Contentment in singlehood

[RodColeman]

Only to those who idolize marriage. The right attitude is, either single or married, be content in every circumstance.

There's a difference between being content in something and being content with something. If I'm homeless of unemployed or in debt, should I be "content" with that, or work to make changes?

And in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul says that if you're not content with being single, then maybe it's better to marry. Paul does say that he, personally, is content with being single, and that he wishes that everyone was like him. But he also says that not everyone's like that, and says that he's not commanding singleness.

 

[Lovette]

Well, that's a pretty bleak outlook.

What's bleak is the church's failure for young men, many are found turning to Andrew Tate and red pill community for guidance.

These are the only possible options, eh?

No, cue the Handmaiden's Tale, like in muslim countries. They have male headship, guaranteed.

He who can accept it. In other words, lifelong singleness isn't for everyone.

Neither is marriage.

 

[Lovette]

There's a difference between being content in something and being content with something. If I'm homeless of unemployed or in debt, should I be "content" with that, or work to make changes?

And in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul says that if you're not content with being single, then maybe it's better to marry. Paul does say that he, personally, is content with being single, and that he wishes that everyone was like him. But he also says that not everyone's like that, and says that he's not commanding singleness.

What's the point of any discussion on marraige when you're not in a relationship, when you don't even know anybody? This is like discussion on a blueprint of a house, but there's neither land plot, building material nor contractor for it.

 

[Lovette]

I'm mainly doing this out of curiosity and, yes, entertainment. I, too, doubt that I will change his mind. I just keep wondering in what new directions these ideas will go, haha.

Then rest your mind, my only logic is that singlehood is the DEFAULT status, marriage is a choice, not the other way around, as you're told. God doesn't owe anybody a spouse, He didn't make an Eve for every Adam. Is anybody born with a betrothal? That they already have a partner waiting for them, once they reach the age they can pick up their other half and get married? Or is it your choice to pursue a partner?

 

[Lovette]

There's a difference between being content in something and being content with something. If I'm homeless of unemployed or in debt, should I be "content" with that, or work to make changes?

And in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul says that if you're not content with being single, then maybe it's better to marry. Paul does say that he, personally, is content with being single, and that he wishes that everyone was like him. But he also says that not everyone's like that, and says that he's not commanding singleness.

And btw, even if you're not content with singleness and you do wanna marry, it is God who join a man and a woman together, it's up to God, not you. If you go pursue a partner on your own accord and you push for marriage just for the sake of getting married, that's a recipe for disaster.

 

[RodColeman]

"What's the point of any discussion on marriage when you're not in a relationship, when you don't even know anybody? This is like discussion on a blueprint of a house, but there's neither land plot, building material nor contractor for it."

If you want to be married, that's fine. Getting married is a big decision, for sure. So there's definitely a "point" to learning about marriage when you're single. If I'm a young person in middle school or high school, I might not know much about money or finances yet, because managing those things on my own is not quite as important as it will be as an adult. Does that mean a young person engaging in a discussion of financial issues, or learning about financial issues, is pointless?

And, yeah, sure, everyone's single by default. So what? You repeat this point a lot, but it doesn't seem all that important. You seem to be saying that staying single is "natural" and that engaging in a romantic relationship or romance is somehow "unnatural" because it's something you have to "force" or something.

What other states can I be in by "default"? Well, I can be unemployed. I can have bad hygiene. I can have bad social skills. I can sleep around all day. I can fail to write a will in the event of my death. All sorts of things. Does that mean I should never take any action to change my default status?

Yeah, marriage is a choice. So what? Doesn't mean it's wrong. How else are you supposed to get married? These things don't just happen.

You also say that God joins people together in marriage. Are you talking about the idea of "soulmates" or something? Because that's not in the Bible anywhere. Marriage is something you can choose to pursue (see 1 Corinthians 7:39) A lot of people think God is a Puppetmaster who's running every aspect of your love life, but the Bible doesn't say anything about that.

 

[Lightbeamrider]

Then rest your mind, my only logic is that singlehood is the DEFAULT status, marriage is a choice, not the other way around, as you're told.

You would not be here if not for all your reproducing female ancestors back to the beginning of humanity.

God doesn't owe anybody a spouse, He didn't make an Eve for every Adam.

He did make females capable of biological reproduction. What good is all that if there is no reproduction? Dead-ending your bloodline and spitting on your female ancestors who raised all their offspring?

