when it comes to looks for a friend, it really shouldn't matter...u should love ur friends for who they are and how much fun u have with them. They should be ur friend because they're ur friend...not because they look good :)
when it comes to looks in ur partner, well most of the time u should love ur partner for who they are...however looks do matter because u can't have a relationship with someone who u don't thik is attractive. they don't have to be the cutest or hottest person in the world but they should look decent. A good relationship is based on ur personality and ur chemistry, but u should really choose to marry someone you think is cute...otherwise u may have difficulty on ur wedding nite...lol
i hope that helps...i had the same question a while ago and thats what my mom and everyone else told me lol... ;D
[quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=60#msg64195 date=1164986975] [quote author=Hizz_chiilld link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64187 date=1164951077] [quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64151 date=1164931800] If love is a feeling, that comes and goes, then when you get married, what "feeling" should you have towards your husband-to-be then before you get married to him? No attraction, No love, no emotions, just a 2 bodies going to get married together and reproduce to have kids??
No, of course there has to be an attraction. They have to like each other.. but thats not going to be there every single second, they're bound to get on each others' nerves... It's the unconditional love they share that keeps them together.
The priest in the marriage tells the husband: "Love your wife". Its as if, its a commandment for him to love his wife. Ya3ni, its hard enough to love her probably as they are... that he has to try and "swing it" so as to love her every day. The priest tells the man to "Love your wife" in that, he is commanded to perpetuate the love he has for her, to always keep this alive somehow.
Then he addresses the woman and tells her: "Honour your husband, address him as "my Lord" as Sarah addressed her husband Abraham. Submit to him... " - its as if , he's reminding BOTH of them of the same feelings of love they had when they first fell in love. To sustain it. I guess when you are in love, you wish to submit to yourself to the one you love, and honour him. And as a man, you probably feel the need to take care of a girl the same way her parents looked after her. (which is also an expression of love, and which is ALSO reminded to the husband on the day of his marriage!!).
So, i think "love" in a relationship is good; especially if you love God more, tha way, you'll obey what the priests tell you, and make sure you always love your wife.
If you DONT or if you DIDN'T love your wife from the beginning of the relationship before marriage, then when the priest tells u to :"Love your wife, and please her". How could you be expected to take this responsibility of loving someone unless you had succeeded in it before: i.e. that you already had some feelings of love towards her before marrying her.
Ofcourse there has to be love in a relationship.. what are you trying to prove ???
I was nt trying to prove anything. I just got the impression from your comments that you didnt think love in a relationship was worth much?
Im not talking about unconditional love either. I think when the priest tells the man "Love your wife" - he is not talking about unconditional love. He can't. He can't tell someone to love that way. I think that if 2 persons love God, their love for each other WILL BE unconditional as far as possible, but the FACT that he's actually TELLING him to love his wife means that he's assuming that the natural feeling of love for his wife would be conditional in fact. If the Church assumed that the man had unconditional love from the beginning, then it wouldn t even bother giving either of them the advice it does during the marriage ceremony.
I didn't say love wasn't worth much. In fact I beleive love is vital in a relationship. What I was arguing was what love is. & for 'love' to be strong ennough to keep a relationship going till both partners depart, it has to be more than a feeling. It cannot just be deep affection you have for another person. That can change so easily, especially as you grow older. So what happens 30 years down the track when they feel for each other no longer? Do they get a divorce and go find someone else they share an attraction with? No. It's their commitment to each other that keeps them together and helps them rekindle their affection. That's love.
think about it this way, would u rather spend the rest of ur life with someone who is amour or amoura and hate rtyhem or would u rather spend the rest of ur life with someone not that amour or amoura and lover them forver?
i think looks r not important, they do say it matters what is in the inside and not on the outside ;)
[quote author=Hizz_chiilld link=topic=4550.msg64203#msg64203 date=1165015753] [quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=60#msg64195 date=1164986975] [quote author=Hizz_chiilld link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64187 date=1164951077] [quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64151 date=1164931800] If love is a feeling, that comes and goes, then when you get married, what "feeling" should you have towards your husband-to-be then before you get married to him? No attraction, No love, no emotions, just a 2 bodies going to get married together and reproduce to have kids??
No, of course there has to be an attraction. They have to like each other.. but thats not going to be there every single second, they're bound to get on each others' nerves... It's the unconditional love they share that keeps them together.
