-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
We can use the one up above, the genesis verse.
I'm not sure I see how.
My position has been, make the commitment to be together, and when you have sex, you are married. it's the sex that is the moment of marriage. I'm on record as saying the commitment first more than a time or two. The question was si there something in the Bible about living together before marriage. I guess I am guilty of taking a tangent there. I went to what WOULD be ok on Biblical standards.
I'm pretty sure I had the commitment in there. At a point it was what made it a marriage. That is the sex. If she and he made a commitment, move in, had sex, they are married. THAT is what the Bible shows a marriage to be. DIfferent cultures had different parties. But it was a covenant between families, lasted several days, culminated in the sexual act, and proof was required. SOMETIMES THEY WATCHED to make sure. Only then, was it a marriage.
there is only a need for an agreement between the two people. Well in American main stream culture I guess. For the most part, we don't have people marrying off their daughters for gifts. Arranged marriages are not that common, although they are still here.
Show me. Show me that in Scripture, Show me God's idea of marriage. Having a a legal document, didn't occur until Rome got involved. The Church were the only people (nearly) who knew how to read and write. So, where before the families had a covenant they had to inform themselves, later the Church did the covenants. That's also WHEN The church got involved in marrying people, as opposed to the two families doing it without the church there.
I'll concede that is fact, if you concede there was no legal marriage license involved.
We are left with an agreement between familes, a feast, a sexual act, and confirmation there WAS a sexual act, and they are married in God's eyes, the families eyes, and any witnesses eyes.
Ummmmm, ok, clarify, And I've said it before, but obviously it's been a bit. THEY COMMIT TO EACH OTHER, and have sex, and it's a marriage. As opposed to a one night stand. ALTHOUGH, I'm pretty sure if they have sex, God looks at them as ONE person. BUT, I have some iffys here.
no, it doesn't.
I'll give you all of that. for reasons above.
No, it's not. And it's pretty impressive that you feel justified to make that call from text alone, with no voice inflection, and guess (errr ASSUME) my motivation. I use sarcasm to lighten the tone. I use sarcasm instead of just calling a person out for being a rude@@$@. I use sarcasm to mimic their behavior. Sarcasm makes it obvious it's not wholly serious, but a point is made. I find it hilarious though, that a great number of times I was sarcastic, I was mirroring the person who spoke down at me with their logic, tone, and attention. So somehow you feel that is belittling them, but its ok for them to do it to me. Yeah, Every watch Saturday Night Live?
SMILE
show me where I was inappropriate. 
Educate me.
What makes you think YOU have to know and approve of what and why they do things? Two men eating meat.... one it was a sin the other it wasn't. The message was, they shouldn't be judging the other. I think, perhaps, the biggest problem may be someone imposing their standards and interpretations of scripture on others. I"m generally focused on what the scripture says. But the more I do that, the more people want to get personal. THEN when I call them on that, you call me a big ole sarcastic meanie.
LEGAL MARRIAGE, didn't exist in Jesus time. Not in the sense you have in America now. THERE WAS NO GOVERNMENTAL LICENSING involved. The covenant was between families.
Today, lacking arranged marriages, the two people getting married would make the call and arrangements.
My most significant beef, I guess, is your insisting on a cultural marriage today, that wasn't the culture then. That part being the "legal license" we have today. That concept was non existant the n.
The agreement was between families. Enforced by families.
Today that would be the two being married.
I'm not sure I see how.
My position has been, make the commitment to be together, and when you have sex, you are married. it's the sex that is the moment of marriage. I'm on record as saying the commitment first more than a time or two. The question was si there something in the Bible about living together before marriage. I guess I am guilty of taking a tangent there. I went to what WOULD be ok on Biblical standards.
I'm pretty sure I had the commitment in there. At a point it was what made it a marriage. That is the sex. If she and he made a commitment, move in, had sex, they are married. THAT is what the Bible shows a marriage to be. DIfferent cultures had different parties. But it was a covenant between families, lasted several days, culminated in the sexual act, and proof was required. SOMETIMES THEY WATCHED to make sure. Only then, was it a marriage.
there is only a need for an agreement between the two people. Well in American main stream culture I guess. For the most part, we don't have people marrying off their daughters for gifts. Arranged marriages are not that common, although they are still here.
