A story in a long post:
Once upon a time, a young man prayed sincerely to God to bring him a wife. A few years past and while in high school this young man met a Christian girl. She was pretty, but not the prettiest, she was well liked, but not popular, but she was sweet, she loved God, and she liked him. The young man took an interest in this girl and they became a young couple. For 3 years they went out together, went to church together, and prayed for each other.
Then one fall day, the young man asked the girl to be his bride. She immediately said yes. Their families were overjoyed. Everyone knew they were a happy couple, and that God had been blessing them. They had not set a date for the wedding yet as he was still in college, and they did not want to rush into things.
Another year past and they set the date for another year away. They wanted the wedding to be near Christmas. They both loved Christmas for its meaning. They wanted to celebrate their love in marriage at the time of year that the gift of Christ came to earth. They and all who knew them knew that God was with them and blessed them.
In all, they had dated for over 5 years with a 2 year engagement by the time they were married. And though life was hard at times, they persevered through it. They went to church, they worked, they had a family. All seemed right and good. There were times when they cried together, laughed together, and even argued with each other. But still, a husband and wife work through things.
The years passed and it seemed that something was wrong. Surely God did not intend that they would have grown apart. Yet that was happening. They both tried for a while to improve things. They tried together, then separately, then one of them quit trying.
Both the man and the woman were Christians their entire marriage. Yet after 18 years married, the woman left the man. She quit trying and caring. She said she had been praying for years for an answer to her question: should I stay or should I go? She said God answered her prayer and her question with "go".
The man tried to fix things. He prayed fervently every day. But with her "answer" to prayer, the woman refused to change her mind. So she divorced her husband after 18 years of marriage, and over 23 years being a continuous couple.
The man remained faithful to the marriage until the final day the official decree was signed and sealed by the courts. He did this even though his wife had already left and had already had a boyfriend to some extent. He didn't want to do that. But he had been praying for months for God to help him make sense of all this. But this was what God told the now much older man to do: remain faithful to your covenant until you are released from it.
The man prayed many times daily for months for an answer to his question: why? His answer came after the divorce was final. The man knew the answer from God was this: "Do these things because it is what I require of you. You need discipline, you need correction. I do this because I love you."
There was evidence in both of their lives that they loved God and tried to serve Him as best they could. Both produced much fruit. Both were without question firm believers in Christ.
So now some questions .
Was this union the will of God to begin with?
Did God allow the dissolution of the marriage?
Did God make a mistake?
Did the man and woman mistakenly marry?
Was the dissolution of the marriage the result of not having been chosen by God or by the hard heart on the part of the one or the other?
Reconcile all these things with the fact that we all serve a sovereign God. There is nothing that can happen outside of God's will.
I have my own answers to these questions and this reconciling. I do not ask you these things to assist me in discovering God's purpose in these things. I am the man. I have spent the last several years in prayer for my marriage. I have spent nearly a year with no wife and being in counsel with my pastor and elders. I have my answers.
The reason I post this is because it is very easy to say something is this way or that when you are only speaking hypothetically. It gets a lot more complicated to explain when its real. Yet even in this complexity I have the straightforward answer from God: I am that I am, I am your God and My will reigns supreme.
The marriage and the divorce were the will of God, but for reasons more difficult to understand than to grasp the infinite universe. God did not make a mistake, all things were planned by God and all things happened according to the will of our unchanging Lord. The marriage was not a mistake. And the divorce was the result of the hardened heart of the woman, though I know that I gave cause for much grievance in the marriage.
Even before the wedding, the marriage was prayed many times for. It was not decided in haste. There was much discussion between the two of us before marriage about how to handle hard things. The decision to marry and the timing was rationally thought out and was definitely of the brain and heart, not merely emotion.
Just my experience and something I think you need to consider in your thought process.
Edited to add: As I read this story well over a year later, I can still say that it fits. Everything that took place, the good, the bad, and the ugly, were all part of God's will to accomplish His purpose. And the result has been that I am a better man, a better husband, and a better father than I was before. God brought to me a woman who is now my wife. She also had similar circumstances in a previous marriage. She also underwent the discipline process of God. And though discipline is not normally joyful at the time, looking back now, it was all worth it. Thank you God.
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
How To Open A Jar Of Spaghetti Sauce
The man's man methods to open that spaghetti jar:
1) use 1/4 stick of dynamite duct taped to the lid, set off in an open field
2) place the jar on a fence post at 20 paces, shoot with large calibre gun
3) secure the lid to your car with duct tape, secure the jar to the road, take off
4) throw that jar away, learn to make sauce yourself
But the one thing you will never, ever do as a man, is ask a woman to open the jar
You know I just thought about this more. Wrap the entire jar in duct tape then freeze the entire jar of sauce and lid with liquid nitrogen, you could crack the lid and jar off, easily remove the glass fragments that are somewhat still bound together with duct tape. Then put the frozen sauce globule (jar shaped still) in a pan to heat. Be careful to use protection in picking up the frozen sauce globule.
This has the added benefit of using both duct tape and liquid nitrogen. The man coolness factor is off the scale.
MacGyver would have to manufacture his own cutting torch using 3 matches, a shoestring, aluminum filings, and a caulking gun. Then I am sure it would involve duct tape and the properties of some obscure household item. But there is no doubt it would be cool, innovative, and have just enough credibility to make it sound possible.
This hand technique you speak of to open the jar, does it involve danger or explosives? I can't see its advantage unless there is some danger or science involved.
Hmmm...
I suppose that if it stated differently it has an appeal....
The elusive spaghetti sauce jar. When seen in captivity, they appear harmless and even lethargic. But here in the wilds of the modern kitchens, their natural aggression lurks just beneath the surface. Its simple glass body is docile when content, but should the jar be broken, those smooth sides instantly becom razor sharp deadly talons. Capable of slashing through your body muscle, tendon, and sinew, the jar can turn from domestic to destructive in a moment. Its unrelenting terror could render you helpless in a heart beat. And its sharp pointed daggers of glass could rip your throat right out.
What's this? We see a woman entering the kitchen... I think she is going to attempt to capture and open the jar of sauce. She is circling, circling, the jar is unmoved oddly enough with all this danger to its contents. At last! She seizes it with both hands!
She is now in a desperate struggle with the jar beast. She is trying desperately to force the lid off. But this is no ordinary jar of sauce and it is reluctant to give up its contents. Oh wait! She has called a male of the pack to come help. She is handing off the jar to the male...
They are struggling! It looks like we may see those razor sharp daggers at any time. But wait!!!!!! The male has the jar wrestled into submission now. He places his hand on the lid... yes... he definitely has his hand on the lid...
This could be it... Yes! He is turning the lid the full 90 degrees! And he has done it!!!!
Oh look! It is a bit gruesome to watch... but the female is now pouring out the insides of the jar of sauce into a pan. Oh Lord! The humanity! She has drained every drop from the jar and tossed it in the trash can.
And that is how males view opening the jar of spaghetti sauce
I will file the flight plan with NASA. This should be interesting.
I just got a shipment of titanium wire in. Been looking for a good use for it. I think maybe we could use it to create a suspension rig for the magnetic rail gun to project the jar.
Ah. Cans. Multiple. I see a home made mortar or cannon requirement. Man, 3 of them. How to get them all opened and combined at once. Now that will have be a clever trick.
