Xan

Remember, she is not as young as you and most likely does not have the same insecurities that plague many 20 somethings. Do as Mead suggested, and don't worry about hurting her feelings. The pain is significant when the feelings start to run deep, but if you let her know now you are interested in someone else, unless she's crazy, she will move on without much difficulty. If you lead her on, you will cause much damage.

no more post with preacher put on here i am not so educated in proper grammer so you all take it and post and i am quiting.. hope that satifies you all...good bye the use or periods and sentences would help also. Preacher777~ We appreciate your heart. Please don't leave us. My education is not so Good and grammer and periods a miserable, but people are always thinking of me as a cave man who cannot write or read most people on here has never been published or have written a book, but i have been published , with editings of course, not bragging but i wrote short stories for a company called the horse connection for about a full year, but someone had to do the editing , my writings. people love my stories and they went all over the world, so tell me how many people on here has ever mananged to accomplish that? but i am not a boastful person, you have a heart and feeling for people and it want be so hard on folks to read what i write it might take a little longer ,but i will guarntee they will get the message.. if i coulld use proper writing skills i would be dangerious with a pen, probadly make a fortune writing stories.. That would be great. So, what stops you from taking a refresher course? I say refresher because the basics were taught in elementary school, but no one actually remembers everything we learned as children. However, there are basic grammar classes adults can take through community colleges and on-line courses.

This is leaning toward ideas invloved in Gnosticism. Humanity was made in God's image, made male and female (Gen 1) and that is what the text says. Before God made humankind he spoke of his intention to make THEM in his image, and so and next he fulfills his spoken intention as Gen 1 says, then when we reach for the details in Gen 2 we know to remember that humankind 'THEM" as seen in Gen 1 was already intended to be made therefore once God acted to make woman it was not solely to alleviate the man in his aloneness. Therefore man is not 'symbolic' of God nor the woman of humanity, those are the gnostic ideas embedded in this comment of your above. While woman is the glory of man for she was taken from him as said in 1 Co 11, she is also the glory of God. Paul gave wives the liberty to cover or not because they are the glory of their husbands. If she uncovered she could shame her husband so Paul says she has authority and out of that was to decide whether to do so or not. Since humanity was made in the image of God, both male and female glorify God. Here is what Paul said: Here's what we have from you but put in clearer words: For a woman indeed ought to cover her head, forasmuch as she is not the image and not the glory of God. Yet Paul gave the woman choice on what to do because she is more in that she is not only the image and glory of God but also the glory man (not the image of man though) and so she was in quite a bind in that culture but had her own authority to decided what to do since every woman's situation was unique as for example not all were married, yet woman is the glory of man, and that does not refer to just wives. Good question. It was for the purpose of foreshadowing the mystery found in Eph 5 at the end of the passage where Paul talks about us being members of Christ's body and for that reason just as in Gen a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife. The church is the glory of Christ who is both God and man just as the woman is the glory of both God and man, as both were taken from their source. Good question again. God chose to do so to picture how he brings us to himself, adn we the church glorify him through Christ, that is through being made from out of Christ kinda how the woman is the glory of man. First, you disagree with William, then you end up agreeing with him. Yes, mankind was made in the image of God, but marraige is the picture of God's relationship with the church with man being the type of Christ and woman being the type of church.

This was the ultimate plan of God, one church one body And this brings up a conversation I recently had with my fiance'. When Christians act like the world with regards to premarital sex and several divorces (not condemning divorce for the right reasons, but those of us who chose unwisely still bear some culpability), we blaspheme the very picture of God's marraige with the church.