Show me. Show me that in Scripture, Show me God's idea of marriage. Having a a legal document, didn't occur until Rome got involved. The Church were the only people (nearly) who knew how to read and write. So, where before the families had a covenant they had to inform themselves, later the Church did the covenants. That's also WHEN The church got involved in marrying people, as opposed to the two families doing it without the church there.
I'll concede that is fact, if you concede there was no legal marriage license involved.
We are left with an agreement between familes, a feast, a sexual act, and confirmation there WAS a sexual act, and they are married in God's eyes, the families eyes, and any witnesses eyes.
Ummmmm, ok, clarify, And I've said it before, but obviously it's been a bit. THEY COMMIT TO EACH OTHER, and have sex, and it's a marriage. As opposed to a one night stand. ALTHOUGH, I'm pretty sure if they have sex, God looks at them as ONE person. BUT, I have some iffys here.
no, it doesn't.
I'll give you all of that. for reasons above.
No, it's not. And it's pretty impressive that you feel justified to make that call from text alone, with no voice inflection, and guess (errr ASSUME) my motivation. I use sarcasm to lighten the tone. I use sarcasm instead of just calling a person out for being a rude@@$@. I use sarcasm to mimic their behavior. Sarcasm makes it obvious it's not wholly serious, but a point is made. I find it hilarious though, that a great number of times I was sarcastic, I was mirroring the person who spoke down at me with their logic, tone, and attention. So somehow you feel that is belittling them, but its ok for them to do it to me. Yeah, Every watch Saturday Night Live?
SMILE
If it were self-directed, perhaps I'd feel differently, but it is always outwardly directed, in this thread and others.
Educate me. What makes you think YOU have to know and approve of what and why they do things? Two men eating meat.... one it was a sin the other it wasn't. The message was, they shouldn't be judging the other. I think, perhaps, the biggest problem may be someone imposing their standards and interpretations of scripture on others. I"m generally focused on what the scripture says. But the more I do that, the more people want to get personal. THEN when I call them on that, you call me a big ole sarcastic meanie.
LEGAL MARRIAGE, didn't exist in Jesus time. Not in the sense you have in America now. THERE WAS NO GOVERNMENTAL LICENSING involved. The covenant was between families.
Today, lacking arranged marriages, the two people getting married would make the call and arrangements.
My most significant beef, I guess, is your insisting on a cultural marriage today, that wasn't the culture then. That part being the "legal license" we have today. That concept was non existant the n.
The agreement was between families. Enforced by families.
Today that would be the two being married.
Once a man and a woman join together, they are consider married. The marriage ceremony was just to prove to others that they belong to one another, but God know the heart; He doesn't need a ritual to prove that a man and a woman is married. When God made the covenants, He perform them because they were our rituals to confirmed a contract. But now we suppose to put away our childish ways when we make an agreement with one another, we just make sure that our Yes be yes, and our No be no.
I
im not saying these scriptures are exactly what you need to read to change your views, i also had questions about what a marriage really is. its basically a committed relationship, but -
Hebrews 13:4
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
1 Cor. 7:1
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
1 Cor. 7:39
A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
Matthew 19:2-9
And large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate
Matthew 5:32
But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery
scripture makes it clear that man / woman is only suppose to have ONE wife / husband (sexual partner), even after divorce (unless the ex died).. and in todays society, a "partnership" is not official. times have changed, and the way marriage is set up now, is for a reason. Lords will will be done. unless it is a committed relationship because in 2013, it is too easy to just walk away from a "partnership". the more i think about it, the more messed up todays world is and how "we" do things.
