Dating and Church life

Post Reply New Topic

I disagree. Lust never fades.

so u find old wrinkly people with shriveled genitals attractive?

Old people do it all the time with each other so obviously they don't care.

tho it can be lust.... it IS possible to do that stuff when you are a husband and wife and it be love

I am not sure that the implication that Christians who tolerate marriage outside their denomination are automatically less devout, still less automatically less faithful, is true or helpful. Being single can certainly be frustrating at times. Holding fast to your principles and faith is important though. Without knowing all the details of your faith and principles I am not sure my advice will be very helpful. As aspiegirl2 pointed out, the Church as Body of Christ includes all Christians (sorry if this is still too exclusive for some of the others here). There are passages in scripture read as opposed to inter-faith marriages; interdenominational marriages being prohibited sounds more like a tradition of men. Which church do you go to?

Whether she is in your church or not, or even Christian or not - wouldn't God love her as unconditionally as he does you?

yes that is true, god loves all of us... but the bible makes it very clear about not marrying non-christians.

also, as i posted above somwhere, i decided that i will not limit myself to christians in my church alone... as there is no reason to do so.

My Church doesn't oblige people to marry within our denomination, but I guess we're encouraged to.

It just makes life easier generally if you date or marry someone with similar interests / background. With the fact that religions can evoke strong feelings, especially if you're not in a mainstream church, if you marry someone in the same faith you'll avoid some of the potential stresses on your relationship.

From my perspective, if I hadn't joined my Church, I wouldn't have met my wife. I think the fact that we both have the same religious outlook helps our relationship.

It's not just religion that this applies to. Any aspect of life that evokes strong feeling can affect a relationship. For example, a right wing Conservative might have difficulty in a marriage with a left wing Socialist.

This isn't to say that people can't have good relationships with partners of widely differing opinion, but I don't think it makes life easier if you're broadly of the same opinions.

u should check for other religions with more truths,the christian religion its a roman business,bible is was totally rearranged to the benefit of the leaders of the church,and after all u can marry who ever u want,soul mates comes by themselves.
try to think for your self,be skeptical about your belief,question it and see if its the right one.

peace

Not exclusively Roman. Jewish, Greek and Roman. And the order of the Old Testament in Catholic Bibles follows the Septuagint (despite the Latin-derived name, the Greek translation of the Tanakh (frequently known as the Old Testament) plus some Apocryphal or Deutero-Canonical works like Tobit, Judith, and I and II Maccabees, etc.; this was a translation from the Hebrew and in a few instances Aramaic, by Alexandrian Jews for the benefit of the Greek-speaking Jewish diaspora. The later Jewish Council of Jamnia formally rejected the extra works which were not extant in Hebew quite late in contradistinction to Christians, and the works continued to be included by Christians; some Christian scholars questioned the canonicity of the works, or at least hinted they might be of less authority. In the Reformation many Protestant denominations rejected them (Luther was influenced by their absence from Hebrew manuscripts, natural given their rejection by Jamnia; this was presumably before his later degeneration into anti-Semitism); the Anglicans took the line that they were useful for moral examples, but were not to be used to establish any doctrine. Yet the order for the canonical Old Testament books continued to follow the Greek order (in a nutshell, both orders commence with the Torah/Pentateuch the first five books; the names in most Christian Bibles are either transliterated Greek (Genesis) Latinate versions of the Greek titles (Exodus), an English translation (Numbers, Greek ’Αρίθμοι (Arithmoi) or an Anglicised vesion of a Greek name (Deuterononomy from the Greek for "Second Law") while the Hebrew tends to use the opening words in Hebrew for the titles of these five works. Both continue Joshua, Judges (title for the first a range of variants on a Hebrew name of the protagonsist, the second Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English or whatever language the copy of the Bible is in for more or less equivalent term though clearly the role of the Judges is rather broader than judicial here). Now the Hebrew arrangement of "Law/instruction, Prophets and Writings," (Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim) regards what some modern scholars call the Deuteronomic histories (Joshua, Judges, I Samuel (some Catholic editions, possibly follwing Septuagint, call this I Kings) II Samuel or Catholic II Kings (I& II Samuel one scroll in Hebrew I think) I and II (or III and IV) Kings (literal translation of Mlakim) so called by modern scholars as theology thought to resemble that of Deuteronomy, as "former prophets" (this is turning into a large nutshell) Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the twelve "minor" prophets (Hosea-Malachi) atwelve on one scroll I think) as "Latter prophets". Lamentations and Daniel are grouped not in Nevi'im but in Ketuvim with material as diverse as Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (do not confuse with Apocryphal Ecclesiasticus/Ben Sira/Sirach NOT in Ketuvim) Ruth, I and II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Song of Solomon/of Songs in a quite miscellaneous group whose Hebrew order I forget. Greek, Latin and various Christian Bibles regardless of language place Ruth between Judges and I Samuel continuing as in Hebrew for a bit, I & II Chronicles after II Kings, followed by Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther, followed by Job and the remainder of the "Writings" minus Daniel and Nehemiah from Psalms through to the Song of Solomon, then Isaiah, Lamentations after Jeremiah, and Daniel between Ezekiel and Hosea then all the way to Malachi.

