Perhaps. Not really sure at the moment.
However, ....
I dare say that something called 'unicorn' [at least] existed at some point in time in the past...
I am pretty sure of that.
Does God choose your spouse or do you with God's guidance?
- Thread starter Roughsoul1991
- Start date
-
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.
However, ....
I am pretty sure of that.
That states that the best advice Paul could give to them is to remain as they were at the moment. This is still good advice.
Telling people to remain single if they can is going to allow them to be more effective for the ministry as they can serve the Lord undistracted. will never be easy to accept to those who are already married and so they are automatically tempted to defend their state of marriage as being more spiritual than the single and set about arguing with Paul or coming up with a reason why he did not really mean that.
Paul saying that if one marries he has not sinned but staying single is better for undistracted ministry takes away the fantasy of a special person God has in mind for you which causes those who want that fantasy to be true to argue with Paul or come up with a reason why he did not really mean it like that.
But there is freedom in just accepting what Paul said about marrying. It is a choice. Choose wisely and only "in the Lord" meaning they must be a servant of Christ, and understand that in the context of ministering to the Lord without distraction, don't do it if you have the gift of celibacy or you will just be heaping a bunch of unnecessary trouble on yourself.
Nothing about a special person God has chosen for you, nothing about God telling you who to marry. It is all up to you. God is fine with it if you choose not to and fine with it if you choose someone "only in the Lord".
The fantasy about God having a special someone just for you, once abandoned is liberating because you no longer are afraid of picking the wrong person. You can take your time and make sure you don't make a mistake. If they have red flags pay attention and don't go through with it. There is no reason to ask God, Is this the one? God is going to answer, "you decide, I am not making you marry anyone." That is FREEDOM.
The idea that God is going to tell me to marry someone is not biblical. The idea that if I don't marry someone that they are left without their God appointed mate because I decided not to and the one they marry is second best is weird and not biblical.
All these imagined scenarios about what it means if we don't marry "the one" is weird imaginations that are not based on any real facts.
I think Paul's teaching on celibacy applies to later decades, but he also gives advice for the 'time of present distress' that might have been more applicable at his time.
If you can stand to live without sex, companionship, making babies, etc., celibacy is better. If you do not have the grace to remain celibate, get married. The Bible says positive things about marriage, also. He who finds a wife finds a good thing and receives favor from the Lord. In Paul's writings, we see that marriage and two becoming one flesh points to Christ and the church. Jesus lived as a celibate man, but the church is also the bride of Christ, and Paul sought to present his readers as a chaste virgin to Christ.
Not everyone is gifted to be celibate. Paul urges the celibate life, but acknowledges that one man is gifted after this manner and another after that.
Being single freed up his attention to focus on the Lord and do ministry. But we also see Paul wrote to both Paul and Timothy about the bishop being the husband of one wife.
But there are plenty of examples of God leading individuals directly in scripture in areas of life that normally would be open to human beings making choices. I don't a lot of emphasis on 'giving you a sign' unless it is a literal Biblical sign, like a specific prophecy, which, if fulfilled points to a longer term prophecy. The fireworks going off the moment an attractive person passes your field of view is not this kind of 'sign.'
If every man has his own wife and every woman has her own husband (among those not gifted for celibacy) then that draining person is going to be married to someone out there. My advice would be to avoid such people also.
Colleges and universities are not the only place to find people who are not loafers, btw.
You should read the verses that precede and follow. Paul already conceded it was better to marry than to burn. After this verse you quote he says if you marry you have not sinned. The 'seek not a wife' is not about God bringing a man a wife without seeking it. That is not the context.
So then what should she do? Should she sin against God and commit adultery by having an affair with 'the one.' Should she sin against God by divorcing her first husband and commit adultery by marrying the second husband and by having relations with him? Or should she stay away from 'the one', but sin against God by coveting him, wishing she had married him instead of whoever he ends up with, pining away for him.