God emphasizes structure (law), and in todays society, there is no law in a "partnership". there is no commitment.
but at the end of the day - you interpret scripture the way you want. and there really is no scripture about modern marriage. clearest scripture about marriage is Hebrews 13:4 "Let marriage be held in honor among all". every other scripture about marriage is basically the laws of marriage / commitment. you can be right, i can be wrong, i can be right, you can be wrong, or we both can be right. its up to the reader and his / her partner to decide their commitment.
but if they want to live a life together without "getting married", then whats the point of not making it official? before God..
Hebrews 13:4
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
1 Cor. 7:1
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
1 Cor. 7:39
A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
Matthew 19:2-9
And large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate
Matthew 5:32
But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery
scripture makes it clear that man / woman is only suppose to have ONE wife / husband (sexual partner), even after divorce (unless the ex died).. and in todays society, a "partnership" is not official. times have changed, and the way marriage is set up now, is for a reason. Lords will will be done. unless it is a committed relationship because in 2013, it is too easy to just walk away from a "partnership". the more i think about it, the more messed up todays world is and how "we" do things.
God emphasizes structure (law), and in todays society, there is no law in a "partnership". there is no commitment.
but at the end of the day - you interpret scripture the way you want. and there really is no scripture about modern marriage. clearest scripture about marriage is Hebrews 13:4 "Let marriage be held in honor among all". every other scripture about marriage is basically the laws of marriage / commitment. you can be right, i can be wrong, i can be right, you can be wrong, or we both can be right. its up to the reader and his / her partner to decide their commitment.
but if they want to live a life together without "getting married", then whats the point of not making it official? before God..
Last edited:
There a lot of Brides and Grooms can't wait for this day.
At a Massai wedding in Kenya it is not uncommon to see the bride’s father bless his daughter by spitting on her head and breasts before she leaves the village with her new husband.
25 Extremely Strange Wedding Traditions
At a Massai wedding in Kenya it is not uncommon to see the bride’s father bless his daughter by spitting on her head and breasts before she leaves the village with her new husband.
25 Extremely Strange Wedding Traditions
W
it is honor for humans to do marriage and they live together. born children and live happy life
with it if boy and girl live they do sin and it is not good for them
society can not run with our marriage we all will be destroyed
marriage is beauty of society and it is holy relationship. respect it live in it
thank you
other against thought can be freedom but it is limitless freedom and it called sin
with it if boy and girl live they do sin and it is not good for them
society can not run with our marriage we all will be destroyed
marriage is beauty of society and it is holy relationship. respect it live in it
thank you
other against thought can be freedom but it is limitless freedom and it called sin
IF they make the commitment, they meet this standard.
This backs up the conjugal part of the commitment.
this is what I meant by COMMITMENT in my other posts.
This backs up the thought if they JOIN they are one to not be separated again. Thus the commitment part of my position.
again, the commitment part. NONE of these imply that them moving in, making a commitment to each other, would be anything but a marriage in God's eyes.
I disagree on the very clear part, but I agree one wife is better. Who can handle that many headaches. (had to say it before one of the women said it about us...)
In the example we are discussing here, it would only BE ONE marriage, onewife/one husband.
The rate of divorce of a couple that lived together and THEN got married is much better than the opposite.
That's inaccurate, it's called common law marriage. The law allows for it. It's on the books in one form or another in every state of the Union I believe. If not every then all but one or two.
[/COLOR] I don't know what the point is. In fact, if they are committed to each other, who are you or anyone to say that they didn't make it official before God.
That's just cultural prejudice.
our differences are pretty well defined. I know where you are coming from, I just think it's a biblical reach as NOTHING backs up that view directly. In fact the situation in the OP with the caveat they are not just together to do the nasty together, and they DO make a commitment, would meat every verse anyone has posted.
This backs up the conjugal part of the commitment.
this is what I meant by COMMITMENT in my other posts.
This backs up the thought if they JOIN they are one to not be separated again. Thus the commitment part of my position.
again, the commitment part. NONE of these imply that them moving in, making a commitment to each other, would be anything but a marriage in God's eyes.
I disagree on the very clear part, but I agree one wife is better. Who can handle that many headaches. (had to say it before one of the women said it about us...)
In the example we are discussing here, it would only BE ONE marriage, onewife/one husband.