Or maybe I am over-complicating this. Perhaps an old-fashioned trebuchet would do the trick. But we need to simmer, that means heat.... hmmm... AHA! Greek fire!
Oh yeah, this could be good. I will need my hard hat for this one.
Did someone say they needed a torch? I have oxyacetylene, propane, and in a pinch, I can rig an oxygen tank together up with other flammable sources. Or do you just need the plain old "there's the ogre, grab your torch and pitchforks" kind of torch? I can soak some old rags in kerosene if you want.
All you ladies need to do is ask. When it comes to pyrotechnics, we men will try to oblige.
It means it is time for some explosives to extricate said item from friend's domicile. Or just eliminate the domicile. Either works for me. I still get to wear my hard hat either way.
First off, I haven't figured out WHY you want to take the tire tracks off the entree. I mean, its like a garnish or something. Part of the presentation.
Oh man, a shop welder. Wow, that could be used to cook the meat by electrocution, or to build a custom rig to roast the roadkill on a spit. So many possibilities.
1) use 1/4 stick of dynamite duct taped to the lid, set off in an open field
2) place the jar on a fence post at 20 paces, shoot with large calibre gun
3) secure the lid to your car with duct tape, secure the jar to the road, take off
4) throw that jar away, learn to make sauce yourself
But the one thing you will never, ever do as a man, is ask a woman to open the jar
You know I just thought about this more. Wrap the entire jar in duct tape then freeze the entire jar of sauce and lid with liquid nitrogen, you could crack the lid and jar off, easily remove the glass fragments that are somewhat still bound together with duct tape. Then put the frozen sauce globule (jar shaped still) in a pan to heat. Be careful to use protection in picking up the frozen sauce globule.
This has the added benefit of using both duct tape and liquid nitrogen. The man coolness factor is off the scale.
MacGyver would have to manufacture his own cutting torch using 3 matches, a shoestring, aluminum filings, and a caulking gun. Then I am sure it would involve duct tape and the properties of some obscure household item. But there is no doubt it would be cool, innovative, and have just enough credibility to make it sound possible.
This hand technique you speak of to open the jar, does it involve danger or explosives? I can't see its advantage unless there is some danger or science involved.
Hmmm...
I suppose that if it stated differently it has an appeal....
The elusive spaghetti sauce jar. When seen in captivity, they appear harmless and even lethargic. But here in the wilds of the modern kitchens, their natural aggression lurks just beneath the surface. Its simple glass body is docile when content, but should the jar be broken, those smooth sides instantly becom razor sharp deadly talons. Capable of slashing through your body muscle, tendon, and sinew, the jar can turn from domestic to destructive in a moment. Its unrelenting terror could render you helpless in a heart beat. And its sharp pointed daggers of glass could rip your throat right out.
What's this? We see a woman entering the kitchen... I think she is going to attempt to capture and open the jar of sauce. She is circling, circling, the jar is unmoved oddly enough with all this danger to its contents. At last! She seizes it with both hands!
She is now in a desperate struggle with the jar beast. She is trying desperately to force the lid off. But this is no ordinary jar of sauce and it is reluctant to give up its contents. Oh wait! She has called a male of the pack to come help. She is handing off the jar to the male...
They are struggling! It looks like we may see those razor sharp daggers at any time. But wait!!!!!! The male has the jar wrestled into submission now. He places his hand on the lid... yes... he definitely has his hand on the lid...
This could be it... Yes! He is turning the lid the full 90 degrees! And he has done it!!!!
Oh look! It is a bit gruesome to watch... but the female is now pouring out the insides of the jar of sauce into a pan. Oh Lord! The humanity! She has drained every drop from the jar and tossed it in the trash can.
And that is how males view opening the jar of spaghetti sauce
quote: ORIGINAL: <name removed>
quote:
Goobers, all of you!
join me next week when i incorporate power tools and home-made explosives to my aunt's famous mac and cheese recipe.
mmm, i'm sure i'll have lots left over, i am single. any takers?
That's Pro Goobers.
Macaroni and cheese. This could be a challenge... some appropriate containment strategies will have to be employed. I'll put together a dossier and notify the CIA.
I will file the flight plan with NASA. This should be interesting.
I just got a shipment of titanium wire in. Been looking for a good use for it. I think maybe we could use it to create a suspension rig for the magnetic rail gun to project the jar.
quote: ORIGINAL: <name removed>
Give me a can instead. Not a jar, a can. Actually three of them.
1.) Pork & Beans.
2.) Stag Chili.
3.) Canned Green Beans (preferably Green Giant brand).
Ah. Cans. Multiple. I see a home made mortar or cannon requirement. Man, 3 of them. How to get them all opened and combined at once. Now that will have be a clever trick.
Or maybe I am over-complicating this. Perhaps an old-fashioned trebuchet would do the trick. But we need to simmer, that means heat.... hmmm... AHA! Greek fire!
Oh yeah, this could be good. I will need my hard hat for this one.
quote: ORIGINAL: <name removed>
src="http://forums.crosswalk.com/upfiles/smiley/icon_smile_yikes.gif" alt="" align="middle" border="0" /> Spaghetti sauce, broken glass, and explosives. My oh my. The only thing missing is a torch. Ladies, isn't this why we don't let the guys in the kitchen unless they behave?
Did someone say they needed a torch? I have oxyacetylene, propane, and in a pinch, I can rig an oxygen tank together up with other flammable sources. Or do you just need the plain old "there's the ogre, grab your torch and pitchforks" kind of torch? I can soak some old rags in kerosene if you want.
All you ladies need to do is ask. When it comes to pyrotechnics, we men will try to oblige.
quote: ORIGINAL: <name removed>
quote: ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
You mean you guys don't have your OWN jaws of life? Weird.
I stupidly, stupidly lent my to a friend and now when I tell him I want it back, he gets all staticy on the phone like he doesn't have signal. And then I don't hear from him for awhile. What do you think this means?
It means it is time for some explosives to extricate said item from friend's domicile. Or just eliminate the domicile. Either works for me. I still get to wear my hard hat either way.
First off, I haven't figured out WHY you want to take the tire tracks off the entree. I mean, its like a garnish or something. Part of the presentation.
Oh man, a shop welder. Wow, that could be used to cook the meat by electrocution, or to build a custom rig to roast the roadkill on a spit. So many possibilities.
Monday, September 12, 2005
Can You Marry Without a Ceremony and Witnesses
The following question was asked:
Ok, I don't normally venture into these forums because of how quickly it becomes an opinion war, but I am going to risk it. I have read through most of the posts. Most are simply arguing back and forth it appears. And I *gasp* found myself agreeing with robalan at times. Had that not happened I would have ignored this entirely.
So here is my "opinion" to add to this, since that is pretty much all that is being discussed here.
The OP is definitely making some assumptions here, let me state them:
If the man and woman are not TRUE believers, they will never approach God in honesty and integrity with God's will in their hearts. This assumption must hold true for the OP to even be considered.
Simply asking for a blessing is one thing. But the OP did mention "they uphold their vows". There is a presumption then that this couple made some vow. If there is no vow to God, then this entire argument falls apart. If the first assumption holds, that they are believers, then they will make a vow to God. And if they make a vow to God, it is logical to conclude they made a vow to each other, though not a requirement and I don't know why I even mentioned it.