I think we are talking about two totally different situations. Pre marriage expectations are different. Everyone has expectations as to whom they want to marry and the kind of person they want that one to be. Frankly, I believe there should only be ONE pre-marriage expectation, Belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. Got takes care of the rest. At least, He did for me. Once you are married though, it's not about you anymore. It's about the other person. What I know is, even when promises are made, by humans, they get broken. Because we are human. "But you promised!"... You promised we could have kids, you promised you would support our family, you promised.... How about this? I expected my husband to work and support our family so that I could stay at home and care for him, the kids and our home. Several times he has been out of work, and I have had to step in. This time he's been out of work for...what now...6 months...I'm working [essentially] three jobs to make ends meet so that he can find another job that will again support our family. Was that a bad expectation? Did he lose his job on purpose so that he could let me down? NOPE. Things happened, life happened. Circumstances changed so that my expectations are no longer being met. What do I do about that? Do I whine about it? Do I complain? Do I ignore his needs because my own are not cared for? Absolutly NOT! I forgo my expectations, and I rest in the Lord. We have both been let down, and instead of whining about our "expectations" we dump the old plan and wait for God's new one. It's not about me, it's about Him, and my husband. What I expect is not always going to be in line with what God has planned. I can't allow my forgone expectations to keep our lives from growing and expanding into the beautiful harmony that God planned from the beginning. I don't think anyone is saying we should whine or complain or ignore our spouses' needs because expectations aren't being met! But having what I call "marriage maintenance" talks where you discuss your marriage and things you would like to see happen in it in a non-accusatory manner is, I believe, healthy for a relationship. Because we all do have needs! And the marriage relationship was built to meet certain needs! An obvious one is sex: for men in particular (but often for women too!), this is a very important need that the marriage relationship was designed to see satisfied in a constructive manner. If I'm not holding up my end in that regard, I want to know about it (and that's an expectation that I have: that we talk about these things, rather than ignoring them, because I can't read minds any more than he can)! In our relationship, the MUTUAL goal is to see that we meet what needs we CAN meet of the other person. There are, of course, guidelines: 1. Our covenant with God is number one. If I'm unhappy because a need isn't being met, that DOES NOT dissolve that covenant. 2. Everything I do, I do out of love for God and for my family. (I'm not saying I'm perfect here...is anyone? But I try) Those guidelines are for both husband and wife, and they are not nullified by one party not following them. Anyway, I just think an attitude that says "I might as well not expect my husband to rise to any of my expectations" is a pretty sad way to go through married life. I don't expect my husband to be perfect...but neither do I see anything wrong with having a mutual agreement to do our best to meet what needs we can. We are both equally responsible in that, and we both focus on our own parts in it, but we do give eachother feedback (gently and lovingly and in the right time and place), so that bitterness does not grow, and so that our relationship DOES grow. As I've said, all those kinds of talks we've had have IMPROVED and STRENGTHENED our marriage, not damaged it! And when we come to eachother to talk about these things, it's always done in love, and with prior prayer and self-examination. Excellent post, Iryssa

Richard Dawkins is not a heavy hitter?

I'm all for the Phone Book Congress. No doubt they'll do a better job.

Dear Brother PA, I think the scripture Matt 5:32 is quoted wrongly. This is from the American Standard version: Mat 5:32 but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery. King James version: Mat 5:32 But1161 I1473 say3004 unto you,5213 That3754 whosoever3739, 302 shall put away630 his848 wife,1135 saving for3924 the cause3056 of fornication,4202 causeth4160 her846 to commit adultery:3429 and2532 whosoever3739, 1437 shall marry1060 her that is divorced630 committeth adultery.3429 Both versions say that excepy for the reason of fornication and not adultery; ie the bride was not a virgin entering into the marriage, all other grounds for divorce is not valid. The reason is rthat the marriage contract is not valid, which is the ground that Joseph could have divorced Mary legally because she is found to be with child. G4202 πορνεία porneia Thayer Definition: 1) illicit sexual intercourse 1a) adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc. 1b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18 1c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mar_10:11,Mar_10:12 1Co 7:11 (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife. 1Co 7:12 But to the rest say I, not the Lord: If any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her. 1Co 7:13 And the woman that hath an unbelieving husband, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave her husband. 1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 1Co 7:15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us in peace Based on 1Cor 7:15 if the unbeliever partner abandons the believer, then a divorce is allowed. You have quoted the Matthew 5 passage well. It does say "put away" (kick out, abandon, seperate) and not "divorce" as so many other versions say. Divorce is an end. It is final and complete; that means there is nothing holding one spouse to another. It is not adultry to get married if there is nothing beholding one to a former spouse. Yet, if one got married while merely "put away" (or what it is called now- "seperated") then it is obviously adultry.

Here is a poignant tribute to a great man of God: http://musiccityoracle.blogspot.com/2008/1...om-history.html

It is difficult sometimes. That's why we have smilies. They have become our facial expressions.

okay. so. was the hug for the fact that i said you had your own special tool belt? or because I was so rudely called surly? to trav and to refuge! Where's my hug? I started the disrespect! i so sorry xan! here's two! Thank you, Char!

okay. so. was the hug for the fact that i said you had your own special tool belt? or because I was so rudely called surly? to trav and to refuge! Where's my hug? I started the disrespect!

