Finding Identity in Relationships/Marriage

  • 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.
B

BlackDove

Guest
#1
I've often heard it said by people that one should not go into a relationship or marriage thinking or hoping that the other person will "complete" them, or "make them whole", etc. Henceforth we will call this "taking identity" in your significant other.

Why would taking that approach be a problem though? Is it because people are too selfish to "complete" anyone? To only give and never take? Is it just setting yourself up for disappointment? Or do people think it's "too much commitment" or "too clingy?"

Philosophically speaking, I find this view to be quite appealing, however. Think of it this way:

It seems apparent to me that God created us with not one, but two "holes in our hearts" as they say: one would be for our longing for God and the heavenly, and the other would be for human companionship (male-female companionship; e.g. emotional and physical intimacy). God said in Genesis (as I'm sure you all know), "It is not good for man to be alone...", implying he created us to desire this kind of companionship. In fact, we need companionship to be made whole in this area (if one's worldview etc allows for such a thing).

So if we take identity in Christ (hopefully) to complete and fill one hole in ourselves, why is it frowned upon to take identity in your significant other?

If anything, I think if more people found "totality", "completeness", or "oneness" with their significant others, we would find the divorce rate to be drastically lower. The Western idea of love is pretty shallow in the sense that it is found almost entirely on affectionate feelings and not commitment. We love only on the basis of an implied contract, and once that contract is "broken" (due to inconveniences, typically), we leave instead of saying to ourselves "I am bound to this person and they to me; we have no choice but to stay together."

(Of course if they're beating you or otherwise abusing you, that's a different story. I know as well as everyone else that there are exceptions to these sorts of things.)

I'm not saying I'm some sort of ultra-clingy freak who falls maniacally in love with people on the first date (nor that I want to be), but I think what I'm saying is I think we as a culture need to start treating relationships a little bit more "permanently" like they were intended to be. Upon marriage, the two individuals "become one flesh", and I seriously don't think we as a culture really stop to fathom what that truly means. Heck, in many cultures there isn't even such a thing as dating, people just marry! And you know what? Statistically they're generally happier than us on the whole, because they know love isn't about feeling, it's about "oneness", and they have that identity in each other that as it was meant to be.

Thoughts?
 
H

heart4him

Guest
#2
hey black dove :)

Interesting post, good thoughts.

I disagree though, because finding our identity in Christ implies somewhat of a dependence on Christ, right? I mean... if you cannot be complete without Him, much of your life is contingent upon Him. Therefore if we leave any room to say that we're "incomplete" without a significant other, that also implies dependency on him/her... and I think that God only wants us to be dependent on a spouse. God is supposed to be the one we put all our trust in, all our hope in, our rock on solid ground, etc. You won't find any references to a spouse being those things in scripture.

You also cannot depend on spouses the way we depend on Christ because man is fallen. What if you marry the "perfect" christian woman for you, in 5 years she falls away from the Lord.. cheats on you and leaves you... if she is what made you complete, then what? You're now incomplete again? I don't think thats the case. Whereas Christ will never leave you for forsake you, your contingency upon Him is secure.

You said something about where in the bible it says how it is not good for man to be alone, and then you finished it with "therefore we need companionship on order to be whole." I don't think thats right in the last part. Paul wrote most of the new testament and he didn't have companionship. In my opinion he seemed pretty whole, and pretty on point in His relationship with the Lord.

Anyway. I could be wrong...just some thoughts. :) Thanks for the thought provoking post.
 

Kakashi

Senior Member
Jan 3, 2007
626
2
0
36
#3
hey black dove :)

Interesting post, good thoughts.

I disagree though, because finding our identity in Christ implies somewhat of a dependence on Christ, right? I mean... if you cannot be complete without Him, much of your life is contingent upon Him. Therefore if we leave any room to say that we're "incomplete" without a significant other, that also implies dependency on him/her... and I think that God only wants us to be dependent on a spouse. God is supposed to be the one we put all our trust in, all our hope in, our rock on solid ground, etc. You won't find any references to a spouse being those things in scripture.