Lastly, these vows, for the argument to stand, must include a promise made by the man to live as her husband and the woman to live as his wife or there is no cause for debate, because there is no marriage and therefore no requirements.
So if all 3 assumptions hold we have then: a man and a woman, both true believers, vow to God to live as husband and wife. Ok, that is the baseline of the argument to draw from.
So then, if the man and woman are alive, they exist in some society. Any society of humans has rules, even if they are unwritten. Though a hypothetical case could be crafted, it is irrelevant. We live in a real world. There are no societies of humans without rules. And if the first assumption holds true, then at a minimum they have God's word and laws etched in their heart. So yes, they live in a society with rules.
If the couple do not abide by the rules (we call them laws) of the society in which they live, they are now in error with God. See Romans 13:1
Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
To not submit to the local laws of the society you live in is therefore sin.
Now just for discussion's sake, let's grant a case in which the local custom is that no legal papers are required, but the mere testimony of the couple as to their vow is sufficient. Though it is arguable that their verbal and non-verbal testimonies as lived out each day constitute legal papers.
So then is a ceremony required?
Arguably no. However, it depends on what you consider a ceremony. A quick search on The Free Dictionary produces this:
Using definition 2, by the act of the vows themselves, they have fulfilled this definition.
Using definition 3 would render the entire argument a moot point as it trivializes their vows to being empty and useless.
Using definition 4, a ceremony is not required.
So then we have that by definition 2, some kind of ceremony is held, if the assumption of vows holds.
Therefore it is illogical to posit the question as to whether or not a ceremony is required, because the act of vowing to God to live as husband and wife is some ceremony in and of itself.
I must therefore conclude that the only logical response to this OP question is the following:
Marriage outside of the rules of society violates God's requirements for us to live by the laws of the land and is therefore sinful.
This is my opinion. You mileage may vary.
Response was given:
My response to that:
Negative on the flaw. Where does the cohabitation reference come from? I never mentioned it. It was not in the OP. Why did you inject it? Cohabitation is irrelevant to the conclusion and was not part of the assumptions or the OP.
And in some American states, per the local social customs AND laws (yes on the books) cohabitation with sexual activity has been illegal in the past. But we are not discussing is it ok to have sex outside of marriage. Again you are introducing something that is irrelevant to the OP and the conclusion.
And you are misquoting the OP when you rearrange the words to suit your cohabitation argument and thus redirect the discussion beyond the OP.
I never addressed cohabitation. It was not part of the OP. If you want to craft a question that incorporates cohabitation I would gladly address that as well.
As far as I can tell, nothing you have said negates my assumptions or conclusions. The cohabitation argument is not part of the question that was being answered.
And another response, quoting another poster:
Was this raised in a later post? It is not in original.
Point to consider in the old testament. The Jewish culture was closely aligned with local culture when it came to business and contracts. In all cases of marriage in OT (at least that I could find), a woman was "given" in marriage and indeed there were legal penalties in the Mosaic Law for when the giver, the woman, or the receiver broke any of the terms of the contract. And furthermore a "certificate" of divorce was required to be written to terminate that contract. Explain why there are legal implications of contractual violation of marriage and a legal certificate was required by the Mosaic Law to release from contract if marriage was conducted in absence of a civilly or religiously recognized marriage or union.
Arguably true. Neither does it prescribe manner of attire, music, dating, cuisine, and many other facets of human existence. Granted.
All US states require official documentation to be granted legal status as married couples. Even in the form of common law marriage. To obtain the legal status as married, documentation has to be filed. Thus there are 2 primary methods prescribed by most US states. Some may have more. But the first is filing of a marriage certificate that MUST have witnesses that observed the marriage "happening". The second is that the person administering the marriage (i.e. doing the paperwork) is licensed in that state to do so.
All US states recognize each other marriages, and in general this is also part of international law. There are laws in place to protect the marriage internationally and domestically. However in the US, each state is responsible for its own laws, procedures, forms, and processing. That is why some states, notably Virginia for it less stringent requirements, are so popular to get married in.
Just because you can't see the legal machine at work does not mean it does not exist. Marriage and the protection of marriage is also discussed in the United Nations. And they approach these very issues. That is why almost without exception among all the countries that are part of the UN have some legal policy on the prescribed legal attainment of marriage and its preservation.
Some states, though they do not enforce the laws today, retain laws on the books that do just that and were enacted at the foundation of the state. However as they are not enforced I can allow their dismissal for debate.
However, when you turn the argument to the positive, every state has filing laws that require a marriage to be legally filed, usually requiring some small fee, that documents the marriage. This is so that there is proof that there is only one spouse per person (not sure about one particular state). Thus monogamy is supported legally through filing and paperwork. Polygamy is illegal in most states (maybe 49 in all - not sure about one).
Therefore you are incorrect about cohabitants considering themselves married. Indeed, they may think it, but there are legal ramifications. For example if you cohabitate with a "spouse" for a couple of years and then take a job that provides family health insurance, and you do not have proof that your "spouse" is your legal spouse, you are denied benefits in most cases. This is the case for federal employment and *most* large companies. Though some companies now offer medical insurance benefits to a "significant other". This is due mostly to homosexual tolerance and pandering. However, even in those cases, there has to be a documented monogamous relationship. Again, rules.
No, you have yet to show proof that marriage laws do not exist. Therefore my conclusion as I wrote it stands. I have shown in the above that such rules and laws exist not only domestically but internationally as well. I welcome to hear about exceptions. Yet as I said in my assertions, if you live in human society, there are rules and laws. And it IS the case that marriage is governed by all governments throughout the planet. Any exceptions are just that, exceptions.
Then by choosing not to obey the laws of the land, they are in sin. Again, my conclusion still stands.
But there are. Prove it otherwise. All US states, all countries have rules regarding marriage. Prove that statement wrong with more than opinion.
There is no requirement to seek marriage. But there are legal requirements for marriage. Blood tests, filing fees, assuring there are no existing marriages, mandatory waiting periods, etc. Again, where is your proof that these do not exist?
True. So what? That was not the question. I can cohabitate with someone of opposite gender for convenience of paying a mortgage and sleep in separate bed rooms. Possibly a dangerous thing to do for sure, but nothing prohibits this. If there is sexual relations, that is sin covered VERY well by the scriptures.
You are incorrect again. I have shown it clearly and you must show proof otherwise to make that assertion. There are civil rules governing marriage and rights. Are you talking about rights or sex? I think you appear to be justifying sexual relations outside of marriage. That is an entirely different thread. Do not take that up in this one.
Please!!!
If they live on this planet, then no it is not valid. Yes it is sin. Emphatically. Grammatically. Economically. Ecumenically. Theoretically. Stochastically. Scholastically. I think I have run out.
I ask you please. Show me the proof that there are no laws governing marriage? There is no place you can go to escape social laws, morays, customs, isms, rules, etc. As long as there are societal rules governing marriage, one must follow those rules. Only if those rules directly defy God's ordinances can they be suspect.
Edited: I asked if you were married. I checked out some of your posts. You are married. So I change my question to "are you legally married and gone through the legal process?
Edited again and for the last time.
~name-withheld~, I have now gone through some of your posts about this. You will never agree with me. I will never agree with you. When I saw you make the assertion that one cannot legally marry after divorce I realized something about your posts. Legalistic when convenient. Ignore laws when convenient. I am divorced and quite legally can remarry in God's eyes. Please pm me for disagreement and keep it away from these fine folks.