You may want to consider whether this was a reference to the gentiles becoming joint heirs with the Jews in Christ . . . and not a reference to individual's salvation. I was relating it to sanctification.

Make that two in this crowd.

I would be curious to hear your thoughts on the matter. As a matter of fact, (*Mudcat unabashedly plugs his upcoming thread*)I plan on starting a thread in regards to faith, works, security of the believer and so forth, pretty soon. Hopefully you will see fit to check it out, when I put it up and share your beliefs, as a discussion on sanctification would fit right in. Go ahead. Shamelessly promote your new thread. I look forward to it. As to your question, let me start with this passage of scripture: Romans 6: 3 "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection," I realize this passage was talking about sin, but there is so much more there. If we have died and have been resurrected with Christ, then it is not by our efforts that we walk in Him, but by His grace. Also, God promises that He will complete the good work He has started. He saved us, so that is the start of the work, but that is only justification (as if anyone could actually say "only" with regards to salvation). Romans 8:30 "and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." From the very beginning, it is God's work in our lives, not of us that we could boast, but of God. When I started really seeing His soverignty in ways I never have before, it spilled over from not just my emerging beliefs in sanctification but in justification as well. As I said, that was just the beginning with this journey, and it in and of itself did not convince me of predestination, but what a beginning!

I'm sorry, Traveler. You saying something about men and women hearing differently, then I was thinking about that as I kept reading.... could you repeat that?

Thanks, Mudcat. I certainly do not view this as an anchor. In fact, this whole thing started as a result of my growing understanding of sanctification. I have placed my life and my growth in our Savior in His hands, and I know He will not fail to lead me in a closer walk with Him.

William, I wanted to share with my Worthy friends my excitement and the path God has lead me through the past five months. Even though I can answer your challenge, I chose not to because it was turning into a debate. This is new to me, and the typical response for most people when coming upon new understanding is excitement and wanting to share with absolutely no desre to be put on the defense. I will probably be willing to engage in a soapbox debate with just you in time, but for now let me continue to grow in the direction God has chosen for me. Be blessed, dear brother, and I hope for the chance to meet you in person in two weeks.

i believe in free will, but i'm beginning to see that it may be six of one, half dozen of the other. what interests me is why the burden for the lost came on you. in no way do i want to lay a guilt trip on you, but i have to ask: why wasn't the burden there before? from your posts, it almost seems like because you don't know who has been chosen, you're more motivated. please don't take this wrong. your love and ache for the lost is a very good thing. i shamefully admit that mine is lacking. and i think i'd like to know what actually raised yours so much, in the hopes that i can raise mine also. is it our calousness in thinking "they are without excuse"? i don't know that i've stated my question very well or that you can really answer it. i was just very intrigued by your statement about a much deeper care for the lost than ever before. i want some! I think that is exactly it. Maybe I was callous in thinking they are without excuse, which is shameful. That's the closest I have to understanding why the sudden change. I asked my fiance' about this, and he told me it's a pretty common reaction when someone adopts this theology. It is pretty exciting to have this great love for the lost, and I wanted to share all of this with my Worthy buddies.

But not all sinners, right? This is the best way I can answer this question considering I had the same qualms for years, and this was the final scripture that finally made me see predestination is Biblical: Ephesians 1: 3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, I don't see how that verse convinced you? It was the final scripture after believing in and living out my faith in God in accordance to Reformed theology, after reading other scriptures that support the belief, after reading what other Calvinists have said, after asking occasional theological questions to a Calvinist, and after explaining Calvinism to people who don't understand it; hence the title of the blog and thread "Spiritual Journey". After ALL of that, as I wrote in my blog, I was doing my Bible study Sunday, and I read that passage which says God chose us and He predestined us according to His will. To truly explain, one would had to have followed me around for the past 5 months and listened to my prayers. It is not one scripture by itself, as compelling as it is with regards to predestination, that made me realize this is how God purposed things so that it is not of us but of God that we receive both justification and sanctification. Romans 9:11-13 shows that God called us to election so that it is not of our own works that we answer the call.