You also cannot depend on spouses the way we depend on Christ because man is fallen. What if you marry the "perfect" christian woman for you, in 5 years she falls away from the Lord.. cheats on you and leaves you... if she is what made you complete, then what? You're now incomplete again? I don't think thats the case. Whereas Christ will never leave you for forsake you, your contingency upon Him is secure.

You said something about where in the bible it says how it is not good for man to be alone, and then you finished it with "therefore we need companionship on order to be whole." I don't think thats right in the last part. Paul wrote most of the new testament and he didn't have companionship. In my opinion he seemed pretty whole, and pretty on point in His relationship with the Lord.

Anyway. I could be wrong...just some thoughts. :) Thanks for the thought provoking post.
Amen! I agree with all of this!
 
S

SeekinHIM

Guest
#4
Dear heart4him,

This is great.............wow, excellent response and the TRUTH..............When we are so consumed by JESUS in us, then we become vessels THAT POUR OUT onto all others, of course our spouse first, unless as you stated, we serve our KING as Paul did.................remembering Paul's statement about CONTENTMENT ................I HAVE FOUND THE SECRET OF BEING CONTENT WITH MUCH OR WITH LITTLE.................

This is why Paul was so content. He discovered the secret of THE WORD (JESUS), a secret "thread" of Truth throughout the entirity of the Bible, which is culminated in Colossians 1: 26 & 27 Which .............that is the mystery which has been HIDDEN (Paul's secret) from the past ages and generations, BUT HAS NOW BEEN MANIFESTED TO HIS SAINTS...........TO WHOM GOD WILLED TO MAKE KNOWN WHAT IS THE RICHES OF THE GLORY OF THIS MYSTERY AMONG THE GENTILES WHICH IS CHRIST IN YOU, THE HOPE OF GLORY.................

This is OUR Sabbath REST as spoken in Hebrews chapter 4.....................Enjoy your rest Sister......


SeekinHIM
 
S

sportygirl

Guest
#5
I agree with this to on some level but God has to be the first person to fill your heart, because if you try to let your spouse fill all of it they can never live up to the standards we set for them yes they can fill that other hole but i see that hole is much smaller than the one God fills.
 
May 4, 2009
1,534
6
0
#6
So then how do I get God to fill my heart? Since I'm even starting to realize that I won't be happy even with a girlfriend if God isn't filling me up...
 
B

BlackDove

Guest
#7
I agree with this to on some level but God has to be the first person to fill your heart, because if you try to let your spouse fill all of it they can never live up to the standards we set for them yes they can fill that other hole but i see that hole is much smaller than the one God fills.
I think that's definitely a given, yeah. God must always be first in a Christian's life, and if He decides to bless us with spouses, then they must always come second.

You said something about where in the bible it says how it is not good for man to be alone, and then you finished it with "therefore we need companionship on order to be whole." I don't think thats right in the last part. Paul wrote most of the new testament and he didn't have companionship. In my opinion he seemed pretty whole, and pretty on point in His relationship with the Lord.
Like I mentioned too, after I had said "we need companionship to be whole" I had also said "if one's worldview etc allows for it." I think if God calls you to the kind of ministry He did with Paul (which was definitely extraordinary) and it leads you to actually shed the need for companionship, then it becomes a non-issue. It's definitely not a black or white scenario.

You also cannot depend on spouses the way we depend on Christ because man is fallen. What if you marry the "perfect" christian woman for you, in 5 years she falls away from the Lord.. cheats on you and leaves you... if she is what made you complete, then what? You're now incomplete again?
If your spouse ended up forsaking God, cheating on you, and leaving, then yes you would be incomplete again in this aspect of your life (though not in Christ of course, should your faith remain strong). But does that mean we should always approach marriage as if that's expected to happen, or rather invest in that person as if it won't, and that God will prevail between you both? If you do find identity in your significant other, I definitely think God must be the center of that identity as well. Because then if He truly is, how can it fail?