The priest in the marriage tells the husband: "Love your wife". Its as if, its a commandment for him to love his wife. Ya3ni, its hard enough to love her probably as they are... that he has to try and "swing it" so as to love her every day. The priest tells the man to "Love your wife" in that, he is commanded to perpetuate the love he has for her, to always keep this alive somehow.
Then he addresses the woman and tells her: "Honour your husband, address him as "my Lord" as Sarah addressed her husband Abraham. Submit to him... " - its as if , he's reminding BOTH of them of the same feelings of love they had when they first fell in love. To sustain it. I guess when you are in love, you wish to submit to yourself to the one you love, and honour him. And as a man, you probably feel the need to take care of a girl the same way her parents looked after her. (which is also an expression of love, and which is ALSO reminded to the husband on the day of his marriage!!).
So, i think "love" in a relationship is good; especially if you love God more, tha way, you'll obey what the priests tell you, and make sure you always love your wife.
If you DONT or if you DIDN'T love your wife from the beginning of the relationship before marriage, then when the priest tells u to :"Love your wife, and please her". How could you be expected to take this responsibility of loving someone unless you had succeeded in it before: i.e. that you already had some feelings of love towards her before marrying her.
Ofcourse there has to be love in a relationship.. what are you trying to prove ???
I was nt trying to prove anything. I just got the impression from your comments that you didnt think love in a relationship was worth much?
Im not talking about unconditional love either. I think when the priest tells the man "Love your wife" - he is not talking about unconditional love. He can't. He can't tell someone to love that way. I think that if 2 persons love God, their love for each other WILL BE unconditional as far as possible, but the FACT that he's actually TELLING him to love his wife means that he's assuming that the natural feeling of love for his wife would be conditional in fact. If the Church assumed that the man had unconditional love from the beginning, then it wouldn t even bother giving either of them the advice it does during the marriage ceremony.
I didn't say love wasn't worth much. In fact I beleive love is vital in a relationship. What I was arguing was what love is. & for 'love' to be strong ennough to keep a relationship going till both partners depart, it has to be more than a feeling. It cannot just be deep affection you have for another person. That can change so easily, especially as you grow older. So what happens 30 years down the track when they feel for each other no longer? Do they get a divorce and go find someone else they share an attraction with? No. It's their commitment to each other that keeps them together and helps them rekindle their affection. That's love.
I just would like to say one thing. Hizz_child, that was really impressive ; on how you defined love. = )
And I definetly agree with everyone else who defined it, I just wanted to point out what Hizz_Child said had real meaning.
i don't think that looks matter. shame on the people who judge others by the way they look. don't ever judge a book by it's cover. u can find a person so ugly from the outside but can be so clean with a kind and pure heart from the inside. also u should never say anyone is ugly we are all God's creation and we were all created the same way.
[quote author=Biscutt link=topic=4550.msg74521#msg74521 date=1184819626] i don't think that looks matter. shame on the people who judge others by the way they look. don't ever judge a book by it's cover. u can find a person so ugly from the outside but can be so clean with a kind and pure heart from the inside. also u should never say anyone is ugly we are all God's creation and we were all created the same way.
I think in a sense it does. With biological defects aside, looks are of some value in contemplating compatibility. If the person is obese, they do not value exercise or taking care of one's health: something that is pernicious for a healthy lifestyle of future children. If the person wears inappropriate clothing, it also demonstrates some preconceptions and character of the person. In this age many people express themselves by their clothing- this is a catalyst opportunity to getting insights about someone, but it is not the most accurate. In fact, it may just be showing the person's aspiration rather than their true self.
Also, many marriages disintegrate due to lack of mutual attraction. So, I think, some physical attraction must exist between partners.
"Looks" might be "superficial" and even "vain"- but it can also be an indicator of "superficiality" and "vanity" of another person! We are humans, and unfortunately, many of us do interact with "looks" as a precipitating factor. To marginalize its role, is, for many of us anyway, trivializing reality.
Come on, there's no need for that. U give me credit and then u say it was Thomas because u don't want my head to go big... its ok habibi.. my head will not go big.
Many many coptic chrisitians do this to me. They give me complements and then, because they are scared it will effect my ego, they tell me :"Listen, it wasn't meant for you, it was meant for someone else".
And this is not the right attitude. I am good at taking complements, and its best u give them to me. We are not sure whether Thomas is capable of handling complements, and u put him in a big spiritual problem and battle that he did not ask for because you were trying to save me from the devil in attacking me by making me think i am special.
