What is love?
- Thread starter davejonescue
- Start date
- Status
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
I think it was mainly the point that I spent 2 pages trying to explain my point, and you wanted me to begin again. When I responded I don't want to spend another 2 pages arguing or discussing it, (as my point was not had in the first 2 pages) you remark as if further discussion is impossible because your arguments are irrefutably iron clad? OK? No, it was really because the point is not worth arguing two more pages. I don't take offense though. Broccoli was frustrating me earlier, and I got snarky with him; but deleted it. It happens. Life goes on. Such are forums online. It would be one thing if it were an every comment thing. Its not.
But to the point, I see it different. I don't think we will be in Heaven loving others more, though; I can concede we will be expressing, investing, and honoring people to different degrees (as that outworks in perfection.) Where no offense can be given, nor no offense can be had, the love we have will be incapable of purposely giving it, or bitterly taking it. So however that plays out, is peach pie to me. If some married people take offense their covenant love would be a shadow of the communal love of the saints in glory; there is nothing I can do about that. It is what it is. Good talk though.
Last edited:
I apologise for that. Not my intention. Here it is mildly scolding but humorous.
[automerge]1772157985[/automerge]
Thankyou, brother. I appreciate your candour. Or should I say, "candor."
Replying to the entirety, I want to throw out an idea, perhaps transgressing certain boundaries, but this is offered in love to a brother: I cannot simply leave 4+ decades of my professional experiences out when I read people's words. Our writing reveals a lot.
---
[digression: when the Unabomber was apprehended he refused psychiatric evaluation related to sanity, etc. But he had decades of journals, and experts spent much time reading and hence derived a very clear picture of his thoughts & motives].
---
Having read your comments in the past related to relationships, marriage, and singleness, it SEEMED that you had some negative issues around marriage. This thread, Matthew's comments,and your responses to him reinforced this APPEARANCE. Not saying it is reality, but it is quite consistent with the "vibe" you have given off before. Forgive me if I am stepping on toes, just offering my observation.
As to the main topic, we don't know clearly but I would think there will be a great dealing of variability in relationships in heaven. Being widowed for some years (and not finding the appropriate candidate for marriage #2, that has gone to the back burner if not off the stove!) I DO look forward to seeing my late wife again. I cannot imagine there being nothing special with her vs others. During her long bout with cancer she brought up remarriage, people thought she was so giving, etc. She said "I get Jesus, who should be jealous?!"
Add my hero to the list of married saints: John Murray. Retired from Westminster, returned to Scotland, married & became a father at 70! Not previously having children, I am open to such Providence myself!
[automerge]1772209912[/automerge]
While this is obviously tongue-in-cheek, it does puzzle me in that it is such a significant element of who we are as humans, never just about making babies (human menstrual cycle produces very different behaviors than the estrus cycle of animals). Jesus' glorified body ate (will we NEED to?). Obviously laws of physics will be altered, the instant transport & appearing in a locked room seem pretty cool, or is that just a "God thing"? Entropy ... there is an interesting one as well! So does the sexual aspect of humans go away? Okay, enough down this path!
Last edited:
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
Thank you for your analysis Doctor, do you take BCBS? On a serious note, I think people mistake my lack of infatuation or refusal to elevate marriage above singleness as a disdain for it. It is not. I have never been married, so I have no ill memories from it. My singleness comes from 1 Cor. 7 actually seeming a gift, and not a curse; so since I became a Christian in my 20's, I have been purposefully celibate. Perhaps in my Christian infancy I should have been persuaded to marry, as I did struggle still with self-gratification; but in the Lords unmerited mercy, he has allowed me to be chaste in my celibacy for quite a few years. People may not like that I say things like "this is a hard discussion to have with married people" but some discussions are, because many of them are tied to a sort of romantic-relationship dependent mindset (which most were created for) that sometimes doesn't allow them to look past the marital paradigm and consider there may be something grander. I certainly do not have an attitude of disdaining married people or marriage in itself. But I do see it sometimes as an idol, an purposely uplifted in importance and status in the Protestant church at the neglect of those God has called otherwise. I know this is to combat the Popish contrary, but in my opinion, many times we become them, just on the opposite spectrum. Again, thank you for your analysis though. Absolutely no offense taken.
Last edited:
The gift of 1 Cor. 7 is the gift to do something unnatural and against the divine order of things. In no sense is singleness itself a blessing. It is not good for a man to be alone. God meets people in their situations and His grace is sufficient for them. But that does not normalise the situation to make it commendable or desirable.
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
And I think this is where we are butting heads. Celibacy is not natural here; but it will be for eternity. It is unnatural, but it is not unspiritual. It isn't common, yet it isn't sin. This life is but a vapor. All life-long singles have done, is start early. One day our nature will not crave sex, because God created sex to be between a man and wife. But, in heaven there is no marriage between saints. In this wise we will be like the angels. Lastly, Paul sets up a pretty good argument to make it both commendable, and desirable; but it is most likely only desirable to those who would think it a gift. Most singles dont care if singleness is lifted up or commended by men. We have far better examples than to need that.
I wish all men were like myself, but each have their particular gift from God....
Last edited:
These are wrong categories. There is no celibacy there. Celibacy is a restraint from a natural human impulse; but there is no such impulse in heaven. Hence no celibacy. There IS such an impulse on earth. God created it and gave it a purpose and set it within bounds of marriage. This is all natural. It is not sin and it is not spiritual to abstain from this because God has given a special dispensation to some. Life-long singles have not started early on anything. This is where your thinking is out of the order of things. You want to normalise something that is not normal according to the Bible. At this point you are engaging in the kind of ascetic thought the Bible rejects.
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
I am not engaging in ascetics brother. But whatever you want to think. I'm not getting drawn back into this. You can attempt to gate-keep your view of the preeminence of marriage all you like; yet you couldn't stop God knocking a whole generation off their horse if he so chose. So why bother? Do I want people to forsake marriage? Obviously no. Do I think we could sure use some more Paul's in our day? Certainly. Call it unnatural or whatever you want to call it. But there are some pretty good examples of folks in the bible who have lived it. So whatever it is, if it was good enough for them, it is good enough for me.
Last edited:
It is Biblical. That is why I bother. I am taking captive every thought. This is God's mind and will revealed to us. It is normality. There is no reason to think that God has made known His mind and will so that we can ignore Him and come up with our own thoughts on things.
Last edited:
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
I do not know when and where I have said marriage, and natural affection/attraction for the oppose sex are unnatural or not normal? I haven't, not a single place. I have said, that the gift of celibacy is spiritual; and I say this, because it can only happen chastely by grace, i.e the gift (or, i.e. those that can practice self-control). Maybe supernatural would have been a better word? Also, I have nothing against marriage. I just don't see it as more honorable or more Christian than singleness. If you do, we are simply not going to agree. I don't know what you are taking captive? But, I am going to drop it. Thanks for the convo. TTYL.
Last edited:
I readily acknowledge that this is your intention, but like our brother said earlier, when you come to expand your thoughts, you say things that do not line up with this intention. Numerous people have pointed this out in the thread. It is not just me. So you might want to give yourself a review and see what might be causing the disconnect. I leave it to you do that review so that you can earnestly fulfil your own good intention.
davejonescue
Puritan Board Graduate
TheBoringBaptist
Puritan Board Freshman
WHAT IS LOVE?
Baby dont hurt me. Dont hurt me. No more
Sorry. Couldn't help my boring self
Baby dont hurt me. Dont hurt me. No more
Sorry. Couldn't help my boring self
- Status
