige in your essay) should be addressed and what is right and what is wrong in the eyes of the Chrisitan church.  If you wanted to address building better relationships in general you should have focused a hell of a lot more on the relationship itself.  you only seem to address one point on the matter (when you mention that the two should be of the same religione... most marriage counselors actually agree on that btw) and then go on to discuss your idea of a Christian relationship.  You should be a bit more careful with your phrases btw, because while God wants us to share the word, he wants us to be careful.  We have to show others God through OUR actions, and do whatever we can to be polite to them and to love them, AND ESPECIALLY to be forgiving and understanding.  Telling people they are wrong will simply make them angry at Christians (and currently we have a terrible reputation because of that).  We have to instead be understanding... some people want to marry a member of the same sex, ok, fine.  It is their decision and it does not mean that they are going to hell.  The Christian God is utterly understanding and forgiving and we are supposed to be as well.

Er, now back to the topic I should have been addressing instead of my tagent rant... your essay is misleading.  Your title does not tell us at all what you are going to talk about it should have instead been "The Basics of a Christian Relationship"... and there are a few things that you have a bit backwards... the part where you mention they stop seeing their friends is, sadly, true very often.  But that actually hurts a relationship.  Having friends can really help a relationship.  You can place your love on one person, but sometimes you can't be with them (when they have to work) and being away causes loneliness which can lead to other issues.  Having friends helps defeat that loneliness and an SO who your friends enjoy hanging out with helps to build the relationship even further... one who chases your friends away or seperates you from them can really hurt.  So you've got a point to make, but I don't think it was the one your title intended, perhaps you should write what you meant to write.


----------



## Winged Sandals (Nov 17, 2006)

Hmmm... Although I disagree very much with a lot of your views, I guess my purpose here is to evaluate your writing and not your beliefs, so I'll try to be unbiased. (I apologize in advance if I don't succeed, heh.)

Anyway, this didn't really strike me as a very powerful piece. I found that it was very general and didn't have much of a point. The language was very simple and it read like a textbook. I think it would be better if you would delve deeper into the points you made and support them with details and examples. Also, a bit of creativity wouldn't hurt either. Try to keep the reader interested and tell them something new; explain to them a well-formed thought that will intrigue them. I think the essay would also be stronger if you explored different scenarios (not everyone dates at 21, et cetera). For another note, I would also suggest trying to vary your sentence structure. Right now, the wording seems very basic and somewhat monotone.

All in all, it sort of struck me that there wasn't much effort put into this, although it might just be me. I think you could do a lot better.  With some revising, a topic like this would have the potential to be a very passionate piece of work.  Good luck!


----------



## Flexbile Garphite (Nov 22, 2006)

I was hoping your peice would be about developing better relationships, but it wasn't at all. I was hoping to learn something, but I didn't. You just provided a basic instruction by which two people meet, date, and get married. I wish it were that simple, but it ain't, not even if you beleive in God.


----------



## cellardoor (Nov 23, 2006)

it's almost like you're completely out of touch with the real world

oh probably because you absolutely are


----------



## Winged Sandals (Nov 23, 2006)

cellardoor said:
			
		

> it's almost like you're completely out of touch with the real world
> 
> oh probably because you absolutely are


 
That's uncalled for.


----------



## cellardoor (Nov 23, 2006)

it's accurate


----------



## Kane (Nov 23, 2006)

Wow.  This entire essay is total hogwash, and to top it off it's just written poorly.  

By the way, that little snippet claiming that Jesus said, "No greater love hath man than that for a woman," is just a little off.  What the Bible actually says is, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."


----------



## WordBeast (Nov 24, 2006)

Kane said:
			
		

> Wow.  This entire essay is total hogwash, and to top it off it's just written poorly.



I wouldn't dignify it by calling it an "essay". What it is, is a narrow-minded and sanctimonious lecture. And yeah, it doesn't help that it's also badly written.


----------



## Winged Sandals (Nov 25, 2006)

cellardoor said:
			
		

> it's accurate


 
It's your opinion.  Although I in some ways agree with you, I don't think this is the place to quibble about beliefs.


