It is better to marry than to eat in their lust 01/01/2011
Someone explained the reasons for the community for the celibate life (see the comment from 1.1.11). I agree that it benefits if you remain unmarried - as Paul writes. But he also writes:
1 Corinthians 7 1 Now on to the questions of your letter! "It's good for a man not to touch a woman." 2
Because of the danger of fornication is but always have his wife, and each will have their man. ... 5 you do not withdrawn by each other except by mutual consent and only for a time, to be free for prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will
not into temptation when you mentioned you can not. ... 7
I wish all people would be (not married) as I do. But everyone has his proper gift from God , one of one kind and another after that. ... 9
But if they can not live celibate, should marry her. It is better to marry than to eat in desire. (
After New American Bible text EÜ)
Unfortunately, Today there are many sexual temptations. So many in the community - especially brothers - have to fight it and many have failed in it and they have been overwhelmed and had to leave the community. Paul desired and recommended that all remained free of marital obligations, but he was also granted permission to marry, if someone can not restrain his desire. He says it is better to marry than to eat in desire. It is better to marry than to go to hell. It is better to control his desires, but if that costs too much force, it is better to carry on the sexuality in the way in which God has provided for it: in marriage.
The leaders in the community make their way so close as Paul, when they forbid to marry the brother and sister.
_____________________________________________
Comments:
02/01/2011: K:
I do not quite understand what is meant by the apostle Paul.
I see marriage not as a problem solution to sexual immorality. It protects the people do not sin.
The issue of marriage, I see it as a choice. You look into his heart and consider what is his desire, what plan they have for his life, in what way you want to give his life to Jesus and falls then his decision.
L. (author) 02/01/2011: Some
brothers, who have gotten married, told me that it is now easier to fight against temptations. You have to fight still, but to live the way their sexuality in the intended way of God, reduces the temptation.
Anonymous: 02/01/2011:
is the real reason for marriage not sex. You acknowledge themselves, appear that there are still temptations. Consequently, Paul means by "desire to eat" is not a strong physical sense, but the eating (his Ignites) in the spirit, the tasks associated with marriage, raising children and the pure love between the partners. It
is not equivalent to deciding what is the best. You can not use the argument "but Paul also says," as it would be an equivalent option. If someone is humble, willing to give up and ready to do always the best, he will come to the same conclusion as Paul. He will recognize that the love of family hampered him in carrying out the tasks God wants him transferred to a much larger group of people.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul makes a general statement to a question from a letter to reply to it, we do not know. In verse 2 he says to the married. Only in verse 8, it actually speaks to unmarried with a clear statement.
In verse 24 Paul speaks clearly and not only related to the social state, but the thing itself.
We can also remember what Jesus said. "Because after the resurrection, people will not marry, but are like angels in heaven" (Mt 22:30 EÜ) Marriage is only for this (earthly) time . Therefore, it is wiser to seek to what remains forever.
helps Encouraging Petrus us to establish the correct position:
"were they given to us by the exceeding great and precious promises, so that their perishable of desire which prevails in the world, and escape from the divine Nature percentage gain. Why is all zeal to connect to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, with the knowledge of the self-control, self-control with endurance, the endurance the piety, ... (1 Pet 1.4 to 6 after EÜ)
I think it is good to focus not only on this point, but you should open your eyes and see the demand for our position, "so the man of God to every good work to be ready and prepared. "(2 Tim 3, 17 to STP). For it is written: "Be holy, for I am holy." (1 Pt 1, 16 (STP)).
Because we have good role models: neither Jesus nor Paul were married, but sat with her whole life and all your strength to all who need it.
The letter to the seven churches in the Book of Revelation reminds us of that standard. They were warned because they did not all because they were lukewarm. "He who has ears, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."
In terms of my flesh, I know myself sexual temptation and the desire to get married. Without the help of the community it is much harder to fight it. I do not know if I went through old (am n). But in the spirit I know what to do. It would be wrong to give up, but you have to fight. With my heart I can make the best decision and accept the advice of Paul.
01/03/2011
K:
I feel closer to L's position. I can imagine that it is in marriage better able to remain pure.
Nevertheless, I agree that this is not the main reason for marriage. When we see the case of recurring sexual sins, it is a kind of addiction. An addiction can be cured completely if eliminating the causes upon which to fall is in it. So I agree that the marriage was not created primarily to help people to struggle against temptations - but in order to give each other (literally, the other a gift to give of myself). Also through sexuality. Someone can have sexual temptations, even though he recognized that God wants him for a celibate life. Then he must marry to solve this problem without. I now realize that St. Augustine has adopted much of the Pauline theology of marriage, but I see it rather differently.
The statement by Anonymous:
1) I think Paul means and sexuality.
2) There are so many paths to holiness as people in the world. I protest against it, if the road is made uniform for all people in the world, as the "community" does.
3) verse 24 should be seen in the previous verses from verse Konktext 17th There will not be the marriage talk. But these verses for me are not entirely clear.
4) With regard to the words of Jesus: It is true that marriage is for this (earthly) life is determined. But one can also cite the opposite argument: We should accept this gift from God, because in heaven we will lose it J. And something serious: people who live in celibacy - and I mean all, do not marry, are signs of kingdom of God. But marriage is also a sign of Christ's love for the church.