Is anybody born with a betrothal? That they already have a partner waiting for them, once they reach the age they can pick up their other half and get married? Or is it your choice to pursue a partner?

Arranged marriages were common back in the day

What's bleak is the church's failure for young men, many are found turning to Andrew Tate and red pill community for guidance.

Who is and what does that matter? There are plenty of male haters out there. What problem do you have with Tate when you recommend Margaret Atwood?

No, cue the Handmaiden's Tale, like in muslim countries. They have male headship, guaranteed.

That book was written to bash Christian Fundamentalism, focusing on Old Testament verses to the exclusion of the New by a male-hating conspiracy nut.

The book tells a chilling account of a modern-day America run by a totalitarian, theocratic republic called Gilead, replacing the once secular, democratic state. It is an echo of the Islamic Republic established in Iran after the 1979 Revolution, which was close to the time that Atwood wrote her novel. However, the villains of this cruel republic are not Muslim, the villains of “The Handmaid’s Tale” are fundamentalist Christians who commit unspeakable acts with the intention of restoring Biblical morality to the world. “The Handmaid’s Tale” provides an opportunity for those of all religions to reflect on the way they are living out their faith, especially those in power. The main plot revolves around rampant infertility and infant mortality rates of the nation. The Republic of Gilead blames this on fallen morality and is set on restoring it. In this new state, when a member of the pious ruling class cannot have a child—a situation where the blame is always placed on the woman, never on the man—the state sends the family a “handmaid” to conceive in her place. Handmaids are fertile, young women who are enslaved, beaten and who live with a sole purpose of providing surrogacy for the ruling class of Gilead. The handmaid is forcibly raped by the husband—”the commander”— in a ceremony every month as she lays on the knees of the commander’s wife.

Neither is marriage.

You can always die childless, extinct your bloodline and spit on your ancestors because you know better.

 

[Snackersmom]

Because this thread is titled "contentment in singlehood", and contentment is what I care.

You need to stop satisfying the desires of the flesh and preaching that God owes you a spouse, it is not Biblical.

 

[Lanolin]

Margaret Atwood was married and had three children (1 biological daughter, 2 stepsons) she recently buried her long time husband,/partner so I think she's far from a male-hating conspiracy nut.

Her science fiction/dystopian literature doesn't reflect her own personal beliefs at all. It's just a take on what's already out there with extreme religious sects. Polygamy and concubinage/surrogacy is still practised in a lot of cultures.

I mean in the olden days, wives and China had their feet bound, and there is still FGM being practised in Africa. So on the face of it, its more women-hating then men-hating for those cultures.

 

[Lightbeamrider]

Margaret Atwood was married and had three children (1 biological daughter, 2 stepsons)

Married and divorced and shackled up with the latest, who had two sons. Could say common-law marriage.

she recently buried her long time husband,/partner so I think she's far from a male-hating conspiracy nut.

Yeah husband partner and pro-abort

"enforced childbirth is slavery" because it allows the state to claim ownership and control over a person's body. [1, 2, 3]

Killing your offspring must be liberation. How can Atwood moan and groan about men and all the other issues when she adheres to a policy of strong killing the weak on demand as liberation for women?

Her science fiction/dystopian literature doesn't reflect her own personal beliefs at all. It's just a take on what's already out there with extreme religious sects. Polygamy and concubinage/surrogacy is still practised in a lot of cultures.

Not to mention abortion and infanticide.

I mean in the olden days, wives and China had their feet bound, and there is still FGM being practised in Africa. So on the face of it, its more women-hating then men-hating for those cultures.

It all is of the same mindset of the strong dominating or killing the weak on demand, and that is what Atwood promotes

 

[Lovette]

You would not be here if not for all your reproducing female ancestors back to the beginning of humanity.

He did make females capable of biological reproduction. What good is all that if there is no reproduction? Dead-ending your bloodline and spitting on your female ancestors who raised all their offspring?

Arranged marriages were common back in the day


Who is and what does that matter? There are plenty of male haters out there. What problem do you have with Tate when you recommend Margaret Atwood?

That book was written to bash Christian Fundamentalism, focusing on Old Testament verses to the exclusion of the New by a male-hating conspiracy nut.