Come on, there's no need for that. U give me credit and then u say it was Thomas because u don't want my head to go big... its ok habibi.. my head will not go big.
Dude! You just totally figured me out. :D
In all seriousness though, you initiated the point with your statement, but Thomas expanded on it. So, to be fair, props to you both.
[quote author=Κηφᾶς link=topic=4550.msg77120#msg77120 date=1190123001] [coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
Come on, there's no need for that. U give me credit and then u say it was Thomas because u don't want my head to go big... its ok habibi.. my head will not go big.
Dude! You just totally figured me out. :D
In all seriousness though, you initiated the point with your statement, but Thomas expanded on it. So, to be fair, props to you both.
It was easy to figure u out Cephas! EVERY COPT swears at me, and insults me, and says bad things against me as they are scared that my head will go big if they gave me complements. Don't worry. There's no even need to say that THomas and I deserve credit, when it is just me you want to complement. I know that.
Methinks you should lighten up a bit. This was a joke that was between myself and another individual. It was addressed to this individual, and thus if he had a problem with it, he should be the one addressing it. That being said, while you may think there are some things that shouldn't be joked about, I disagree. God does have a sense of humour, as is apparent by our manifestation of humour.
Thank you kindly for your permission, though I didn't realize I needed it. Once again, lighten up. No one else seems to have a problem, so I fail to see why you do.
alot of interseting points but what if ur ugly or cute just have lil floses like a big nose or big ears maybe big mouth or sumthing would plastic surgry be wrong?
Comments
when it comes to looks in ur partner, well most of the time u should love ur partner for who they are...however looks do matter because u can't have a relationship with someone who u don't thik is attractive. they don't have to be the cutest or hottest person in the world but they should look decent. A good relationship is based on ur personality and ur chemistry, but u should really choose to marry someone you think is cute...otherwise u may have difficulty on ur wedding nite...lol
i hope that helps...i had the same question a while ago and thats what my mom and everyone else told me lol... ;D
[quote author=Hizz_chiilld link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64187 date=1164951077]
[quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64151 date=1164931800]
If love is a feeling, that comes and goes, then when you get married, what "feeling" should you have towards your husband-to-be then before you get married to him? No attraction, No love, no emotions, just a 2 bodies going to get married together and reproduce to have kids??
No, of course there has to be an attraction. They have to like each other.. but thats not going to be there every single second, they're bound to get on each others' nerves... It's the unconditional love they share that keeps them together. Ofcourse there has to be love in a relationship.. what are you trying to prove ???
I was nt trying to prove anything. I just got the impression from your comments that you didnt think love in a relationship was worth much?
Im not talking about unconditional love either. I think when the priest tells the man "Love your wife" - he is not talking about unconditional love. He can't. He can't tell someone to love that way. I think that if 2 persons love God, their love for each other WILL BE unconditional as far as possible, but the FACT that he's actually TELLING him to love his wife means that he's assuming that the natural feeling of love for his wife would be conditional in fact. If the Church assumed that the man had unconditional love from the beginning, then it wouldn t even bother giving either of them the advice it does during the marriage ceremony.
I didn't say love wasn't worth much. In fact I beleive love is vital in a relationship. What I was arguing was what love is. & for 'love' to be strong ennough to keep a relationship going till both partners depart, it has to be more than a feeling. It cannot just be deep affection you have for another person. That can change so easily, especially as you grow older. So what happens 30 years down the track when they feel for each other no longer? Do they get a divorce and go find someone else they share an attraction with? No. It's their commitment to each other that keeps them together and helps them rekindle their affection. That's love.
think about it this way, would u rather spend the rest of ur life with someone who is amour or amoura and hate rtyhem or would u rather spend the rest of ur life with someone not that amour or amoura and lover them forver?
i think looks r not important, they do say it matters what is in the inside and not on the outside ;)
EgY
[quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=60#msg64195 date=1164986975]
[quote author=Hizz_chiilld link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64187 date=1164951077]
[quote author=vassilios link=board=13;threadid=4550;start=45#msg64151 date=1164931800]
If love is a feeling, that comes and goes, then when you get married, what "feeling" should you have towards your husband-to-be then before you get married to him? No attraction, No love, no emotions, just a 2 bodies going to get married together and reproduce to have kids??
No, of course there has to be an attraction. They have to like each other.. but thats not going to be there every single second, they're bound to get on each others' nerves... It's the unconditional love they share that keeps them together. Ofcourse there has to be love in a relationship.. what are you trying to prove ???