I cannot continue this debate despite the fact that I like debate. Your faith basis and mine are too far different.
I extract myself from this thread entirely. Have a good day folks. Sorry to have stirred the waters and left, but I see no logic in continuing.
If a man and woman proclaim their love to one another with only God as their witness and they ask God to bless them as man and wife without a ceremony or legal papers, and the man and woman stay faithful to one another and uphold their vows, is this considered in Gods eyes valid? Or is it sinful?
Ok, I don't normally venture into these forums because of how quickly it becomes an opinion war, but I am going to risk it. I have read through most of the posts. Most are simply arguing back and forth it appears. And I *gasp* found myself agreeing with robalan at times. Had that not happened I would have ignored this entirely.
So here is my "opinion" to add to this, since that is pretty much all that is being discussed here.
The OP is definitely making some assumptions here, let me state them:
- Both the man and woman are TRUE believers
- They MUST make each some vow, at a minimum to God, then to each other
- The vows to God must at a minimum be for the man to live as her husband, the woman to live as his wife
If the man and woman are not TRUE believers, they will never approach God in honesty and integrity with God's will in their hearts. This assumption must hold true for the OP to even be considered.
Simply asking for a blessing is one thing. But the OP did mention "they uphold their vows". There is a presumption then that this couple made some vow. If there is no vow to God, then this entire argument falls apart. If the first assumption holds, that they are believers, then they will make a vow to God. And if they make a vow to God, it is logical to conclude they made a vow to each other, though not a requirement and I don't know why I even mentioned it.
Lastly, these vows, for the argument to stand, must include a promise made by the man to live as her husband and the woman to live as his wife or there is no cause for debate, because there is no marriage and therefore no requirements.
So if all 3 assumptions hold we have then: a man and a woman, both true believers, vow to God to live as husband and wife. Ok, that is the baseline of the argument to draw from.
So then, if the man and woman are alive, they exist in some society. Any society of humans has rules, even if they are unwritten. Though a hypothetical case could be crafted, it is irrelevant. We live in a real world. There are no societies of humans without rules. And if the first assumption holds true, then at a minimum they have God's word and laws etched in their heart. So yes, they live in a society with rules.
If the couple do not abide by the rules (we call them laws) of the society in which they live, they are now in error with God. See Romans 13:1
Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
To not submit to the local laws of the society you live in is therefore sin.
Now just for discussion's sake, let's grant a case in which the local custom is that no legal papers are required, but the mere testimony of the couple as to their vow is sufficient. Though it is arguable that their verbal and non-verbal testimonies as lived out each day constitute legal papers.
So then is a ceremony required?
Arguably no. However, it depends on what you consider a ceremony. A quick search on The Free Dictionary produces this:
- A formal act or set of acts performed as prescribed by ritual or custom
- A conventional social gesture or act of courtesy
- A formal act without intrinsic purpose; an empty form
- Strict observance of formalities or etiquette
Using definition 2, by the act of the vows themselves, they have fulfilled this definition.
Using definition 3 would render the entire argument a moot point as it trivializes their vows to being empty and useless.
Using definition 4, a ceremony is not required.
So then we have that by definition 2, some kind of ceremony is held, if the assumption of vows holds.
Therefore it is illogical to posit the question as to whether or not a ceremony is required, because the act of vowing to God to live as husband and wife is some ceremony in and of itself.
I must therefore conclude that the only logical response to this OP question is the following:
Marriage outside of the rules of society violates God's requirements for us to live by the laws of the land and is therefore sinful.
This is my opinion. You mileage may vary.
Response was given:
The flaw in your conclusion is, as already stated, that there is nothing in social law or rules that requires a legal marriage for two partners to cohabit domestically.
Nor is there anything in social law making the act of living together unlawful or illegal without the benefit of a marriage license.
This makes your argument and conclusions moot....and the act of not marrying or living together without the benefit of a legal or religious observance not sinful at all based on God's requirements for us to obey the laws of the land.
The Laws of the land do not prohibit this type of arrangement, and therefore living together without the benefit of a marriage certificate remain perfectly legitimate before God based on the social rules test.
My response to that:
Negative on the flaw. Where does the cohabitation reference come from? I never mentioned it. It was not in the OP. Why did you inject it? Cohabitation is irrelevant to the conclusion and was not part of the assumptions or the OP.
And in some American states, per the local social customs AND laws (yes on the books) cohabitation with sexual activity has been illegal in the past. But we are not discussing is it ok to have sex outside of marriage. Again you are introducing something that is irrelevant to the OP and the conclusion.
And you are misquoting the OP when you rearrange the words to suit your cohabitation argument and thus redirect the discussion beyond the OP.
I never addressed cohabitation. It was not part of the OP. If you want to craft a question that incorporates cohabitation I would gladly address that as well.
As far as I can tell, nothing you have said negates my assumptions or conclusions. The cohabitation argument is not part of the question that was being answered.
And another response, quoting another poster:
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ Cohabitation is entirely relevant because the question has been raised by the original poster whether or not a living arrangement by couples without the benefit of a ceremony is valid.
Was this raised in a later post? It is not in original.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~
There is no legal or Biblical mandate to have a civilly or religiously recognized marriage or union.
Point to consider in the old testament. The Jewish culture was closely aligned with local culture when it came to business and contracts. In all cases of marriage in OT (at least that I could find), a woman was "given" in marriage and indeed there were legal penalties in the Mosaic Law for when the giver, the woman, or the receiver broke any of the terms of the contract. And furthermore a "certificate" of divorce was required to be written to terminate that contract. Explain why there are legal implications of contractual violation of marriage and a legal certificate was required by the Mosaic Law to release from contract if marriage was conducted in absence of a civilly or religiously recognized marriage or union.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ The Bible does not prescribe a means by which a marriage should take place or be recognized.
Arguably true. Neither does it prescribe manner of attire, music, dating, cuisine, and many other facets of human existence. Granted.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ Neither do US states. US states recognize anything from common law marriages from other jurisdictions, to common law marriage within their own jurisdictions. Some states even recognize marriages having ocurred after the fact for purposes of probate and inhertance when two people have merely lived together.
All US states require official documentation to be granted legal status as married couples. Even in the form of common law marriage. To obtain the legal status as married, documentation has to be filed. Thus there are 2 primary methods prescribed by most US states. Some may have more. But the first is filing of a marriage certificate that MUST have witnesses that observed the marriage "happening". The second is that the person administering the marriage (i.e. doing the paperwork) is licensed in that state to do so.
All US states recognize each other marriages, and in general this is also part of international law. There are laws in place to protect the marriage internationally and domestically. However in the US, each state is responsible for its own laws, procedures, forms, and processing. That is why some states, notably Virginia for it less stringent requirements, are so popular to get married in.
Just because you can't see the legal machine at work does not mean it does not exist. Marriage and the protection of marriage is also discussed in the United Nations. And they approach these very issues. That is why almost without exception among all the countries that are part of the UN have some legal policy on the prescribed legal attainment of marriage and its preservation.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ Those who choose to cohabit, yet consider themselves married before God with no civil or relgious recognition have no requirements placed upon them by the state to act otherwise, nor is their arrangement deemed illegal by the states.