Can you see how thinking about a 'first love' as being 'the one' could lead to sin against God. Where is this 'the one' idea in the Bible? If God allows widows and widowers to remarry, how could this 'the one' thing be true.
I believe someone could pray and ask God for a perfect mate. And it could be that God has one person picked out for another and works behind the scenes to put people together. It may be that he knows that a certain wife or husband would die young and another person will be the next husband or wife. That's not a case of 'the one' though. It's 'the two.' And if another partner dies, it's 'the three.' During times when there was a lot of warfare, there must have been a lot of widows who remarried. And back when women died in childbirth when doctors did not know they needed to wash their hands, a lot of women died in childbirth and widowers married women. So there were lots of 'the twos' and sometimes 'the threes' marrying each other.
That is just odd KJV word choice. This is not the one-horned horse from little girls backpacks and stickers.And, apparently, in the Bible also:
Numbers 23:
22 God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.
Numbers 24:
8 God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.
Job 39:
9 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10 Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
Psalms 29:
6 He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
Psalms 92:
10 But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.
I dare say that something called 'unicorn' [at least] existed at some point in time in the past...
I think the context of Paul's advice was that there were those who were thinking that the most spiritual state of a person was to not have sex. He answers them that if they are married they should not think that sex is unspiritual and they should not refuse their partners.
And none of them should think of leaving their mates because they thought that they were not as spiritual in the married state.
And then he also addresses those that were single and wondered if maybe they should stay that way because somehow sex was wrong even in marriage. He sets them straight and then adds that from a practical context if they have the gift (charisma) thus suggesting it as a spiritual gift by God for the sake of undistracted devotion to Christ they should remain single.
This gift is in the context of spiritual service or ministry calling as it is a spiritual gift and not a natural disposition of lack of interest in sex that he is referring to. This gift/charismatic gift, should be used and they will indeed be able to avoid unnecessary distractions if they so chose to follow this call.
So if there is any suggestion about God getting involved in this decision to marry it is seen in this reference to a charismatic gift of celibacy. It seems then that it would be more biblical for someone to be concerned with "missing out" on what God had for them if they rejected the charismatic gift given to them than it is to think that one who chose not to marry would be rejecting a spouse God had "chosen for them"
T
TheIndianGirl
Guest
o
She should stay with the second guy since she decided to marry him. However she will probably still love the first guy probably as a first/early love, like how the woman in the movie Cast Away felt about Tom Hanks' character. Similarly, a widowed woman who remarries may feel the same about the first husband.
She should stay with the second guy since she decided to marry him. However she will probably still love the first guy probably as a first/early love, like how the woman in the movie Cast Away felt about Tom Hanks' character. Similarly, a widowed woman who remarries may feel the same about the first husband.
T
TheIndianGirl
Guest
The idea of 'the one' comes from the fact that a married couple becomes one. I do believe God in ideal situations, God does intend one man and one woman to be lifelong partners. Is this incorrect? However as you mentioned other issues arise so people get remarried. However, 'the one" is spoken under a different context here in that the two become one flesh. Regarding God choosing 'the one' as in the spouse, if one is intended to marry (not everyone is), it doesn't seem far fetched to me that God has a heavy role in making sure the couple crosses paths, etc. That's all.
Can you imagine how sad that must make the second guy feel? Unfortunately his wife is sick in the head. That would be the truth. He should have waited and found a wife that was not brainwashed by romance novels and nonsense. The one the woman marries is the one she is meant to be with period. It is called wedding vows and that is all that matters. No one else was the one, but the one you marry. And if they die, you can marry another one.
One thing that might dispell the myth of the One, is when you realize that you are not married in heaven. it is a temporary earthly relationship for the sake of sex, procreation, companionship, etc., but it is not an eternal mystical fore ordained and forever bond reltationship, two souls eternally bound as one. No it ends at death. Poof... there goes the romance. Sorry.
T
TheIndianGirl
Guest
You are living in la la land, or you obviously don't know people who have had a past, multiple relationships, etc.
How do you think the woman should feel about the first guy, in this case let's say a remarried widowed woman about her first husband. Just forget about him?