I was nt trying to prove anything. I just got the impression from your comments that you didnt think love in a relationship was worth much?
Im not talking about unconditional love either. I think when the priest tells the man "Love your wife" - he is not talking about unconditional love. He can't. He can't tell someone to love that way. I think that if 2 persons love God, their love for each other WILL BE unconditional as far as possible, but the FACT that he's actually TELLING him to love his wife means that he's assuming that the natural feeling of love for his wife would be conditional in fact. If the Church assumed that the man had unconditional love from the beginning, then it wouldn t even bother giving either of them the advice it does during the marriage ceremony.
I didn't say love wasn't worth much. In fact I beleive love is vital in a relationship. What I was arguing was what love is. & for 'love' to be strong ennough to keep a relationship going till both partners depart, it has to be more than a feeling. It cannot just be deep affection you have for another person. That can change so easily, especially as you grow older. So what happens 30 years down the track when they feel for each other no longer? Do they get a divorce and go find someone else they share an attraction with? No. It's their commitment to each other that keeps them together and helps them rekindle their affection. That's love.
I just would like to say one thing.
Hizz_child, that was really impressive ; on how you defined love. = )
And I definetly agree with everyone else who defined it, I just wanted to point out what Hizz_Child said had real meaning.
i don't think that looks matter. shame on the people who judge others by the way they look. don't ever judge a book by it's cover. u can find a person so ugly from the outside but can be so clean with a kind and pure heart from the inside. also u should never say anyone is ugly we are all God's creation and we were all created the same way.
Good point Biscutt. We are all God's creation.
You're Ethiopian by the way, right? :)
.
You're Ethiopian by the way, right? :)
NO!
Also, many marriages disintegrate due to lack of mutual attraction. So, I think, some physical attraction must exist between partners.
"Looks" might be "superficial" and even "vain"- but it can also be an indicator of "superficiality" and "vanity" of another person! We are humans, and unfortunately, many of us do interact with "looks" as a precipitating factor. To marginalize its role, is, for many of us anyway, trivializing reality.
PP4M
You've hit the proverbial nail on the head. Excellent post.
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
You've hit the proverbial nail on the head. Excellent post.
Thanks man,
But I also agree with what Thomas said.
I was referring to Thomas' post. ;)
:D
Many many coptic chrisitians do this to me. They give me complements and then, because they are scared it will effect my ego, they tell me :"Listen, it wasn't meant for you, it was meant for someone else".
And this is not the right attitude. I am good at taking complements, and its best u give them to me. We are not sure whether Thomas is capable of handling complements, and u put him in a big spiritual problem and battle that he did not ask for because you were trying to save me from the devil in attacking me by making me think i am special.
I think it was good, though, that you maintained your ground.
QT, I defended your tiny post- I think that I complimented you! :P
I think it was good, though, that you maintained your ground.
Thanks Tommy,
In all seriousness though, you initiated the point with your statement, but Thomas expanded on it. So, to be fair, props to you both.
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic] Dude! You just totally figured me out. :D
In all seriousness though, you initiated the point with your statement, but Thomas expanded on it. So, to be fair, props to you both.
It was easy to figure u out Cephas! EVERY COPT swears at me, and insults me, and says bad things against me as they are scared that my head will go big if they gave me complements. Don't worry. There's no even need to say that THomas and I deserve credit, when it is just me you want to complement. I know that.
Go in peace, and do not sin again.
Your heart is deep and you mercy vast O Beneficent One. May the gods shower you with praise now and forever and unto the ages of all ages, amen.
;D
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
Your heart is deep and you mercy vast O Beneficent One. May the gods shower you with praise now and forever and unto the ages of all ages, amen.
;D
No no.. u must not say that. I am a sinner.
Pray for me.
Or perhaps it was just a joke (hence the use of smilies).
Just in my honest opinion.
Methinks you should lighten up a bit. This was a joke that was between myself and another individual. It was addressed to this individual, and thus if he had a problem with it, he should be the one addressing it. That being said, while you may think there are some things that shouldn't be joked about, I disagree. God does have a sense of humour, as is apparent by our manifestation of humour.
Whatever you like to think though, it's your descision.
Thank you kindly for your permission, though I didn't realize I needed it. Once again, lighten up. No one else seems to have a problem, so I fail to see why you do.
OK, done deal. Let's just drop it.