Contentment in singlehood

  • 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.
RodColeman said:
OK, do you understand what a "question mark" does? Can you not tell when I'm asking you a question to test the implications of something you said? Apparently not.

I think somebody here mentioned that English isn't your primary language. And yet your English is actually pretty good. But apparently it's little things like these that are contributing to repetitive misunderstandings here on a truly epic scale.

That's what I'm starting to suspect.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what a loaded question means? If it feels repetitive to you, don't speak on behalf of "all" again. I understood what it does, I just exposed you and threw it back at you.
RodColeman said:
"Weaponize," eh? Pointing out nuances in someone's writing is "weaponization"?

1 Corinthians 7 is one of the most nuanced and yet still one of the easiest chapters to understand in the Bible. But, hey, that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
If it's easy, stop arguing and nagging about it, take Paul's advice or leave it.
RodColeman said:
I discussed that a gazillion posts ago.

Again, I'm starting to chalk this up to fantastic grammatical misunderstandings on your part. Don't get me wrong. You strike me as an intelligent and knowledgeable guy, really. But that's what I'm beginning to suspect here.

And, a while ago, someone here mentioned that you seem to enjoy arguments and even admit to misrepresenting people's positions.

Maybe that's it, too.
Click to expand...
No you didn't. Again you still sanctimoniously speak on behalf of "all", that has nothing to do with grammar, but everything to do with your strawman tactic.
 
Lovette said:
Do you even know what a loaded question means? If it feels repetitive to you, don't speak on behalf of "all" again. I understood what it does, I just exposed you and threw it back at you.
Click to expand...

And.....the misunderstanding persists. I thought it would. 🤣

Lovette said:
If it's easy, stop arguing and nagging about it, take Paul's advice or leave it.
Click to expand...

Paul's advice on this topic is rather nuanced. I could explain it again, but I think you still wouldn't understand it.

Lovette said:
No you didn't. Again you still sanctimoniously speak on behalf of "all", that has nothing to do with grammar, but everything to do with your strawman tactic.
Click to expand...

Yep, I knew it. A grammatical misunderstanding it is.
 
RodColeman said:
And.....the misunderstanding persists. I thought it would. 🤣
Click to expand...
It was YOUR supposition that "all" are like that, your supposition, you own it.
RodColeman said:
Paul's advice on this topic is rather nuanced. I could explain it again, but I think you still wouldn't understand it.
Click to expand...
I think his advice was dismissed by you as his personal opinion, a gazillion posts ago. You could pervert it again into the opposite of what he meant.
RodColeman said:
Yep, I knew it. A grammatical misunderstanding it is.
Click to expand...
No you didn't. It was your strawman tactic. Do you understand what strawman means? Come on, be a man and at least own your "all".
 
Lovette said:
It was YOUR supposition that "all" are like that, your supposition, you own it.
Click to expand...

No, I'm asking questions to test the implications of things that you're saying.

Lovette said:
I think his advice was dismissed by you as his personal opinion, a gazillion posts ago. You could pervert it again into the opposite of what he meant.
Click to expand...

Paul himself clarifies some of these things as his own opinion.

Lovette said:
No you didn't. It was your strawman tactic. Do you understand what strawman means? Come on, be a man and at least own your "all".
Click to expand...

It's a misunderstanding on your part, not a straw man on my part.

Anyway, I think 2 Timothy 2:23 is really speaking to me at the moment. :LOL:
 
RodColeman said:
No, I'm asking questions to test the implications of things that you're saying.
Click to expand...
I held no such implications, you made it up by sanctimoniously speaking for "all".
RodColeman said:
Paul himself clarifies some of these things as his own opinion.
Click to expand...
Then take it or leave it, enjoy your "troubles in the flesh".
RodColeman said:
It's a misunderstanding on your part, not a straw man on my part.

Anyway, I think 2 Timothy 2:23 is really speaking to me at the moment. :LOL:
Click to expand...
Then let it up. I don't like arguing any more than you do. It is foolish and ignorant as long as you sanctimoniously speak for "all".
 
Lovette said:
I held no such implications, you made it up by sanctimoniously speaking for "all".

Then take it or leave it, enjoy your "troubles in the flesh".

Then let it up. I don't like arguing any more than you do. It is foolish and ignorant as long as you sanctimoniously speak for "all".
Click to expand...

God bless you, Lovette.

One day, we'll be together at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and none of this will matter.