----------



## Changeling (Nov 28, 2006)

*Is this comedy?*

Oh where to start.
  First of all lets get one thing straight - Jesus didn't exist ok.  Christianity is an inferior version of the hundreds of pagan mysteries that were around at the time.  Only after it became the official religion of Rome under Antonious (i think it was) did they set into dogma the four gospels (of which were edited for Imperial purposes) and emphasised his incarnation.  Christianity stole all its festivals and philosophy for superior pagan ones, and its theology from Jewish sources and its Vengeful, wrathful tribal deity.
   Second, the whole relationship thing you have adopted is from the OLD TESTAMENT which JESUS (if you beliece in him) came to *REPLACE*, with his NEW COVENANT.  WHY DON'T CHRISTIANS UNDERSTAND THIS?  Dont you read you bible?  Perhaps it is beacause it is a sin to doubt, and therefore it is wrong to think.
   I'd love to go on, but I'm afraid my words would be wasted on sheepish ears.  GOD gave Man REASON.  
  MAN gave GOD a thousand names, his reason for creating the world and the birth of morality.


----------



## Winged Sandals (Nov 28, 2006)

Uugh, you guys this piece of writing isn't here to be criticized because of its topic. It's here to be criticized on its writing!


----------



## Rob (Nov 29, 2006)

Changeling said:
			
		

> First of all lets get one thing straight - Jesus didn't exist ok.


*Offtopic* - I don't think there's much doubt that Jesus existed, in the sense that he was a real person who lived a couple of thousand years ago. There's plenty of independent historical evidence supporting this. Whether the stories in the bible are literally true, whether we can believe all that was written about him at and just after that time, that's something else.

I don't believe in God or a creator, but I don't doubt that Jesus existed.

*Ontopic* - I just felt this didn't have any real punch. It's a statement, not even much of an opinion behind it. Maybe it could be broadened or exanded to go deeper into relationships, how they develop, and how to manage the difficulties that often arise. Maybe it could be expanded to strengthen the view of relationships, permitted and otherwise, in a religious context. The topic has plenty of scope. The piece needs a little more punch (though there may be markets for it as written).


----------



## Changeling (Nov 29, 2006)

*Do you Adam and Eve it?*

Ok, if jesus existed could you please list some of the hundred or so Jewish historians or hundred or so Roman historians that might have mentioned such a momentus event in history.  The only one I know of is Josephus who was a pro Roman Jew at the time and who wrote his histories about fifty years after JC was suppposeed to have existed.  Also, when he mentions Christ he sounds like a devout Christian - which is at odds with everything he wrote before and after.  This is because Josephus didn't mention him at all and the quote was added after his death.
Besides him, there are no historical accounts that i have found, and believe me i looked.
    When we take such things for granted like the world being flat and the moon being made of cheese, the earth being centre of the universe people seem crazy when they mention Gravity, Galaxies, rocket propulsion.  But Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Darwin have all been proved right.  Once people look into the truth for themselves they will see clearly how deluded they have been by mass indoctrination.
    Christianity was born along the same lines as, Osiris, Dionyisis, Mithras, Attis, and many more ressurecting godmen of the time.  Christianity is the Jewish version.
     All the above had virgin mothers, had little account of their early life, were born in stables or caves, (on december 25th - winter solstice) recieved gifts from Magi, were tortured and killed by humans for healing people, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven and promised salvation for mankind in heavenly kingdoms.  Is this coincidence?  
    According to the Church it isn't - the official line of explanation for these  previous godmen is that the devil pre-empted Christ's incarnation with such myths in order to lead us all astray and thus doubt his real existence.  
    The first Christian were all Gnostics, not Literalists.  Literalists were those introduced to outer pagan mysteries.
     I could go on, but I'll stop now since this isn't a debate forum.


----------



## Rob (Nov 29, 2006)

Changeling said:
			
		

> Ok, if jesus existed could you please list some of the hundred or so Jewish historians or hundred or so Roman historians that might have mentioned such a momentus event in history.


No. Why? Because I don't personally give a shit whether you believe it or not. This is a writing forum, not a court of law. You want evidence? Go pay someone.

Cheers,
Omni


----------



## Glen1 (Jan 23, 2007)

Thanks everybody for your comments and opinions. I appreciated them very much. I'll try to write something next time a long the lines of a Christian Ethic. Maybe this was a little bit off the wall. 

