reneweddaybyday said:
nope ... I know from personal experience because my husband and I were already in relationship when his cousin witnessed to us and brought us to the Lord Jesus Christ.
Are you born again, Lovette? If so, then you know the change that occurs in a person's life.
And I know from the word of God that marriage is for all mankind, not Christians only. Your personal story is purely anectodal.
Nope.
Maybe you're not born again so you do not know about the change that occurs within natural man when he or she is born again.
That is fact ... not anecdotal but, again, maybe you do not know of the change God brings about at the time one is born again.
reneweddaybyday said:
What are you going on about? In our day and time, kids live with their parents after they reach adulthood and you call that "medieval"? Our daughter lived at home until she was married. Our oldest son lived at home until he was married. That is not a "medieval" practice, Lovette.
You said it was referring a father's disposal of his daughter, don't ask me.
nope ... I clarified your misinterpretation of what is written in 1 Corinthians 7:36-38:
The only tragedy is your obsession with marriage, despite your denial.
Speaking the truth of God's Word concerning marriage is not an "obsession with marriage" ... it is an "obsession with" the truth of God's Word ... "despite your denial".
The truth of God's Word is that celibacy is a gift, "he who does not give in marriage does BETTER,"
1 Cor. 7:38.
Yeah, so a woman just a piece of property to be traded at her father's will? Which century are you living in, medieval?
What are you going on about? In our day and time, kids live with their parents after they reach adulthood and you call that "medieval"? Our daughter lived at home until she was married. Our oldest son lived at home until he was married. That is not a "medieval" practice, Lovette.
I said if a father gives his daughter in marriage, he does not sin and if he keeps his daughter with him, he does well.
You're so hellbent on your "worldly institution" of marriage that you cannot receive the truth of God's Word.
reneweddaybyday said:
sigh … we're speaking of marriage, Lovette. If there is a marriage, there are two spouses. I guess you haven't ferreted that out yet have you, Sherlock?
No, we're speaking of the IDOLATRY of marriage. Your "if" is just a baseless assumption.
... would you ever refer to a single man as a "husband"? ... or a single woman as a "wife"?
And your "IDOLATRY" is wholly on your part as you're the one who keeps equating the "worldly institution" of marriage with what God established.
That's your busines which I asked nothing about.
Here's the discussion, Lovette:
I ask you again, if you never had the opportunity to meet anybody, while everybody else around you seem to have their luck, would you still worship God?
yes.
Liar.
I am not married now and I worship God. My husband worshipped God while he was alive. I worshipped God while he was alive. We also gasp worshipped God together.
That's your busines which I asked nothing about.
Just clarifying who is the one who is the “liar”.
From a godly standpoint, God himself never married
Oh, really? You might want to reconsider your error.
reneweddaybyday said:
You don't believe now, even though you have been shown from God's Word ... you hold the world in higher esteem than God's Word.
Trying to explain to you the marriage relationship established by God is like trying to explain to an unbeliever that peace with God is not the same as cessation of conflict in the world. The believer is afforded peace through the Lord Jesus Christ in the midst of conflict.
And the believer is also smart enough to avoid such conflict in the first place.
Well, we do have an adversary who walks about seeking whom he may devour and the believer is empowered to endure.
reneweddaybyday said:
We weren't talking about the sadducees. We were talking about the Olivet Discourse. You keep bringing the sadducees into the Olivet Discourse, but the sadduccees were not there. Jesus was answering questions asked of him by His disciples (
Matthew 24:3 “
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately,saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?”
The disciples came to Jesus privately ... there were no sadducees, pharisees, chief priests, scribes, elders involved in the discussion.
And, I again clarify ... I do not worship marriage, I worship God Who established the marriage relationship.
Then why are you so vehemently arguing for your earthly attachment when you should've been watching out for the signs of his coming, speaking of the Olivet Discourse?
Do you now agree that the sadducees were not present during the Olivet Discourse?
reneweddaybyday said:
Nope. The mention of "eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage" refers to the every day goings on in life. Jesus would have used terms such as gluttony and drunkenness if He had meant "excessive eating and drinking".
Yes, it is referring to gluttony and drunkenness at the fateful time where you should've been watching out for the signs of his coming. It's about the attitude of gross negligence.
You and I are not in agreement on this point ... best you let it go.
The model for marriage established by God is arranged marriage, God made Eve for Adam and joined them together.
The joining of Adam and Eve was a one-time event ... just as what happened to Paul on the road to Damascus. Do you insist that if a born again believer did not have the same experience Paul had on the road to Damascus they are not born again?
If you or anybody married on your own initiative, don't call that godly, that'd be taking the Lord's name in vain, and the error is all yours.
The marriage covenant entered into between husband and wife does not mean they are "taking the Lord's name in vain". That error is all yours.
.