I can't wait! 🤣
 
RodColeman said:
No, I'm asking questions to test the implications of things that you're saying.
Click to expand...
Then Matt. 22:18 is really speaking to me at the moment.
RodColeman said:
God bless you, Lovette.

One day, we'll be together at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and none of this will matter.

I can't wait! 🤣
Click to expand...
God bless you too.

And yes, none of this will matter because we'll "all" be collectively married to Lord Jesus. That's what's truly for "all".
 
Now back to the subject of op, many Christian singles are happy with current state. Don't want to settle for someone they not crazy about.

Only the singles that are eager to change their current status toward their ideal life, then they are willing to settle.

As Ruth was eager to find a bread winner to lean on, so she settled for boaz. Nothing wrong with that. Just describing the reality of single and marriage.
 
Churchgoer said:
Now back to the subject of op, many Christian singles are happy with current state. Don't want to settle for someone they not crazy about.

Only the singles that are eager to change their current status toward their ideal life, then they are willing to settle.

As Ruth was eager to find a bread winner to lean on, so she settled for boaz. Nothing wrong with that. Just describing the reality of single and marriage.
Click to expand...

Oh, yeah. The OP.

Sorry OP! 😂
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Churchgoer
As for Rebecca, she was eager to get married. When a relative shows up with gold and wealth, and trust of the family, she took a jump. She probably wouldn't mind moving or looked forward to moving, to see the world.

Jacob was definitely crazy about Rachel s beauty. That's that. And back then the culture is trying to get married, not encouraging singlehood.
 
Churchgoer said:
As for Rebecca, she was eager to get married. When a relative shows up with gold and wealth, and trust of the family, she took a jump. She probably wouldn't mind moving or looked forward to moving, to see the world.

Jacob was definitely crazy about Rachel s beauty. That's that. And back then the culture is trying to get married, not encouraging singlehood.
Click to expand...
Back in that culture, marriage was all arranged, and polygamy was the norm. Free love was not a thing until the Regency era (about the time of the French Revolution), dating and hookup culture was not a thing until the 60s; and in fact, only did marriage itself become a holy sacrament declared by the fourth Lateran Council in early 13th century, before that marriage was just a necessity for survival, and up until the Industrial Revolution and urbanization, each family was like a small workshop, a secular union for economic reasons. So don't bother to Christianize those examples, that is revisionism.
 
Marriage was a necessity in the past, also in today, many cases.

When marriage is not a necessity, people tend to stay single.
 
Churchgoer said:
Marriage was a necessity in the past, also in today, many cases.

When marriage is not a necessity, people tend to stay single.
Click to expand...
Marriage had only become commonplace after WWII. Up until then, most were either arranged to marry, having no suitable mate to marry, or dead before reaching a reproductive age, about only 40% of all males had a living descendant.

According to some experts, this 75 years, a lifetime from 1946 to 2020, was a historical anamoly, and quite a blissful anamoly, as most people were able to climb up the social ladder and get married freely, in an unprecedented free and prosperous environment, boomes are probably THE luckiest and THE happiest generation throughout all human history; but all of that seems to have come to an end, they're afraid, that now it's back to historical norm, since the boomers themselves have come to an end.
 
Churchgoer said:
How to be content in single time? Helping out community, local church, cook and bring food to VBS celebration. Go to town pool, swimming under summer evening sky, talking to friend in water, relax...

Be happy, kids. :)😃 😃
Click to expand...
Or... OR... Now hear me out... You could also get a cat and take up video games. It works just as well. ;)
 
So how many times (so far) has I Corinthians 7 been referenced in this thread?

What are we going to do to celebrate when it reaches a thousand?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RodColeman
I would like to point out that when so-and-so begat so-and-so, that's how all this got started. Now we have issues!

I did not reference 1 Corinthians in this post. But maybe you could argue that the begats could reference that from a certain point of view?

I don't know, I'm just saying... 🤷
 
RodB651 said:
I would like to point out that when so-and-so begat so-and-so, that's how all this got started. Now we have issues!

I did not reference 1 Corinthians in this post. But maybe you could argue that the begats could reference that from a certain point of view?

I don't know, I'm just saying... 🤷
Click to expand...
I do know that strife begets strife...

And I do know that it would be sooooo much easier to get to heaven if I didn't have all these OTHER PEOPLE to deal with.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: RodB651 and dkontner
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back