*But anyway thanks.* 

Glen


----------



## Flexbile Garphite (Jan 24, 2007)

Wow. Glen1 sure took that in stride.


----------



## Glen1 (Feb 3, 2007)

Everyone: I'm discarding this item and putting it in a different context. The new essay's beginning is an introduction which will help and will be better than the last one. I also have taken out all of the biblical stuff. I will post it in forum this afternoon. I hope that you all will enjoy it. The title is "Relationships and Their Meaning - An Introduction."


----------



## quignov (Feb 3, 2007)

f


----------



## quignov (Feb 3, 2007)

Winged Sandals said:
			
		

> Uugh, you guys this piece of writing isn't here to be criticized because of its topic. It's here to be criticized on its writing!



well. You are right. However, the essay has absolutely nothing to do with the title. The proposed topic idea is in no way related to the essay itself. Also, this should be more correctly labeled an opinion piece as there is no desire to see any viewpoint except his/her own, and there is absolutely no use of logic in the piece. 

Cheers, Quignov

okay, deeply sorry I didn't see the second page when I responded... my apologies


----------



## nostalgicdemise (Feb 7, 2007)

The best way to improve this essay, in my opinion, would be to fully flush out the things that really make relationships interesting.
People don't just meet, start to like each other, and then BAM!  Get married.  There's also a lot of bickering and arguing and reconciling and compromising, and "Fine, okay.  Chinese tonight.  But, by God, we're having Italian tomorrow."  
And not everyone abandons their friends once they become involved with an intimate someone else.  Plenty of couples keep close connections with their own friends, and most will connect with the friends of their partner, as well.
Granted, there are some who cut ties completely, but it's harmful.

If you want to include the church related stuff, I suppose you can do that, too.  But not even all Catholics follow the rigid guidelines that are in your essay.

Just remember that no two relationships are the same, and no relationship goes without a hitch or two.  Or twenty.



Oh, and I'm semi-Christian.  And Jesus was one cool cat.

(Just figured I'd impose my beliefs like everyone else.)


----------



## KStayte (Feb 10, 2007)

Glen1 said:
			
		

> Everyone: I'm discarding this item and putting it in a different context. The new essay's beginning is an introduction which will help and will be better than the last one. I also have taken out all of the biblical stuff. I will post it in forum this afternoon. I hope that you all will enjoy it. The title is "Relationships and Their Meaning - An Introduction."


 
Glen one thing that is drilled in my head constantly is not to ever throw anyway material I have written. Perhaps what I write now, may not be the piece I want to print, but it may provide a starting point for an in depth later on. I would encourage you to keep writing, congratulate you on your courage for putting this out there for critique, and admire your attitude and determination. I believe you will do well. We all are practicing this craft, and each of us take each step, one at a time, in our own journey.


----------



## boongee (Feb 11, 2007)

When I read this, I just felt like it was something a CCD teacher gives to a 6 year old child. To me, there was no point in reading it. It wasn't exactly interesting, creative or well-written, either.


----------



## gradefpoultry (Feb 25, 2007)

Hehehehe...you have a playboy avatar.

...I just find that funny.

edit: and I just realized I bumped a thread that was over 10 days old...sorry!


----------



## Subterranean1984 (Feb 27, 2007)

Are you serious? Is this real. Poor writing, didactic, biased. A dissertation on dated, judgmental values. Relationships don't constitute only Christian human beings, or christian values. Not everyone wants to/needs to get married, etc etc. Your whole frame of reference for this piece is a Jew Dao Christian soaked conformist nightmare. In fact this approach to marriage hasn't been working for generations, taken a look at the divorce rate? Quite a misleading title. Oh, one more thing. I know religious folks can't help but being hypocrites, but showing it in your avatar? If you’re so enamored with Christian values, how can you represent yourself with the Playboy Bunny? A "heathen, heretical organization." Hmmm? Gays offend you but not boobies shown for cash? Hmmmm? (Yes, boobies).
Didn't realize there was a second page. Whups.


----------



## Subterranean1984 (Feb 27, 2007)

God I'm a dick


----------