One this is for certain that I've seen repeated here a few times though, and that is ultimately contentment in Christ is the most important thing we can have in this regard. Because we all know that He may not choose to bless someone with a spouse during their life here on earth. Would such a person be complete in Christ, but should they always desire a husband or a wife, be something of incomplete as a human?

Thanks for your thoughts guys!
 
B

BlackDove

Guest
#8
So then how do I get God to fill my heart? Since I'm even starting to realize that I won't be happy even with a girlfriend if God isn't filling me up...
What would be your primary identity should you acquire a girlfriend? A "Christian", or a "Boyfriend"?

I think it's definitely possible to be content and full in the Lord and still feel the sting of interpersonal loneliness (again, should your worldview allow it), which is kind of one of the points I'm presenting here. I think if we keep our focus on our identity as emissaries of Christ and stay true to the new life and purpose Christ has given us, then we can find fullness in Him.

I don't know you personally, so I don't know what your spiritual life looks like, but I'm just speaking from my own experience here. I always feel closest to God when I actively take part in what my identity in Him calls for.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#9
i dont know which ones right and which isn't. But I've heard two theories about this. One is that you must become a whole complete person first and then get married. The other is that you must find someone who is strong where you are weak and vice versa. The first is like two whole people coming together , 1+1 = 2. The second is like two people fitting together like a lock and key, if each person is half complete, that's 0.5+0.5 = 1. I always think the first theory seems the better way to be. I think that's why people who marry later say in their 30's often have longer lasting marriages, than people who marry as teens.
 
B

BlackDove

Guest
#10
i dont know which ones right and which isn't. But I've heard two theories about this. One is that you must become a whole complete person first and then get married. The other is that you must find someone who is strong where you are weak and vice versa. The first is like two whole people coming together , 1+1 = 2. The second is like two people fitting together like a lock and key, if each person is half complete, that's 0.5+0.5 = 1. I always think the first theory seems the better way to be. I think that's why people who marry later say in their 30's often have longer lasting marriages, than people who marry as teens.
That's a nice bit to chew on, thanks Snail. : )
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
14,940
4,581
113
#11
i dont know which ones right and which isn't. But I've heard two theories about this. One is that you must become a whole complete person first and then get married. The other is that you must find someone who is strong where you are weak and vice versa. The first is like two whole people coming together , 1+1 = 2. The second is like two people fitting together like a lock and key, if each person is half complete, that's 0.5+0.5 = 1. I always think the first theory seems the better way to be. I think that's why people who marry later say in their 30's often have longer lasting marriages, than people who marry as teens.

To add an even further twist to the apparent mathematical equation of love ;), I'm in a group right now that is currently viewing a series called, "Don't Get Married Until..." and the pastor (who's in his early 30's and is married with a daughter) said that marriage is actually meant to work as a multiplication:

1 (whole person) X 1 (whole person) = 1 complete marriage as God intended it.

I have yet to figure that out or experience it... but I thought that was another interesting interpretation.
 
Dec 21, 2009
538
1
0
55
#12
IF
YOU CANNOT STAND ALONE IN GOD
AND BECOME THE INDIVIDUAL GOD HAD INTENDED YOU TO BE
AND NEVER FIND THAT IDENTITY THAT SETS YOU ALONE
BY YOURSELF

THEN
ADDING ANOTHER TO THE EQUATION
WOULD ONLY EQUAL
DISASTER

TO HELP ANOTHER IN LOVE OR MARRIAGE
IS TO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND WHO YOU ARE FIRST
 
G

greatkraw

Guest
#13
To add an even further twist to the apparent mathematical equation of love ;), I'm in a group right now that is currently viewing a series called, "Don't Get Married Until..." and the pastor (who's in his early 30's and is married with a daughter) said that marriage is actually meant to work as a multiplication:

1 (whole person) X 1 (whole person) = 1 complete marriage as God intended it.