Some states, though they do not enforce the laws today, retain laws on the books that do just that and were enacted at the foundation of the state. However as they are not enforced I can allow their dismissal for debate.
However, when you turn the argument to the positive, every state has filing laws that require a marriage to be legally filed, usually requiring some small fee, that documents the marriage. This is so that there is proof that there is only one spouse per person (not sure about one particular state). Thus monogamy is supported legally through filing and paperwork. Polygamy is illegal in most states (maybe 49 in all - not sure about one).
Therefore you are incorrect about cohabitants considering themselves married. Indeed, they may think it, but there are legal ramifications. For example if you cohabitate with a "spouse" for a couple of years and then take a job that provides family health insurance, and you do not have proof that your "spouse" is your legal spouse, you are denied benefits in most cases. This is the case for federal employment and *most* large companies. Though some companies now offer medical insurance benefits to a "significant other". This is due mostly to homosexual tolerance and pandering. However, even in those cases, there has to be a documented monogamous relationship. Again, rules.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ This makes your conclusion that a marriage not legally recognized as sinful to be completley false, because there are no "rules" or "laws" requireing such arrangements to be legally recognized or religiously recognized.
No, you have yet to show proof that marriage laws do not exist. Therefore my conclusion as I wrote it stands. I have shown in the above that such rules and laws exist not only domestically but internationally as well. I welcome to hear about exceptions. Yet as I said in my assertions, if you live in human society, there are rules and laws. And it IS the case that marriage is governed by all governments throughout the planet. Any exceptions are just that, exceptions.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ Those who choose such arrangements simply do not share or partake of the legal benefits legal marriages may automatically convey.
Then by choosing not to obey the laws of the land, they are in sin. Again, my conclusion still stands.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ The point is, you claimed that if it goes against local law, it is sin in God's eyes, because God requires us to defer to those in authority over us. While it is true that God requires us to obey the rules....there are no rules to obey in this case.
But there are. Prove it otherwise. All US states, all countries have rules regarding marriage. Prove that statement wrong with more than opinion.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ There are no legal requirements to marry...
There is no requirement to seek marriage. But there are legal requirements for marriage. Blood tests, filing fees, assuring there are no existing marriages, mandatory waiting periods, etc. Again, where is your proof that these do not exist?
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ There are no legal prohibitions against living together or cohabiting or whatever one wants to call it without the benefit of marriage.
True. So what? That was not the question. I can cohabitate with someone of opposite gender for convenience of paying a mortgage and sleep in separate bed rooms. Possibly a dangerous thing to do for sure, but nothing prohibits this. If there is sexual relations, that is sin covered VERY well by the scriptures.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ It therefore remains a false and erroneous conclusion that God considers such arrangements as inately sinful, because no civil laws or rules are being broken. PERIOD.
You are incorrect again. I have shown it clearly and you must show proof otherwise to make that assertion. There are civil rules governing marriage and rights. Are you talking about rights or sex? I think you appear to be justifying sexual relations outside of marriage. That is an entirely different thread. Do not take that up in this one.
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~ Back to the original question:
Please!!!
quote: ORIGINAL: ~name-withheld~quote:The answer to this question here, is an emphatic YES the arrangement is a valid marriage in God's eyes and an emphatic NO it is not sinful.
"If a man and woman proclaim their love to one another with only God as their witness and they ask God to bless them as man and wife without a ceremony or legal papers, and the man and woman stay faithful to one another and uphold their vows, is this considered in Gods eyes valid? Or is it sinful? "
If they live on this planet, then no it is not valid. Yes it is sin. Emphatically. Grammatically. Economically. Ecumenically. Theoretically. Stochastically. Scholastically. I think I have run out.
I ask you please. Show me the proof that there are no laws governing marriage? There is no place you can go to escape social laws, morays, customs, isms, rules, etc. As long as there are societal rules governing marriage, one must follow those rules. Only if those rules directly defy God's ordinances can they be suspect.
Edited: I asked if you were married. I checked out some of your posts. You are married. So I change my question to "are you legally married and gone through the legal process?
Edited again and for the last time.
~name-withheld~, I have now gone through some of your posts about this. You will never agree with me. I will never agree with you. When I saw you make the assertion that one cannot legally marry after divorce I realized something about your posts. Legalistic when convenient. Ignore laws when convenient. I am divorced and quite legally can remarry in God's eyes. Please pm me for disagreement and keep it away from these fine folks.
I cannot continue this debate despite the fact that I like debate. Your faith basis and mine are too far different.
I extract myself from this thread entirely. Have a good day folks. Sorry to have stirred the waters and left, but I see no logic in continuing.
Should Women Approach Men?
The following are some posts I made in a singles thread once about women approaching men for dating:
I see nothing wrong with a woman approaching a man.
I see two aspects of this. First is there a scriptural element, is this appropriate per the scriptures? Secondly, in our respective societies and cultures (not all are Americans here in these forums), what are the practical and security considerations?
I think that regarding the first part it is my assertion that a lot of our beliefs about this aspect of relationships comes from our cultural context. However, I think this deserves some exegesis.
So I am going to start looking through the scriptures for general and regulative principles. Just to keep things out of the Jewish cultural context, I will not be going to the Old Testament scriptures at this time, but instead I will concentrate on the New Testament scriptures first, then look to the OT second. I believe this is proper given that my pre-supposition is that our beliefs are mostly cultural and the NT has the most cross-cultural instructions.
This should be fun. I am really curious what scriptures will be used to support the various opinions.
Now regarding the second part, as an American, our culture and society is fairly level in this regard and has been for many generations. There exists a prevailing myth that the woman never approached first. However in hearing the stories from my own extended family about our past and present, I don't see there being any major alignment to either side.
Yet, I think it is culturally appropriate for Americans at least that the man be the one to propose. Maybe this is just tradition in me speaking, but as I think about it, it makes more sense. Using the scriptural model of the man being the head of the house, it only makes sense that he be the one to initiate such a union as he will be absorbing the bulk of the financial and leadership responsibilities.
Still, I have no problem with a woman approaching a man like me first to say "hey I like you". In fact, where is she?
post:
So when asked about the kinds of signal's a girl can give, the most "obvious" signals by girls' standards are not even seen by a guy. Subtlety is not the art of the male typically. It's easy. Follow me here.
1. Sitting alone looking pretty is not an obvious sign, maybe you always look like that. We can't tell if you are looking pretty specifically for us.
2. An occasional smile is not an obvious sign, everyone smiles. If you just smile at me when I stare, you could be just being polite, or smiling at the person behind me.
3. Laughing at his jokes is not an obvious sign, he obviously thinks they are funny anyway. We think we are funny. The laugh is expected anyway. Again, not a sign.
4. Doing things in secret hoping they are noticed is not an obvious sign, ask any woman in a relationship, they will tell you, guys don't notice this kind of stuff.
5. Giving gifts could be a sign, but could just weird us out unless we knew you better. So avoid this sign.
6. Hanging around near us a lot is not necessarily a sign. If we are confident, we expect people to want to. If we are not, we may think you are a loser like ourselves.
So what do you do then?
1. Just smile, say "hi", and follow that with "I noticed you" or "I like you". Trust me, if the guy is at all remotely interested, his brain just went from park to overdrive. That is how simple it is.