With regard to the New Testament, certainly the inclusion or exclusion of books in the canon is a complex and interesting story. As late as Emperor Constantine the latter had grave doubts about Revelation given it being quite possibly thinly veiled anti-Roman propaganda; that it is included in the New Testament Canon rather weakens your "evil Roman conspiracy to change scriptures for self-interest," theory I am afraid. The rejection of some of the Gospels may be taken issue with; there is a conundrum if the authority of Scripture is normative for church doctrine, but doctrine is a criterion on which to determine the canonicity of scripture. This would be an interesting topic for discussion. Sorry about the length.

Last edited by AlexandertheSolitary on 22 Mar 2007, 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

To return to the topic, can you turn to certain passages of scripture for comfort? Jeremiah, Jesus and Paul were all single (yes, I know that the Church is Jesus' bride) Hosea probably wished he had remained single. Most men (certainly Noah, Moses, Samuel, obviously David and Solomon, and Isaiah) in the Old Testament may have been married as a matter of course, but there lives were not invariably utopian as a result. Elijah I am uncertain about. Any way read I Corinthians 7. If that does not cheer you up, try Matthew (the whole of it; obviously not all specfic to your situation, but some of it is and it's all bound to do you good).

My situation is rather different, I am intensely attracted to, greatly admire and respect, enjoy the company of and am possibly in love with a young lady at my church, but I have heard from my mother (not a regular churchgoer, news at second or third hand) that she already has a boyfriend, making it wrong for me to continue to think about her in certain ways, and certainly out of the question to court her. I have great trouble getting over her; when with her I can talk to her as a friend about common interests like history, but away from her I brood obsessively. I am afraid from this and other earlier experiences that I am rather prone to the sin of idolatry, both with regard to my attitude to individual women and in idolising the idea of a requited romantic relationship in general, at times (though not invariably) to be blunt a not especially romantic idolatry of lust. Maybe it is like money and other possessions for the otherwise upstanding rich young man in the Gospels who wanted to inherit eternal life. Maybe celibacy (for me personally you are all free to marry, or indeed in a sense free to make whatever choices you like, provided you remember consequences) is the best option. At present there is little option but at least temporary celibacy. Certainly abstinence before marriage is my resolve. But matrimony is not necessary to live a fulfilling life, I could live and die a bachelor, which for me must mean a virgin as well. This is in one sense easier in the absence of a girlfriend (other than in the literal sense of a female friend; the majority of my friends are female) but it can be very difficult at times, however self-inflicted given my indulgence in self-pity and other unproductive emotions.

If I took religion seriously I would hate to be forced into marrying in my church, sure go there to prey etc... but I'd rather go somewhere special.

AlexandertheSolitary, you seem to have a good understanding of things, how old are you?

Twenty five years of age, as of January the 10th. Thank you. I would have said a moderately good understanding. I still seem slow to learn some things.

If only Christians feel love then what do you call the thing that non Christians feel that is normaly known as love?

I mean really what is the thing that non Christians feel that is not lust? There has to be a word for it because it exists, and since it's not all that different from what Christians feel why call it by a different name?

I would like this question to be treated seriously.

Erm, Christians aren't the only ones who believe in god...