The book tells a chilling account of a modern-day America run by a totalitarian, theocratic republic called Gilead, replacing the once secular, democratic state. It is an echo of the Islamic Republic established in Iran after the 1979 Revolution, which was close to the time that Atwood wrote her novel. However, the villains of this cruel republic are not Muslim, the villains of “The Handmaid’s Tale” are fundamentalist Christians who commit unspeakable acts with the intention of restoring Biblical morality to the world. “The Handmaid’s Tale” provides an opportunity for those of all religions to reflect on the way they are living out their faith, especially those in power. The main plot revolves around rampant infertility and infant mortality rates of the nation. The Republic of Gilead blames this on fallen morality and is set on restoring it. In this new state, when a member of the pious ruling class cannot have a child—a situation where the blame is always placed on the woman, never on the man—the state sends the family a “handmaid” to conceive in her place. Handmaids are fertile, young women who are enslaved, beaten and who live with a sole purpose of providing surrogacy for the ruling class of Gilead. The handmaid is forcibly raped by the husband—”the commander”— in a ceremony every month as she lays on the knees of the commander’s wife.

You can always die childless, extinct your bloodline and spit on your ancestors because you know better.

Yeah, tell that to the disciples, apostles, generations of priests and nuns, martyrs who gave their own lives for the Lord. None of them had any children, yet the gospel was still preached around the whole world.

As for my ancestors, none of them was Christian, none of them knew the Lord or heard the gospel, but I'm not gonna judge, you're the one judging.

 

[Lovette]

You need to stop satisfying the desires of the flesh and preaching that God owes you a spouse, it is not Biblical.

That's the opposite of what I preach, please go back and check. God does NOT owe anybody a spouse, so don't presume and act as though He does.

 

[Lovette]

"What's the point of any discussion on marriage when you're not in a relationship, when you don't even know anybody? This is like discussion on a blueprint of a house, but there's neither land plot, building material nor contractor for it."

If you want to be married, that's fine. Getting married is a big decision, for sure. So there's definitely a "point" to learning about marriage when you're single. If I'm a young person in middle school or high school, I might not know much about money or finances yet, because managing those things on my own is not quite as important as it will be as an adult. Does that mean a young person engaging in a discussion of financial issues, or learning about financial issues, is pointless?

And, yeah, sure, everyone's single by default. So what? You repeat this point a lot, but it doesn't seem all that important. You seem to be saying that staying single is "natural" and that engaging in a romantic relationship or romance is somehow "unnatural" because it's something you have to "force" or something.

What other states can I be in by "default"? Well, I can be unemployed. I can have bad hygiene. I can have bad social skills. I can sleep around all day. I can fail to write a will in the event of my death. All sorts of things. Does that mean I should never take any action to change my default status?

Yeah, marriage is a choice. So what? Doesn't mean it's wrong. How else are you supposed to get married? These things don't just happen.

'Singlehood" and 'marriage" may seem like a simple dichotomy, but in between, the relationship is a long journey that emcompasses many stages - companionship, friendship, fellowship, partnership; in modern time, most people have to go through these stages in order to let the relationship mature; if you know somebody and they know you, you start as acquaintances; you spend time together, acquaintances evolve into companions; you share and trade favors, companions evolve into friendship; and so on. Therefore, a realistic and rational expectation is the next stage, you don't expect marriage until you propose and she says yes.

However, if you're single with nobody, yet you begin to fantasize about marriage with your IMAGINRARY, ideal mate, and search around the world for somebody to fit your model; or you have crush on somebody, and fantasize marriage with that person, that they don't even know you, that is NOT biblical, and that's NOT fine. Why? Expectation minus reality equals disappointment.

You also say that God joins people together in marriage. Are you talking about the idea of "soulmates" or something? Because that's not in the Bible anywhere. Marriage is something you can choose to pursue (see 1 Corinthians 7:39) A lot of people think God is a Puppetmaster who's running every aspect of your love life, but the Bible doesn't say anything about that.

You're in denial. "What God has joined together, let not man separate,” Matt. 19:6.

 

[RodColeman]

'Singlehood" and 'marriage" may seem like a simple dichotomy, but in between, the relationship is a long journey that emcompasses many stages - companionship, friendship, fellowship, partnership; in modern time, most people have to go through these stages in order to let the relationship mature; if you know somebody and they know you, you start as acquaintances; you spend time together, acquaintances evolve into companions; you share and trade favors, companions evolve into friendship; and so on. Therefore, a realistic and rational expectation is the next stage, you don't expect marriage until you propose and she says yes.