The rate of divorce of a couple that lived together and THEN got married is much better than the opposite.
That's inaccurate, it's called common law marriage. The law allows for it. It's on the books in one form or another in every state of the Union I believe. If not every then all but one or two.
[/COLOR] I don't know what the point is. In fact, if they are committed to each other, who are you or anyone to say that they didn't make it official before God.
That's just cultural prejudice.
our differences are pretty well defined. I know where you are coming from, I just think it's a biblical reach as NOTHING backs up that view directly. In fact the situation in the OP with the caveat they are not just together to do the nasty together, and they DO make a commitment, would meat every verse anyone has posted.
Actually, the rate of divorce is much higher for those who "tried it out" by living together before getting married.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/o...ohabiting-before-marriage.html?pagewanted=all
Also, how do you explain the Samaritan woman at the well? She was "with" someone who was not her husband. It sounds like she did have some sort of commitment to him - more than a one-night stand. She'd had 5 other husbands, but this one was not a husband. What was the difference between this one and the other five? Why did Jesus not see this one as a husband?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/o...ohabiting-before-marriage.html?pagewanted=all
Also, how do you explain the Samaritan woman at the well? She was "with" someone who was not her husband. It sounds like she did have some sort of commitment to him - more than a one-night stand. She'd had 5 other husbands, but this one was not a husband. What was the difference between this one and the other five? Why did Jesus not see this one as a husband?
I
you actually repeated everything i said in my last post and in some way, used it against me,
"but at the end of the day - you interpret scripture the way you want. and there really is no scripture about modern marriage. clearest scripture about marriage is Hebrews 13:4 "Let marriage be held in honor among all". every other scripture about marriage is basically the laws of marriage / commitment. you can be right, i can be wrong, i can be right, you can be wrong, or we both can be right. its up to the reader and his / her partner to decide their commitment."
but failed to address Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be held in honor among all"
which is similar to getting baptized. i like to compare getting baptized to getting married. its a commitment. you are committing yourself to somebody (Jesus), and when you get baptized, you are in the church and in front of everybody in it (Let marriage be held in honor among all).
so yes, in my opinion, a marriage is a little deeper than just a partnership.
you are not saved until you get baptized, you are not husband and wife until you get married. theres a process to each.
yes, God knows your heart, but its more than clear that you need to get baptized to be saved. so what makes the marriage with another less of a commitment / process than getting baptized.
"but at the end of the day - you interpret scripture the way you want. and there really is no scripture about modern marriage. clearest scripture about marriage is Hebrews 13:4 "Let marriage be held in honor among all". every other scripture about marriage is basically the laws of marriage / commitment. you can be right, i can be wrong, i can be right, you can be wrong, or we both can be right. its up to the reader and his / her partner to decide their commitment."
but failed to address Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be held in honor among all"
which is similar to getting baptized. i like to compare getting baptized to getting married. its a commitment. you are committing yourself to somebody (Jesus), and when you get baptized, you are in the church and in front of everybody in it (Let marriage be held in honor among all).
so yes, in my opinion, a marriage is a little deeper than just a partnership.
you are not saved until you get baptized, you are not husband and wife until you get married. theres a process to each.
yes, God knows your heart, but its more than clear that you need to get baptized to be saved. so what makes the marriage with another less of a commitment / process than getting baptized.
I guess they weren't devoted to one another. Marriage is when both party are one (Devoted to each other)and if they are with each other without love, isn't a marriage. Most men in those days didn't married just to one woman, and Jesus has said that no one can't serve two, because eventually they will love one over the other. So the man didn't love the woman at the well; that is probably why she was unhappy and looking for a better life.
M
He did see the man as her husband because he first addressed the man as her husband.
He conceded within mercy that she didn't see him as her husband in her heart and commitment in holy matrimony when she refuted.
In essence she was admitting she was just being a hoochy so it was like jesus said
"ok, if you wanna play it that way then, lets continue on to the main point"
Did Jesus assume incorrectly when he first regarded the man she was with as her husband?