But not all sinners, right? This is the best way I can answer this question considering I had the same qualms for years, and this was the final scripture that finally made me see predestination is Biblical: Ephesians 1: 3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,

This statement confuses me. Are you saying that you did not feel compelled to pray for the lost because they had a choice and since they did not choose Christ, it didn't bother you, but now that they don't have a choice, you feel compelled to pray for them? If this is the case, then with the thought of predestination, they are destined to die in their sin, so what good is prayer if they are going to burn anyway? Will be looking for you answer ... thanks! OneLight This is something alot of Arminians don't understand. God wants us to reach out to the lost, and Calvinists feel that quite strongly. In fact, the modern missionary movement was started by Calvinists who had a strong heart for the lost. This is a change in my own heart I certainly did not expect; yet here it is. God works in ways we don't understand. Instead, I just study the Bible and follow His leading. First, let me assure you that I carry only one title, and that is Christian. If any other title is placed on me, it is not by my hands. Correct me if I am wrong, but the thought in Calvinism is that God has already chosen who will be saved and who will not, right? So, in my mind, I see a list with two columns in Gods hand. On the right are the names of the saved and on the left, the lost. If a person is destined to be with God, or not to be with God, there is nothing we can or can not do to change this fact, so why do anything? Do you believe it is possible to change Gods predestined list by praying for those that are lost, if in fact, God has already made up His mind? You must understand I'm new to this theology, actually 2 days new; however, it's written in scripture. Because I'm new to this, some questions are hard to answer,so I asked my fiance' (who, BTW never pushed this on me. He rarely spoke of his beliefs, and in time, I saw it for myself as I mentioned in my blog and in this thread), and this was his answer: "We spread the Gospel because God has called us to. Our activity is not based on how important we are to the process, but it is based on the command of our Savior who loved us and gave Himself for us. Far from demeaning us, this means that God gives us the privilege of participating in His work, and the fact that he goes about the humanly impossible task of saving sinners through our sharing the Gospel means that we can spread it with confidence that people will come to know Christ. It is true that we don't know for whom Christ died. We know that He died for sinners, so we share the hope with everyone that Christ's death accomplished salvation for people like them."

But why reach out to the lost if they won't / can't be saved because they are not part of "the elect?" I once read in a catechism book of the presbyterian church that you cannot tell somebody that Jesus died for their sins because you do not know if they are truly part of the elect. Having only been attending a Presbyterian church for 3 months, I can't answer what's in the catachism. What I do know is the Lord has blessed us with the grace for reaching out to the unsaved. The Holy Spirit goes before us, and Christians are called to bring in the harvest. Since we don't know who will accept Christ and who will reject Him, the gospel is to be preached to the whole world.

This statement confuses me. Are you saying that you did not feel compelled to pray for the lost because they had a choice and since they did not choose Christ, it didn't bother you, but now that they don't have a choice, you feel compelled to pray for them? If this is the case, then with the thought of predestination, they are destined to die in their sin, so what good is prayer if they are going to burn anyway? Will be looking for you answer ... thanks! OneLight This is something alot of Arminians don't understand. God wants us to reach out to the lost, and Calvinists feel that quite strongly. In fact, the modern missionary movement was started by Calvinists who had a strong heart for the lost. This is a change in my own heart I certainly did not expect; yet here it is. God works in ways we don't understand. Instead, I just study the Bible and follow His leading.

Thanks for your responses. A few months ago, I never would have thought I would ever be leaning towards Calvinism. When I started learning about sanctification and how every step in our Christian walk with God is ordered by Him, and that it is not our doing but the leading of the Holy Spirit that draws us closer to Him, and after looking back and seeing that first hand in myself, I was quickly able to adopt the Reformed views on sanctification, which finally answered all my doubts on preservation of the saints. The first part of Romans spells out very well how totally depraved we were as non-believers, so that's not an issue. However, I was resistent on the part of limited atonement and irrisistable grace. Sunday when I put my feelings aside and was focused on a Bible study while reading J.I. Packer's "Knowing God" and was in the chapter concerning grace and read Ephesians 1:3- 2:10, I could not ignore the Biblical teachings any longer. Something else has come to my rememberence- Peter only knew who Jesus was because the Holy Spirit told him. For me, what makes this difficult is even though none of us deserve salvation, and we all deserve hell, when I had an Arminian viewpoint, it didn't bother me so much that people rejected Christ because I thought they had a choice. Now my soul aches for the lost in such a strong way it never has. I have spent much time in prayer for the lost since Sunday.