However, if you're single with nobody, yet you begin to fantasize about marriage with your IMAGINRARY, ideal mate, and search around the world for somebody to fit your model; or you have crush on somebody, and fantasize marriage with that person, that they don't even know you, that is NOT biblical, and that's NOT fine. Why? Expectation minus reality equals disappointment.

You're in denial. "What God has joined together, let not man separate,” Matt. 19:6.

Well, sure, yeah. It's still fine to have the basic desire for marriage, though. You seemed to be saying earlier that this basic desire is in itself somehow a big, distracting waste of time. It's fine to desire marriage. You desiring marriage, even desiring marriage passionately, is fine. Some people are just like that. That's what Paul wrote. And what Jesus said.

If nobody desired marriage, and if nobody passionately desired marriage, well, nobody would be getting married, now, would they?

And Jesus's pint here seems to be that marriage is not human in its origin. And in saying “let no one separate” a marriage, Jesus taught that divorce isn't God’s plan. Once a couple is married, they've been joined together by God and the union is meant to be for life.

This still doesn't convince me that there's such a thing as a "soulmate" or that God's a Puppetmaster who arranges all the successful Christian dating relationships. In 1 Corinthians 7:39, Paul even says you can marry whoever you want, as long as they're a Christian. Jesus aid there is no marriage in Heaven, so how can there be such a thing as a "soulmate." And, in reference to what Jesus taught about divorce, if you're a married Christian, the person you're married to is your "soulmate," if you will.

 

[Snackersmom]

That's the opposite of what I preach, please go back and check. God does NOT owe anybody a spouse, so don't presume and act as though He does.

I don't need to read what you actually write, because prosperity gospel is taught in most churches and in the secular culture at large. So I assume you follow it as well.

 

[Lovette]

Well, sure, yeah. It's still fine to have the basic desire for marriage, though. You seemed to be saying earlier that this basic desire is in itself somehow a big, distracting waste of time. It's fine to desire marriage. You desiring marriage, even desiring marriage passionately, is fine. Some people are just like that. That's what Paul wrote. And what Jesus said.

If nobody desired marriage, and if nobody passionately desired marriage, well, nobody would be getting married, now, would they?

And Jesus's pint here seems to be that marriage is not human in its origin. And in saying “let no one separate” a marriage, Jesus taught that divorce isn't God’s plan. Once a couple is married, they've been joined together by God and the union is meant to be for life.

This still doesn't convince me that there's such a thing as a "soulmate" or that God's a Puppetmaster who arranges all the successful Christian dating relationships. In 1 Corinthians 7:39, Paul even says you can marry whoever you want, as long as they're a Christian. Jesus aid there is no marriage in Heaven, so how can there be such a thing as a "soulmate." And, in reference to what Jesus taught about divorce, if you're a married Christian, the person you're married to is your "soulmate," if you will.

Neither Jesus nor Paul ever taught such a thing. God is the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent Creator of eternity, "Puppetmaster" is just your framing of Him. Want whatever you like, in the end, it is HIS will be done, not ours. Man proposes, God disposes.

And btw, I never argued anything for "soul mate". But since it is God who joins man and woman into one union, whoever He joins with you, that's your soul mate.

 

[Lovette]

I don't need to read what you actually write, because prosperity gospel is taught in most churches and in the secular culture at large. So I assume you follow it as well.

No I don't, I'm here to bust it. Everyone here harping for marriage like Rodcoleman might be under their spell, but not me.

 

[Snackersmom]

No I don't, I'm here to bust it. Everyone here harping for marriage like Rodcoleman might be under their spell, but not me.

Nevermind. You are completely missing the point, as usual. I don't know why I even bother.....

 

[Lovette]

Nevermind. You are completely missing the point, as usual. I don't know why I even bother.....

Prick yourself with that point of yours and feel the sting first.

 

[RodColeman]

Neither Jesus nor Paul ever taught such a thing. God is the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent Creator of eternity, "Puppetmaster" is just your framing of Him. Want whatever you like, in the end, it is HIS will be done, not ours. Man proposes, God disposes.

And btw, I never argued anything for "soul mate". But since it is God who joins man and woman into one union, whoever He joins with you, that's your soul mate.

Jesus said that some people are single not because they chose it or because God chose it. It's just how life turned out. And Paul said that, if you want to marry, that's fine, and you can marry whoever you want, as long as they're a Christian.