Paul writes that one has a gift after this manner and another after that, so both marriage and celibacy are charismata.
If dating partners don't fornicate, then the woman in the boyfriend-goes-to war scenario does not become one flesh with the old boyfriend, so does that mean he is not 'the one.'
In America, a lot of people start having boyfriends and girlfriends at a terribly young age. They may not 'go out' that young, but I remember some of the kids starting in fifth or sixth grade, 10 or 11, having paired off as a couple. Then they date through high school and college. Some people date a lot and experience heartbreak when they are young, but are still happy to be married with that final person.
There was a book written by a man who has since denied his faith, about kissing dating goodbye in the 1990's. I did not read the book, but my understanding was the idea that all these relationships and breakups emotionally damage people and train them for divorce. It sounded like there were some valid points, but maybe some legalistic extremes.
Be that as it may, I do not think everyone who had a boyfriend or girlfriend or just a crush they were crazy about in their youth is always pining away for their lost love, even after marriage. That does not seem to be the case with people I know well when I know a bit about their background. I can think of my brother who was happy to have escaped a couple of relationships of his youth, looking back on them
I don't know all of God's plans, and many of those Christians who consider the characteristics of a potential partner, make a list, pray about it, and decide to marry might have been directed by God to meet each other, too.
I met a white man at a gathering of people from my wife's nation in a city in the US. He had dated a woman from that country for about a decade, long distance. He met her parents, thought about proposing, but did not do it. Then he was in grad school, in a jury, working full time and was so busy he did not keep up with her and she married someone else. So he was pining over this woman, heartbroken. He was hoping to find a single woman from my wife's people. he had recently heard the Gospel. We encouraged him to get baptized, which he did, and tried to encourage him not to covet this other man's wife. My wife even showed him relatives pictures on Facebook to set him up. He felt it was creepy to marry a woman more than 10 years younger. He looked young, and I tried to talk him out of his hang-up. Women in my wife's country generally get married by 30.
Getting hung up on an old girlfriend or boyfriend is a big problem for some people. I believe it's coveteousness in a lot of cases. I also know a man who must be around 60 now who, as far as I know, has never married. He had a great job, got a doctorate, inherited a company from his dad, is a worship leader at church, had an outgoing personality. I can't really tell much about looks, but my guess is he would have been considered a catch, but his high school sweet heart broke up with him and married someone else. I guess that was it for him. I did not hear him say anything about wanting the old girlfriend. Maybe he settled on being single. But I thought at one point he might have ended up with the Nigerian girl from our church. In her kitchen preparing a meal before a Bible study, he asked her, "If you were olive oil, would you be extra virgin or dark and fruity? She said 'Extra virgin.' That's the cleverest way I ever heard that question asked." If I hadn't already gotten to know my then-future wife I might have borrowed that line.
Well I think it is not appropriate to ask a woman such questions.
However, concerning the concept or idea that it is somehow sad to see a man of marriageable age who is not married.
I think that the idea that people are going to miss out on the "best things in life" is what drives people to get married and then live the rest of their lives in a sort of private misery that they keep to themselves because it is "too late" to do anything about it.
A sort of "i made my bed, now I must lie in it" mentality. Many, many, are living this way. They were not missing anything. They had a very enjoyable life and if they had to do it over again they would not have married, but they won't dare speak that out loud. They play the role of being happy and try to find the positive in things but they know they were not missing anything and that they married because everyone made them feel like they would be choosing a sad life if they remained single.
But EVERYONE was wrong and they should have listened to their common sense thoughts instead of these stupid romantic fantasies about marriage THAT ARE NOT TRUE. But too late... now their stuck and must make the best of it. So sad.
Many can testify that marriage is nothing like the fairy tale books they imagined it was but they will never say it out loud because they don't want their mates feelings to get hurt by saying such things, or they are afraid that saying that marriage is not what they really would do if they had to do it over again is something they should admit. So they just grit and bare it.
