MeLessHimMore

I've been reading some of the posts in Worthy and noticed that there are some posts with black diamonds with ?'s within the posts that make it nearly impossible to read. It borderline causes me a headache trying to read through it as I tend to strain my eyes while reading it, thus I've given up on those. Someone from the chat said it was a "feature". Is there a way to disable or turn it off? That "feature" is akin to the "feature" that comes on my car from time to time: flat tires. If not I guess I'll just have to skip over those posts/posters but I really hope that can be done away with. Help?

Knowing that you mean "why wait to marry", I'm gonna submit something that may be hard for people to do, which they may indeed not do, but is still good medicine. They would be wise to wait for this reason (I say wise because I'm not going so far as to say right or wrong but wise, to which there is a difference): in our society the young are growing up too fast but maturing slower than ever. They don't know what is real when it comes to the term "passionately in love" and they don't have a clue of what a true relationship really is. They are taking their cues from the likes of Snooki off of "Jersey Shore" and from their own homes that are filled with dysfunction, etc.... From the time of the generations around me (I'm 37) and on it gets progressively worse. AS A BELIEVER, if I had gotten married every time I "JUST KNEW" I was passionately in love I could have as many wives as Solomon. That was in the 90's. It is 10 fold worse now. I'm not saying that there are not young adults who can absolutely know they are in love and "meant to be" with that significant other. But that is generally the exception to the rule rather than the norm. Plus, saying such a thing as "we just knew we were suppose to be together" was made of more stern stuff when our grandfathers and great-grandfathers said it than when today's microwaveable generations say it. They're changing their minds at the same pace as changing underwear. So on the whole, I would put forth that if indeed they are passionately in love and know such a thing is "meant to be", they would be wise to see a thing grow and blossom. Time will show them and teach them much that will help ratify their "feelings" and indeed make them even stronger as a "meant to be" couple! *sigh.....* We just can't wait for anything these days. It truly is sad that we cannot delay gratifications which would lead to better, more enriching outcomes. We can't save up a little money to pay for that item so we borrow ourselves into debt and bankruptcy because we had to have it NOW! The same is true for relationships, which in our society are just as similarly bankrupt. Such people as you suggest in your post would show maturity, wisdom, and would be well-advised to wait. There is only the rare exception to the rule. With such a covenant that God says shouldn't be undone, there is close to nothing to be gained by rashness and much to profit from delay. If humanity had the fortitude for such, I've no doubt the divorce rate would plummet (at least among believers). However, in these last days, I've little hope for such. Elansing, what you did was right, scriptural and the godly thing to do. Yes, the painfulness and difficulty of doing so breeds some doubt about the decision. But some will say no. Some will only follow because they are fed and will show their heart as they walk away when things stop meeting their physical, fleshly needs. And a broken-hearted Jesus, watching the good but un-surrendered rich, young ruler for example, will allow them to do so.

Hmmm. I didn't see your post before my prior one. You ask a great and interesting question. I think the church is for sinners who have come to salvation in Christ. I know many will disagree and from your post I know you probably will, but I do not think the Church (the Body of Christ and the fellowship and ministry therein) is for the unregenerate sinner any more than heaven is. The perspective of grace and American church culture from long ago to the present has given us this "church" equation that it is but it isn't what we see throughout the New Testament and at the birth of the Jewish and Gentile church in the book of Acts. The ministry that should be happening in our corporate worship services on the weekends should be focused on the edification and feeding of the Body of Christ (the Church). Due to the fact that we've fouled up the "formula" (if you will) of GO and make disciples THEN bring them into the fellowship, we have tons and tons of people sitting under preaching that means little to nothing to them yet they come to pacify a sense of religious obligation. And that they do, never really knowing salvation (if they really HAVE salvation as some may say they don't) and remain nominal Christians at best if they even are. They have never really dealt with a commitment to Jesus and experienced His love and know nothing of sacrificing themselves for Christ and are therefore motivated by their own agendas and cause MUCH of this type of distention that we are discussing here in this thread. If they are in the faith, they remain babes and never grow to maturity. We actually do them a disservice by placating them into a false sense of faith (that pacifying of the moral/religious obligation) that may be endangering their souls and we do ourselves a disservice by having our preachers boxed in to preaching a "milk" instead of a "meat" sermon from week to week just trying to evangelized the unsaved or "barely" saved if you will. While I definitely see the heart of Littlelambs and others perspective and those points are well taken, I think the Scripture supports that the Church is for the Body of Christ. Evangelism should happen out in the markets, streets, fields, and taverns (where Jesus ate with the sinners and Pharisees). Proclaim Christ's death, burial, and resurrection there. When they are cut to the heart and cry for what they must do to be saved, lead them into falling in love with and a relationship with Jesus. THEN get them involved in growing into the deeper things of God and among a fellowship in which they can grow. At that time you will have people who walk in the power of the Living God as congregants. Should we ever get this right, we might not have to worry as much about what is going on behind the closed doors of believers and constantly be accused of being fruit inspectors and judgers. Joint WORSHIP would be drastically different in tone, power, and atmosphere. What a mighty vision that is!!

I've often wondered myself about this issue. I'm not a pastor but a worship leader. However, I know that I must do all I can to support the leadership above me and I've been under preachers that have taken both approaches. Take the issue of two people living together before marriage who have been counseled against doing so as it goes against God's moral principles (let's leave the brother and his influence aside momentarily). On one hand, you have two people who are willfully disobedient to wise counsel. Then let's say a pastor marries them to dodge the sinfulness of their situation. After some time, because they have not the moral character and fortitude to follow through on their vows and covenants, they divorce. This sin will cause them further harm and may have some dire lasting reproductions. When all is said and done, you have the consequences of two serious sins to deal with. Would the pastor have been wiser to NOT marry them because they showed an unwilling, uncooperative heart towards the mind and will of God? Personally, I have to think so. Does the pastor share some responsibility before God as a vessel used in the joining together of the two into one (obviously, God does that but the pastor acts as a priest for them before God, no)? No pastor should take such ordination lightly. Is there a possibility that the two would live on together in harmony until their 50th anniversary. Possibly. But that is a matter between those two and God. The pastor has to be responsible for that which God has called him to. In our church, we had a couple (children of members but not members themselves) who wanted to have their baby baptized (I'm Methodist, though I stringently disagree with Wesley on this one and do not believe in baptism for babies myself; dedicate them all day long but...anyway). They were living together, had this child, but were not married and did not intend to get married. Yet they were wanting to say before the church and priorly before God that they were going to raise this child according to His laws and nurture him towards a life of faith in God. What would have been the right call here? Some would say why would you deny a child? Tricky issues! That is why we shouldn't have eaten the fruit. We are horrible at deciding an absolute right and wrong when so many circumstances give rise to grey areas. Only God can judge rightly on these things. And because of that, the answers to these questions are to be found not in creeds, doctrines and theological statements of denominations, and not in feelings, etc. but in the Word of God. With proper hermeneutical study one can know what the good and right thing to do in these situations by letting the Word shed its light on the path of righteousness. Praying for you because I know that it can be difficult and uncomfortable to go through these things. Be strong and courageous!!!

Satan yes, but humanity's sin more so.

And just as a complete side note, if what I understand is correct, sharks have somewhat the capability to selectively regurgitate.