Or did the woman assume incorrectly when she contended(was contentious) that she wasn't actually married.
(kinda like how people in world do when living together sexually active but dont see that partner as their spouse)
I ascertain Jesus was the correct one in his first statement to her in verse 16 of John 4
He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.”
How did Jesus know to say call your husband when the man was not even with the Samaritan woman?
Because Jesus already knew....He then went on to reveal facts of her life which a stranger could not have known showing her he had divine intimate knowledge of her private life.
Yes this was a test, a test to her and what she believed.
But he was helping her to voice it out with his line of dialogue.
The discovery being more to herself than to him that she did not believe as a follower of God therefore did not condemn or convict her at that moment but instead drew her closer offering her the essence of eternal life.
Just as with most of us, we must first believe in Christ before we shed the incorrect beliefs of the world in favor of those of our heavenly father.
Jesus as well demonstrated not condemning or judging someone who is not aware of their sin.
Since we do not know sin until we are told of sin
In an ingenious way he was allowing her to voice an admission of guilt likely to later reveal to her how to correct her way of life after first leading her to him.
He conceded within mercy that she didn't see him as her husband in her heart and commitment in holy matrimony when she refuted.
In essence she was admitting she was just being a hoochy so it was like jesus said
"ok, if you wanna play it that way then, lets continue on to the main point"
Did Jesus assume incorrectly when he first regarded the man she was with as her husband?
Or did the woman assume incorrectly when she contended(was contentious) that she wasn't actually married.
(kinda like how people in world do when living together sexually active but dont see that partner as their spouse)
I ascertain Jesus was the correct one in his first statement to her in verse 16 of John 4
He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.”
How did Jesus know to say call your husband when the man was not even with the Samaritan woman?
Because Jesus already knew....He then went on to reveal facts of her life which a stranger could not have known showing her he had divine intimate knowledge of her private life.
Yes this was a test, a test to her and what she believed.
But he was helping her to voice it out with his line of dialogue.
The discovery being more to herself than to him that she did not believe as a follower of God therefore did not condemn or convict her at that moment but instead drew her closer offering her the essence of eternal life.
Just as with most of us, we must first believe in Christ before we shed the incorrect beliefs of the world in favor of those of our heavenly father.
Jesus as well demonstrated not condemning or judging someone who is not aware of their sin.
Since we do not know sin until we are told of sin
In an ingenious way he was allowing her to voice an admission of guilt likely to later reveal to her how to correct her way of life after first leading her to him.
R
It is simply giving The devil an oppurtunity to come in and tempt both of you. Most people would eventually cave into the temptation.... It is man' s nature to want to fulfill the natural desires when we are in Love especially. Do not give Satan a chance if you really want to stay celibate until marriage...
M
I have done this with an ex-girlfriend, and earnestly plead with you not to do it. In my arrogance, I thought it did not matter what men thought, and that God would know the truth and that is all that mattered. I believed I would be immune from temptation, and that no harm would be done as I would (probably) marry the girl.
We never did have sex (the physical act itself), but we were certainly guilty of sexual immorality, and this wickedness has hurt my precious wife as much as if I had had sex itself, even though I met my wife years later. Whenever my wife and I quarrel, this sin of mine always comes to her mind and the devil uses it to extend or escalate our quarrel to his advantage. As David was severely hindered in administering justice after his sin with Bathsheba, so this sin has lasting (probably lifelong) implications in my own life, and not only mine, but the lives of my wife and family.
I remember trying to witness to others while living with this woman, and being told by non-Christians exactly what others on this forum have rightly pointed out - I was "shacked up" with that girl and living as a hypocrite, how could God tell them anything through me? In the end, I often ended up living a lie (and telling lies), and feeling unable to witness because of hypocrisy. I remember pleading with God for our relationship to end, to be able to escape the snare in which I had entrapped myself (the woman was in a cult which masqueraded as a church). God blessed me and saved me from this sinful lifestyle, but I and my family will continue to live with the consequences of my past sin, and I will one day have to give an account to Him for this great wickedness.