Thar's all. But I must caution you. Do not walk up to a guy and do that unless you want his attention, because you will get it.
post:
I was asked what it meant to "approach" a male. I responded with the following.
post:
Let me just say I am truly thankful for one woman in particular to take a small amount of initiative and email me just to say "hi" and "that was a good post". And then to email me a second time to say "isn't that sig line from Dune?"
That is all the approach it took. And I am thankful and happy for that approach.
Amy, thank you for approaching me so I could approach you and God could bring us together in His timing. And as we continue to walk toward each other, and cover these miles, it was you who took the first step. Thank you. I love you.
I see nothing wrong with a woman approaching a man.
I see two aspects of this. First is there a scriptural element, is this appropriate per the scriptures? Secondly, in our respective societies and cultures (not all are Americans here in these forums), what are the practical and security considerations?
I think that regarding the first part it is my assertion that a lot of our beliefs about this aspect of relationships comes from our cultural context. However, I think this deserves some exegesis.
So I am going to start looking through the scriptures for general and regulative principles. Just to keep things out of the Jewish cultural context, I will not be going to the Old Testament scriptures at this time, but instead I will concentrate on the New Testament scriptures first, then look to the OT second. I believe this is proper given that my pre-supposition is that our beliefs are mostly cultural and the NT has the most cross-cultural instructions.
This should be fun. I am really curious what scriptures will be used to support the various opinions.
Now regarding the second part, as an American, our culture and society is fairly level in this regard and has been for many generations. There exists a prevailing myth that the woman never approached first. However in hearing the stories from my own extended family about our past and present, I don't see there being any major alignment to either side.
Yet, I think it is culturally appropriate for Americans at least that the man be the one to propose. Maybe this is just tradition in me speaking, but as I think about it, it makes more sense. Using the scriptural model of the man being the head of the house, it only makes sense that he be the one to initiate such a union as he will be absorbing the bulk of the financial and leadership responsibilities.
Still, I have no problem with a woman approaching a man like me first to say "hey I like you". In fact, where is she?
post:
So when asked about the kinds of signal's a girl can give, the most "obvious" signals by girls' standards are not even seen by a guy. Subtlety is not the art of the male typically. It's easy. Follow me here.
1. Sitting alone looking pretty is not an obvious sign, maybe you always look like that. We can't tell if you are looking pretty specifically for us.
2. An occasional smile is not an obvious sign, everyone smiles. If you just smile at me when I stare, you could be just being polite, or smiling at the person behind me.
3. Laughing at his jokes is not an obvious sign, he obviously thinks they are funny anyway. We think we are funny. The laugh is expected anyway. Again, not a sign.
4. Doing things in secret hoping they are noticed is not an obvious sign, ask any woman in a relationship, they will tell you, guys don't notice this kind of stuff.
5. Giving gifts could be a sign, but could just weird us out unless we knew you better. So avoid this sign.
6. Hanging around near us a lot is not necessarily a sign. If we are confident, we expect people to want to. If we are not, we may think you are a loser like ourselves.
So what do you do then?
1. Just smile, say "hi", and follow that with "I noticed you" or "I like you". Trust me, if the guy is at all remotely interested, his brain just went from park to overdrive. That is how simple it is.
Thar's all. But I must caution you. Do not walk up to a guy and do that unless you want his attention, because you will get it.
post:
I was asked what it meant to "approach" a male. I responded with the following.
Well I don't think it means approach as in landing lights, wind sock, radar tower, and the like. I think of it as simple as a girl walking over to a guy and saying "hi, I just noticed you and wanted to introduce myself". Or even sending an email to a guy to say "hi, I just saw something you posted and wanted to talk about it with you"
post:
Let me just say I am truly thankful for one woman in particular to take a small amount of initiative and email me just to say "hi" and "that was a good post". And then to email me a second time to say "isn't that sig line from Dune?"
That is all the approach it took. And I am thankful and happy for that approach.
Amy, thank you for approaching me so I could approach you and God could bring us together in His timing. And as we continue to walk toward each other, and cover these miles, it was you who took the first step. Thank you. I love you.
My "Icky" Love Letter Posts
8/1/2005 6:28:25 PM
My dearest love,
I look at your long ebon locks of hair draped on your shoulders that frame your sweet face. I think of the veil of night that frames a dream. Your eyes are the starlight in this night. Your sweet smile is the crescent moon that lights a path to love. In dreams my heart takes flight through your skies. And on silken wings you fly to me. How long until the distance is gapped? How long until we at last embrace in unabashed love? Until then, my dearest, I dwell in your visage.
Your admiring slave of passion,
neuronstatic
8/1/2005 8:36:56 PM
My astral sweet,
Your love is like a supernova in my heart. I quantum leap when I but think of you. I get lost in the constellation of your eyes, and I don't want to steer a course away. I trek across the universe and no other as sweet as you do I find. You are my stargate to love. You are my peace keeper and I am your wanderer so far from home.
Your devoted human,
neuronstatic
8/5/2005 3:27:59 PM
<name withheld>,
I saw you today, though you were no where around. I sat at my desk and I closed my eyes and I saw you. I could see your smile, your eyes so bright, and you were so happy. I could see your hair, a light breeze blowing it loosely. I could feel the chill on my arms at the thought of touching your hair, of running my fingers through it.
I drew closer and I could hear your laugh. And I held that moment. Standing there, the living breathing woman that my heart longs for. I wanted to take you by the hand and tell you I love you. I wanted to tell you so many things, and I wanted to hear your voice. I wanted to hear just four words. I desperately wanted to hear "I love you too" spoken from your lips.
Yet slowly the sounds of an office rose up in my ears. I opened my eyes, and you were gone. I lost you without every having you. And I stare at my computer monitor. I sigh, and I go back to work. I live and I breathe, but my heart lingers on you. I write and I read, but my mind still holds that image of you.
I am hopeless.
8/8/2005 9:49:35 PM
C,
Tonight I saw your eyes. I looked into them and I saw beauty. The smile on your face made my heart leap. Time stopped and I drank in the vision of you. How I want to drink in that vision always. How do I wait? How do I go on? My dearest, do not keep me waiting forever. But as long as I must wait, I shall. You are worth the wait. And in waiting, I will dream of you. Until then, I hold the vision of your beauty near. I hold it tightly and I dare not let go. To let go of that vision would be madness. Until then my sweet. Until then.
K
8/13/2005 7:57:00 PM
To the love that was not,
But I wanted it to be.
See not from without,
Look inside of me.
See things that are kept
In secrets and dreams.
To long for you still,
Is harder than it seems.
Hope is now all but lost,
To find love in my life.
Yet still I continue to pray,
For a godly loving wife.
8/31/2005 11:28:01 PM
Dearest one,
You are so far from me, and yet I hold you in my thoughts so closely. I see your face in my dreams. And I picture us walking arm in arm. I long for a day with you, and even more so I long for a night. I long to make you my wife and enjoy you forever.
I would so much like to reach out to you right now and hold you. Pull you tight against me and feel our hearts beating together. And feel the warmth of your skin against mine. I have these desires, they are so strong. God requires me to wait still. And wait I shall. But I wait in hope that I will hold you one day.
I must now be patient and wait for the Lord's leading. Oh how I pray that the Lord leads you to me. My heart is yours for the asking. I willingly share it with you. Come now and take my heart and take my hand. Walk with me through life and let our love grow always.
Good night my sweet, may God keep you in the hollow of His hand. And may I soon caress you each night.