I have yet to figure that out or experience it... but I thought that was another interesting interpretation.
this is closer to the truth

you must be a whole CONTENT(ie NOT NEEDY) person while you are still single
part of contentment isbeing abel to identify your weaknesses as well as your strengths

then a union is NOT ABOUT how the other person will strengthen you but how you will strengthen them
 

Kakashi

Senior Member
Jan 3, 2007
626
2
0
36
#14
To even add on to what Seoul said: I think we must be content in Christ, but that does not mean we have to be perfect before we get married. i do think there are many obstacles we should overcome before we marry, but it hit me one day that we can;t wait till we are perfect, but we must definetly be teachable! Being teachable means that you are always willing and ready to grow and will grow. i think that's a huge aspect of being "whole" in Christ because we are always searching for the truth in him. That requires a teachable attitude.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#15
What does content mean? That you couldn't care less if you do or don't get married? That you really don't need the other person if push comes to shove?
 
Mar 18, 2009
190
2
0
#16
Wow...this is a very interesting (and somewhat controversial) topic, to say the least.

Here's my thoughts...

The "Identity" Issue: God or Spouse?

God describes Himself in the Bible as a jealous God, in that He wants no one before Him in the hearts of mankind. Unlike others, who may feel the same way, as our Creator he has that right, whether we like it or not. He won't force us to love Him, but if and when we choose to, He desires first place in our hearts, minds, and lives. I also feel its important to note that God's in no hurry. He will not demand to be allowed into any area of our life, if we are not willing to surrender that piece of ourselves. Surrendering to God is a very slow process, and often day-to-day. From the moment we accept Christ, we will spend the rest of our lives growing closer to God, one step at a time.

God made man in the Garden of Eden, and declared everything - literally, "every thing" - to be good, or pure in his sight...except for man's loneliness. After naming every animal, Adam was still alone, and God recognized that only another human could fill that particular area of his heart. This was set into motion before the Fall, and so God created a woman, to help, aid, and better the man, just as he would do the same for her. Man and woman, male and female, were inherently designed by God to compliment each other, in every way...but God did not create Eve as a replacement for Himself in Adam's life. Above all else - even the newfound joy and peace which Adam finally had with Eve - God's original purpose was still intact: He wanted first place, in both their lives.

How does this work in 21st-century society? Well, we admittedly bear a lot more difficulties than Adam & Eve originally had. The Fall placed all of us under a curse, which effectively severed our relationship with God. Jesus' death and resurrection restored that in many ways, but our flesh will eventually die..there's no escaping that. Unlike we once were, human beings are no longer immortal on Earth. Also, Jesus Himself said that in heaven, marriage won't be the same as it is here. We don't know exactly what this means, or how it will be applied, but nevertheless its fairly clear that earthly marriage is, by definition, a temporary arrangement, righteously severed by only death or infidelity. In this context, "irreconcilable differences" means nothing. Once we say "I do", we are bound to our spouse for the rest of our lives...period.

That's why it is so very important to consider as many situations as possible, before taking your vows. You can never plan everything about the future, but the more scenarios you discuss with your beloved, the better. I strongly believe that of all the reasons for divorce these days, one of the biggest is the simple fact that many - Christian or otherwise - do not take the institution of marriage seriously. In order to function best as a husband or wife, your relationship with God must be one of trust and faith in Him, more than your spouse or even yourself. It's a sad reality that no matter our intentions, other people will always let us down, in one way or another. If you go into marriage believing that your spouse will never hurt or disappoint you, you're a fool. They are just as fallible as you are, and they will make mistakes just as you will. Trusting your spouse isn't sinful or wrong by any means, but placing all trust in them isn't right. In the end, God must be more important to you than your spouse; otherwise, your marriage will never become all that God created it for. These things aren't easy to "hear" or read - believe me, I feel somewhat hypocritical in writing them - but that doesn't make them any less true.