I wish today that one of my Christian relatives or friends would have severely rebuked me, and told me what I am saying to you, before this chapter in my life had even started. As 1 Thes 5:22 says, we are to "Abstain from all appearance of evil.", not just evil itself.
Talk with Christian friends/family, or even just Christians in your church about finding a place to stay if you need to move. But most definitely, I believe it is a serious sin for Christian boyfriends/girlfriends to live together, and the consequences will be for life.
We never did have sex (the physical act itself), but we were certainly guilty of sexual immorality, and this wickedness has hurt my precious wife as much as if I had had sex itself, even though I met my wife years later. Whenever my wife and I quarrel, this sin of mine always comes to her mind and the devil uses it to extend or escalate our quarrel to his advantage. As David was severely hindered in administering justice after his sin with Bathsheba, so this sin has lasting (probably lifelong) implications in my own life, and not only mine, but the lives of my wife and family.
I remember trying to witness to others while living with this woman, and being told by non-Christians exactly what others on this forum have rightly pointed out - I was "shacked up" with that girl and living as a hypocrite, how could God tell them anything through me? In the end, I often ended up living a lie (and telling lies), and feeling unable to witness because of hypocrisy. I remember pleading with God for our relationship to end, to be able to escape the snare in which I had entrapped myself (the woman was in a cult which masqueraded as a church). God blessed me and saved me from this sinful lifestyle, but I and my family will continue to live with the consequences of my past sin, and I will one day have to give an account to Him for this great wickedness.
I wish today that one of my Christian relatives or friends would have severely rebuked me, and told me what I am saying to you, before this chapter in my life had even started. As 1 Thes 5:22 says, we are to "Abstain from all appearance of evil.", not just evil itself.
Talk with Christian friends/family, or even just Christians in your church about finding a place to stay if you need to move. But most definitely, I believe it is a serious sin for Christian boyfriends/girlfriends to live together, and the consequences will be for life.
M
This is a great testimony, thank you for sharing as I believe it will speak to others who try to justify the same.
Praise God for bringing you to enlightened truth as he is always faithful to do when we listen in obedience.
On the other hand, As many people who are held accountable by another brother or sister and spout the "don't judge me" or "you're not God" excuse when confronted... can I ask you a question.
Thinking back, can you share how you would have handled a rebuke at the time?
-Met with resistance
-Or humbly embraced it
Praise God for bringing you to enlightened truth as he is always faithful to do when we listen in obedience.
On the other hand, As many people who are held accountable by another brother or sister and spout the "don't judge me" or "you're not God" excuse when confronted... can I ask you a question.
Thinking back, can you share how you would have handled a rebuke at the time?
-Met with resistance
-Or humbly embraced it
Last edited:
M
Thank you - I am so grateful to God for bringing me out of that situation, as I was so miserable, finally realising I was living in sin, but unable to escape since having started. I have often wondered about how I would have handled it if someone were to have rebuked me. I believe if they had simply rebuked me because I was opening myself up to temptation, in my arrogance, I may have ignored their words (depending on how much respect I had for the brother or sister).
If, on the other hand, the brother/sister had told me that I would be sinning simply by giving a poor testimony for Christ, because my actions would have had the appearance of evil (in addition to temptation), and had quoted 1 Thes 5:22 to me, I like to think that I would have reconsidered, and repented, although it is hard to say with certainty.
Again, though, I would have to have had respect for the brother or sister rebuking, due to my pride at the time. If the brother or sister had some serious theological or doctrinal belief flaws (even in unrelated areas), I would definitely have been less likely to heed their words.
If, on the other hand, the brother/sister had told me that I would be sinning simply by giving a poor testimony for Christ, because my actions would have had the appearance of evil (in addition to temptation), and had quoted 1 Thes 5:22 to me, I like to think that I would have reconsidered, and repented, although it is hard to say with certainty.
Again, though, I would have to have had respect for the brother or sister rebuking, due to my pride at the time. If the brother or sister had some serious theological or doctrinal belief flaws (even in unrelated areas), I would definitely have been less likely to heed their words.