My dearest love,
I look at your long ebon locks of hair draped on your shoulders that frame your sweet face. I think of the veil of night that frames a dream. Your eyes are the starlight in this night. Your sweet smile is the crescent moon that lights a path to love. In dreams my heart takes flight through your skies. And on silken wings you fly to me. How long until the distance is gapped? How long until we at last embrace in unabashed love? Until then, my dearest, I dwell in your visage.
Your admiring slave of passion,
neuronstatic
8/1/2005 8:36:56 PM
My astral sweet,
Your love is like a supernova in my heart. I quantum leap when I but think of you. I get lost in the constellation of your eyes, and I don't want to steer a course away. I trek across the universe and no other as sweet as you do I find. You are my stargate to love. You are my peace keeper and I am your wanderer so far from home.
Your devoted human,
neuronstatic
8/5/2005 3:27:59 PM
<name withheld>,
I saw you today, though you were no where around. I sat at my desk and I closed my eyes and I saw you. I could see your smile, your eyes so bright, and you were so happy. I could see your hair, a light breeze blowing it loosely. I could feel the chill on my arms at the thought of touching your hair, of running my fingers through it.
I drew closer and I could hear your laugh. And I held that moment. Standing there, the living breathing woman that my heart longs for. I wanted to take you by the hand and tell you I love you. I wanted to tell you so many things, and I wanted to hear your voice. I wanted to hear just four words. I desperately wanted to hear "I love you too" spoken from your lips.
Yet slowly the sounds of an office rose up in my ears. I opened my eyes, and you were gone. I lost you without every having you. And I stare at my computer monitor. I sigh, and I go back to work. I live and I breathe, but my heart lingers on you. I write and I read, but my mind still holds that image of you.
I am hopeless.
8/8/2005 9:49:35 PM
C,
Tonight I saw your eyes. I looked into them and I saw beauty. The smile on your face made my heart leap. Time stopped and I drank in the vision of you. How I want to drink in that vision always. How do I wait? How do I go on? My dearest, do not keep me waiting forever. But as long as I must wait, I shall. You are worth the wait. And in waiting, I will dream of you. Until then, I hold the vision of your beauty near. I hold it tightly and I dare not let go. To let go of that vision would be madness. Until then my sweet. Until then.
K
8/13/2005 7:57:00 PM
To the love that was not,
But I wanted it to be.
See not from without,
Look inside of me.
See things that are kept
In secrets and dreams.
To long for you still,
Is harder than it seems.
Hope is now all but lost,
To find love in my life.
Yet still I continue to pray,
For a godly loving wife.
8/31/2005 11:28:01 PM
Dearest one,
You are so far from me, and yet I hold you in my thoughts so closely. I see your face in my dreams. And I picture us walking arm in arm. I long for a day with you, and even more so I long for a night. I long to make you my wife and enjoy you forever.
I would so much like to reach out to you right now and hold you. Pull you tight against me and feel our hearts beating together. And feel the warmth of your skin against mine. I have these desires, they are so strong. God requires me to wait still. And wait I shall. But I wait in hope that I will hold you one day.
I must now be patient and wait for the Lord's leading. Oh how I pray that the Lord leads you to me. My heart is yours for the asking. I willingly share it with you. Come now and take my heart and take my hand. Walk with me through life and let our love grow always.
Good night my sweet, may God keep you in the hollow of His hand. And may I soon caress you each night.
Friday, August 19, 2005
Do we over spiritualize dating?
There has been a lot of verbiage tossed about regarding how we are to approach our singleness and dating. I have seen a lot of confusion on the part of many, myself included, as to how spiritual our approach and our dating should be. Some hold to an extreme that it is just dating, no big deal, just don't sin. Others hold to an extreme that sees the entire approach to singleness as a spiritual matter second only to their salvation. While I know that I may be exaggerating a bit, it is to illustrate the range of opinions.
To me, finding my life partner is an overtly spiritual journey. But there are general and regulative principles from scripture to apply here. These principles tell me that my focus is to be on God, but I am perfectly free to seek a life partner, and in my case, should do so. There are also principles that tell me that God is in control, and I must be active in seeking this partner to work with God. At no time are these scriptural principles at odds. On the contrary the complement each other well.
So my question is:
To be sure, I am not condemning anyone for how they perceive their own spiritual life or how they proceed with their singleness. I just don't agree with everyone.
For starters, some have the impression that I have somehow separated out finding my future special woman from my spiritual walk. Well, you were wrong in the presumption and over-analysis of my question. That is simply not the case.
Indeed, as this is one of the most significant journeys of my life, I involve God in all aspects of it including praying for wisdom and guidance for myself, praying for God to provide me with the right woman, and praying that God protect me from the pain, betrayal, and my own fears of the past.
What I personally think of when I refer to over-spiritualizing our singleness and dating, is when people do one of the following:
This does not mean I set up the scales with God on one side and all my other stuff of life on the other. Absolutely not!
This DOES mean that I have to balance all things in my life on the fulcrum of God. He is my underpinning, my foundation, and in Him only do I find my existence. But He also destined me for a full life to enjoy His creation and all His spiritual and physical blessings He has in store for me.
For this man Kevin, I fully believe and feel directed by God, that I am to seek and pursue a godly woman to fulfill my emotional and physical needs as my wife. And she will be the one that, in like fashion, God would have directed her to seek me to be the one to fulfill her emotional and physical needs as her husband.
You know its interesting to note that the longer I walk the earth, the easier it is to see how amazing God is and how He has planned and moved completely without my help. I find that comforting. And when I see God in everything, it becomes quite natural to see how God weaves our lives together. So the longer I walk with Christ, the more natural it becomes to see the handiwork of God in all things.
And for me, the more natural that becomes, and the more I see His hand at work, the more natural it looks. So it is no longer some deep spiritual movement that I see in a particular situation or event, but the quite obvious and natural movement of the Holy Spirit at work. And thus all things are of God's creation, order, and design and are moved according to His purpose.
So then the "natural" world for me becomes God's world. It is not God moving in a foreign world. It is God moving His plan, and His works, through His creation. And knowing that I am a part of that creation, I know that He has placed me in this world specifically, it was not by chance, it was ordained of God. And to this purpose: we are all here to Glorify God.
God delights in His creation. He has created a marvelous dwelling for us all. Even while it is in this fallen state, it is beautiful. I can only imagine how much more beautiful it was before the fall. So when I look to the creation, I see animals moving and living, birthing and dying, and hunting and eating. God has made it clear that it is He that feeds all these creatures and sustains them. Yet they still take action and move and hunt and kill in order to survive. The images that come to mind are that of lions chasing prey and, funny enough, a bird "listening" for worms to pull from the ground.
So it appears to me that living in the creation with God at the helm and in control of all things is a fact of existence. And like the lions and the birds, I must be at all times actively working for God, to do His will in my life, and listen to him for my sustenance.
And now back to the OP. It is clear to me, that there is no conflict between my active participation in my relationships and pursuit of a wife and my being mindful and listening to God for His direction. I must do both. I must work according to His plan for my life and I must listen to Him to know what that plan is.
For me, then, living is spiritual by nature and so I find God in all events and activities of life even when I am not looking for Him. Thank God for that.