The Age of Marrying: Younger or Older?

Generally speaking, I think that both choices - marrying in your late teens or early twenties, and waiting until your thirty, forty, or older - have benefits and drawbacks. The first matter of concern is one I find rather obvious: longevity of the marriage. After all, if you get married at 40, how likely do you think it is to reach your 50th wedding anniversary? Now, please don't misunderstand me: I am not advising people to marry young simply for the sake of status. To do so would be foolish, rash, and almost heretical by Christian standards. however, I also feel that many in our current society are telling young people to wait for the wrong reasons.

Think about it: if you went into your local church, what kind of reaction do you think you'd get if you told someone, "My 18-year-old-daughter is shacking up with her 19-year-old boyfriend"? Personally, I'd be surprised if the reply wasn't something like this: "Oh, that's too bad; I'll pray for them." Now, you go into that same scenario again, only this time you're telling your friend, "My 18-year-old daughter wants to marry her 19-year-old boyfriend"...howls of protest would likely fill that church faster than a coyote's family reunion. Almost everyone would tell you, "They're too young! They'll ruin their lives!"...and when asked why, here's just a few reasons which might get tossed your way...

1) They need to finish college first!
2) They need to have a home of their own!
3) They need a high-paying, prosperous job!
4) They need a car, and preferably a new one!
5) they need to sow their wild oats first, and live life!
6) They're not smart enough! (or the popular variant, "They're just being foolish!")

Of all these, I'd like you to consider one question: which of them are accomplished easier, and with more reliability, by single people instead of married people? In other words, which of these can't be as easily done by a married man or woman? What is to stop a married person from furthering their education, searching for a better job, or saving for a house and car? Statistically, the difficulty of these things between spouses and singles is practically equal. Parents often indoctrinate their kids to wait for marriage, not so much out of love or support, but rather fear. They're afraid that they haven't prepared them enough, or that the kids won't continue along the path they deem to be "right" for them. So, in a desperate move to keep their offspring "in line", some parents will emotionally manipulate their kids, even threatening not to help them whatsoever if they make the "wrong" (a.k.a. "their own") choice.

If anything, marrying earlier can provide many things for college-aged adults, that they'd never get while single. Emotional and spiritual support on a daily basis; companionship; another income to help "balance the scales" for both involved; intimacy with both God and each other. Some of these are debatable, but overall how much sense does it make to struggle for 10 or 20 years as a single, just to satisfy some public perception that marriage belongs in the "older crowd"?

The final aspect of this which I will mention (at least for now) is the sexual arena. Now, before I get into this, I want to stress very clearly that I am NOT advising anyone - man or woman, young or old - to marry for sex in and of itself. Once again, to make such a recommendation would be self-defeating and stupid. However, given the extremely corrupt and lust-ridden state of our current culture, how sensible is it to think that each and every person raised in a Christian home will remain sexually pure until they reach the age of 30? Parents can teach and model wonderful, Godly morals for their kids, and the children can love God with every fiber of their being...but in the heat of the moment, it's all too easy to justify anything to ourselves.

As anyone who's gone through puberty knows, sex drives are insanely strong, and willpower alone will not prevent them from breaking through. There's always exceptions to the rule, but in my opinion it's far better to allow a young couple who's in love and committed to marry, so they can express their God-given desires without fear, guilt, or shame. That bond, being emotional, mental, and spiritual plus the physical, will give both the husband and wife different forms of strength that they wouldn't find elsewhere...its one of the many reasons why God designed us the way He did, in the first place! Anyone who says that "sex is just for having children" needs to seriously re-examine their worldview.
 
B

BlackDove

Guest
#17
I pretty much agree with everything you've said Moviefan2k4, well said! Thanks for sharing your thoughts!