Don't feel like your missing something if you are single. ENJOY your freedom. Pinch yourself everyday and say... This is so awesome. My friends wish they were in my shoes. Get your head right. Then take your time when choosing a mate and don't settle for someone that will make you wish you had staid single.
And if you are married, don't let your wife watch the Hallmark Channel if you can help it. These movies keep them pining away for something they think they don't have that they are "supposed" to have and it is poison to their souls and their marriage but they are in too deep to extract themselves. It starts in child hood with the fairy tales, cartoons, books and movies. Soon they are brainwashed, and mentally deranged and rarely ever recover from the deep seated illusions of a reality of their own making which is based on all lies.
Stop watching movies altogether. Retrain your brain and discover reality. It's nothing like Hollywood.
T
TheIndianGirl
Guest
Are the words "extra virgin" and "dark and fruity" code words for something else? If "extra virgin" means what I think it means, I don't think it is proper for a man to ask a woman, who he doesn't know personally except through Bible study, this question especially in a public space. The woman also shouldn't reveal as it is not his business.
T
TheIndianGirl
Guest
I think the Hallmark Channel is fine; the movies show how couples should treat eachother, with love and respect. Also, it is important to bear in mind that the movies focus more on dating, not marriage. There are some old shows that center more on married life, like Leave it to Beaver or Father Knows Best, which are also similarly unrealistic like the Hallmark movies. A show like Roseanne is more realistic about marriage, but still not entirely accurate. I have never read the paperback romance novels (where the guys are shirtless, etc.) available in the grocery stores, as I never been interested in them. However, romance has its place and purpose. Jacob worked 14 years to be with Rachel. There is also the Song of Songs. I believe the older novels from prior centuries are more in line with Christian values; the couples wait to marry first before having sex.
I am not saying that it is...
Strongs says it is a wild bull.
My 1828 dictionary suggests that it is a one-horned animal, possibly a rhino.
That "word choice" was made because - at the time of the translation - the English word 'unicorn' referred to the thing that the translated Hebrew word indicated.
There was something in existance that the word described.
In other words, unicorns did/do exist.
However, I wiil agree with you that it is not likely to be a horse with a horn.
If one is considering a woman as a marriage partner, IMO, it is a reasonable thing to do. His relationship with her probably was not that far along or as serious as mine was with my future wife. They seemed to be friends. They flirted, but I don't think it went much further than that.
I don't know the man's thoughts. He seemed to me like the kind of man who might marry, especially in his interactions with that one woman. But he might have resolved to remain celibate for life and have been at peace at it. I never discussed it with him. Another man at the church led a Bible study. He was maybe 10 years older. He seemed to have been at peace with life-long celibacy and valued it from a Biblical perspective, though I think he did consider a relationship with a girl who had been in the other Bible study group for a while. There was also a woman of Indian descent who had never married, was thinking about it, but eventually decided she was resolved to stay in life-long celibacy.
I do think it is sad if a man or woman really wants to marry but it doesn't work out. If they are happy with celibacy for life, that's fine. It's actually the more advantageous path according to Paul.
Well, the Bible calls characters in it virgins. Why should it be a secret? Tamar stopped wearing clothes that virgin daughters of the king wore after she was raped. It could be there were special garments for virgins in general. Fornicating and allowing oneself to be married off as a virgin bride while not being one carried a potential death penalty under the Law, also. Those who fall into sin may be ashamed. Virgins have nothing to be ashamed of for being virgins.
I am unaware of code words. She is Nigerian, and her skin was dark. Maybe she would not want to be 'fruity.' But she claimed to be 'extra-virgin.' If she was a virgin and cared about her reputation, what other answer would she give? I suppose one could be deceptive or evasive with the answer or decline to answer.
I wouldn't do that with a someone who was just a friend. The clever thing was it could be passed off as a funny joke, but he could also get some useful information to determine if he wanted to pursue a relationship. He might have been considering her as a potential spouse, or wanted to, but knew it would have caused problems with racism relatives at home, so maybe it would have been best to left the joke untold.