Edited to note: And all that worked. I found my lifelong mate, Amy. I was not looking for her, but God drew us together and we only did as He would have us do. So we emailed, we called, and we talked. And in all things, God was moving. I love that woman, Amy, my wife.
To me, finding my life partner is an overtly spiritual journey. But there are general and regulative principles from scripture to apply here. These principles tell me that my focus is to be on God, but I am perfectly free to seek a life partner, and in my case, should do so. There are also principles that tell me that God is in control, and I must be active in seeking this partner to work with God. At no time are these scriptural principles at odds. On the contrary the complement each other well.
So my question is:
How much of our dating and seeking a partner in life is overtly spiritual and how much is under spiritual principles but is more akin to just daily living?
To be sure, I am not condemning anyone for how they perceive their own spiritual life or how they proceed with their singleness. I just don't agree with everyone.
For starters, some have the impression that I have somehow separated out finding my future special woman from my spiritual walk. Well, you were wrong in the presumption and over-analysis of my question. That is simply not the case.
Indeed, as this is one of the most significant journeys of my life, I involve God in all aspects of it including praying for wisdom and guidance for myself, praying for God to provide me with the right woman, and praying that God protect me from the pain, betrayal, and my own fears of the past.
What I personally think of when I refer to over-spiritualizing our singleness and dating, is when people do one of the following:
- Apply general and regulative principles from the scriptures inappropriately. For example, there is a general principle that we be in the world but not of it, and then misapplying that to say I could never take a date to a non-Christian movie.
- Translate a command of God into a set of rules to limit freedom in Christ. For example, we are commanded to do all things to the glory of God, and then misapplying that to say that based on their opinion of some things, like going bowling or to the movies, certain activities are prohibited because they do not overtly glorify God.
- Look at practical living and place undue spiritual emphasis on physical matters. For example, there is no spiritual dilemma in choosing the color of my shirt when I would go to meet my special woman on a date. She may have a preference for a specific color for me to wear, and I want to please her, but I do not have to fret and wring my hands over it.
- Take spiritual direction in one person's life and assume it is generally applicable to all. For example, some may have been single a long time and now feel that God has given them the direction that they are to remain single and not to worry about it. But that does not mean that all singles are to simply accept that direction given to another. We are to look to God in our own walk, our own situations, and pursue His purpose for our lives with vigor and clarity, and I believe that means at times doing something that may seem completely opposite of what another has been directed to do.
- Looking at a particular situation in your life and using the temporal feeling you have as your spiritual barometer. Two examples: a) you find someone you are REALLY attracted to and you know "this must be the one" and you move too quickly, when it may just be your natural attraction to them and you end up getting hurt, and b) you find someone you are REALLY attracted to, but you don't get that feeling of "the one" and you move too slowly and lose the opportunity and end up getting hurt.
- Taking the scriptures too far in our practical daily lives. For example, some have made statements that sound pious, but when taken exactly as written, without the context of the scriptures around it, would indicate our very existence should be day and night reading the Word and praying with only minimal bodily sustenance and the rejection of all pleasures. God never intended that for everyone, and only arguably for monks.
This does not mean I set up the scales with God on one side and all my other stuff of life on the other. Absolutely not!
This DOES mean that I have to balance all things in my life on the fulcrum of God. He is my underpinning, my foundation, and in Him only do I find my existence. But He also destined me for a full life to enjoy His creation and all His spiritual and physical blessings He has in store for me.
For this man Kevin, I fully believe and feel directed by God, that I am to seek and pursue a godly woman to fulfill my emotional and physical needs as my wife. And she will be the one that, in like fashion, God would have directed her to seek me to be the one to fulfill her emotional and physical needs as her husband.
You know its interesting to note that the longer I walk the earth, the easier it is to see how amazing God is and how He has planned and moved completely without my help. I find that comforting. And when I see God in everything, it becomes quite natural to see how God weaves our lives together. So the longer I walk with Christ, the more natural it becomes to see the handiwork of God in all things.
And for me, the more natural that becomes, and the more I see His hand at work, the more natural it looks. So it is no longer some deep spiritual movement that I see in a particular situation or event, but the quite obvious and natural movement of the Holy Spirit at work. And thus all things are of God's creation, order, and design and are moved according to His purpose.
So then the "natural" world for me becomes God's world. It is not God moving in a foreign world. It is God moving His plan, and His works, through His creation. And knowing that I am a part of that creation, I know that He has placed me in this world specifically, it was not by chance, it was ordained of God. And to this purpose: we are all here to Glorify God.
God delights in His creation. He has created a marvelous dwelling for us all. Even while it is in this fallen state, it is beautiful. I can only imagine how much more beautiful it was before the fall. So when I look to the creation, I see animals moving and living, birthing and dying, and hunting and eating. God has made it clear that it is He that feeds all these creatures and sustains them. Yet they still take action and move and hunt and kill in order to survive. The images that come to mind are that of lions chasing prey and, funny enough, a bird "listening" for worms to pull from the ground.
So it appears to me that living in the creation with God at the helm and in control of all things is a fact of existence. And like the lions and the birds, I must be at all times actively working for God, to do His will in my life, and listen to him for my sustenance.
And now back to the OP. It is clear to me, that there is no conflict between my active participation in my relationships and pursuit of a wife and my being mindful and listening to God for His direction. I must do both. I must work according to His plan for my life and I must listen to Him to know what that plan is.
For me, then, living is spiritual by nature and so I find God in all events and activities of life even when I am not looking for Him. Thank God for that.
Edited to note: And all that worked. I found my lifelong mate, Amy. I was not looking for her, but God drew us together and we only did as He would have us do. So we emailed, we called, and we talked. And in all things, God was moving. I love that woman, Amy, my wife.
What To Expect
Welcome to the ADD world of neuronstatic.
Allow me to describe what not to expect here in this blog. First and foremost, do not expect to find things you will always agree with. Secondly, do expect to find things that always have a simple answer.
What should you expect? You should expect to see some controversial things you may or may not agree with. You should expect to see things that are often complex and cannot be easily summed up.
Why did I create this blog? Because I have been posting on Crosswalk forums and some of the things I have posted were my honest thoughts and I decided I wanted to explore some of those ideas a little further without boring everyone in the threads.
What do I expect of you? Just respect me and know that my intentions are not to attack any one person nor am I seeking to try to elevate myself above others. My honest intentions are to record here some of the things I think about, regardless of what any others may think of them. So therefore expect that I will delete any flaming comments. I can take criticism, but I will not leave acerbic comments on this blog.
With that, I bid you peace. Enter or leave at your leisure. No one will force you to read anything.
Allow me to describe what not to expect here in this blog. First and foremost, do not expect to find things you will always agree with. Secondly, do expect to find things that always have a simple answer.
What should you expect? You should expect to see some controversial things you may or may not agree with. You should expect to see things that are often complex and cannot be easily summed up.
Why did I create this blog? Because I have been posting on Crosswalk forums and some of the things I have posted were my honest thoughts and I decided I wanted to explore some of those ideas a little further without boring everyone in the threads.
What do I expect of you? Just respect me and know that my intentions are not to attack any one person nor am I seeking to try to elevate myself above others. My honest intentions are to record here some of the things I think about, regardless of what any others may think of them. So therefore expect that I will delete any flaming comments. I can take criticism, but I will not leave acerbic comments on this blog.
With that, I bid you peace. Enter or leave at your leisure. No one will force you to read anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)