5) The Letter of Peter: I see marriage not on the same plane as "evil passions"
I repeat myself: The idea of marriage is not pleasure, but a way to give love a loved one. It's just a way to follow Christ, as the path of celibacy. He has some disadvantages, such as that one has less time for God alone (prayer etc.), but there is a way to SERVE.
L (author): 01/03/2011:
I just wanted to write something similar, K. In addition
: Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 7, that it was better to stay in the state of life where you are. (V. 24), but later in verse 28 he says. "Who married yet, do not sin"
He also writes to Timothy (1 Tim 5:00, 9.11 .* 14 *): widows who are younger than 60 to marry, should . I think this is very clear.
Anonymous, you write what sounds good and is the opinion of the community, but I think it is somewhat idealistic. It seems a bit gnostic sexuality and looks so negative. Even the Catholics, who forbid their priests to marry demand, not that all Christians should be unmarried.
RA: 01/03/2011:
Anonymous writes: "In terms of my flesh, I know myself sexual temptation and the desire to get married. Without the help of the community it is much more difficult to fight against "
RA. After some years away I'm the Community, does this statement that we are against the marriage of these or other reasons to fight surreal to me.
Anonymous writes: "Paul means by" desire to eat "is not a strong physical sense, but the eating (his Ignites) in the spirit, the tasks associated with marriage, raising children and the pure love between the partners "
RA. YES, pure love for the partner. And you would prefer to ban this pure love in which you separate them idealistically of sexuality. It appears that sexuality in your eyes does not fit into God's plan. Paul is "too holy" to speak in 1 Corinthians 7 on sexuality. I think it is so clear that L. has said. Read the site 1 Corinthians 7, 9 times in the New International Version (NIV modern English Bible translation): "But if they are not in the violence (literally: You can control yourself), let them marry, for it is better marry than to burn with passion. "
Here the" burning passion "seen clearly negative. Although I would hold that passion, or whatever (we call it "X") for good, Paul notes that this "X" is worse than marriage.
Let us express your opposition even clearer: If we replace the "X" Your statement, we obtain the Rating: "It is better to close a marriage than to stand in the duties associated with marriage, raising children and the pure love between the partners."
Anonymous says: "For we have good role models: Neither Jesus nor Paul were married, but sat with her whole life and fully committed to all people "
RA. We also have a good example in Peter (who was married).
In 1 Cor 9.5 (written by Paul) says, "Have we no right to take a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and as Cephas" (STP)
So we can , conclude that not only Peter, but also other apostles were married. And these women they could after their conversion, not before, got married. In Peter's case we can safely say, for it is written:
"bring a woman of faith, like the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord, and as Cephas" (STP)
We know that Jesus called Peter directly added. He was one of the first disciples and he had not been previously converted by his wife. (Jn 1, 37.40) and he decided nevertheless to get married. We know very well how much burned the heart of Peter to Christ. And yet he chose to marry. seems
Regarding Mk 1 nevertheless, as if Peter was married before his conversion. Because the distance between his conversion and Jesus' meeting with the mother of Peter seems quite short.
In 1 Cor 9.5 used in the NIV the present tense "take a believing wife, as the other apostles ... Do '. The "doing" (English: do) can of course be meant also in general, but it seems to point out that marriage is nothing abnormal for Christians, but as common as the food (1 Cor 9:4).
The passage in 1 Corinthians 9:00 speaks of it in general that Paul certainly had the right to do this and that, he did not used this right (1 Cor 9, 15) for the benefit of another (1 Cor 9, 19f). His zeal is really impressive.
But the example of Peter is for me just as impressive. I think nothing is lost, no matter if you married to or not. I like Paul, to proselytize kind exerted by our community top notch.
But the example of Peter is for me no less encouraging. His example shows that a family life for those who wish to follow Jesus, must be excluded Not required legally.
Without family, there are no children, which could be the best example for Christians who want to be really big (Mk 9, 33-37)
- Statistics -
Again, if we conclude on the basis of 1 Corinthians 5, is not only an apostle was married (whether before or after his conversion), then we can apply the statistics: At least two apostles of 12 were married (that is, at least 16% ). If there were three apostles, the proportion rises to 25%.
What is the proportion of married couples in our community? I guess it is less. By comparison with the minimum of 16% at the time of the Apostles in our community there should be 16 couple (with an estimated 100 members). Did we last updated 16 couples in the community? If not, why not? If you think things are now different and the comparison is inappropriate, then explain to me why.
As I said, I said earlier: I think it is not normal for mankind to live like the bees, where there is a church family, only a "mother" or something similar. Sure, we have a "model families" are (lit: Model-families), but marriage is still treated as a disturbing chain of our lifestyle and more as a useless relic of the past, because as a sacred union between man and woman.
people are very different from bees. God has created us differently. And he will not impose our doctrines that contradict his creation, including sexuality. God created sexuality, not Satan.
+ + +
5.1.11
Anonymous writes:
Neither marriage nor sex is sin. This assessment was not the issue.
The question was, what is God's way and will - based on a specific question. So we asked (and there are many of us and everyone can participate in this discussion) over and over again by God's will, not only in this case. Led by the Holy Spirit in our numerous conversations and supported by prayer, God revealed his will.
We cut down any decisions based on rules that we derive from experience or even based on scripture. It was always a major concern of the community not to resort to formalism, so we were open, ask God to continually to his leadership. Paul also has established no rules. However, he said, what the best is always in a specific case, he recommended just the opposite to be the best solution. A similar case with special circumstances can also occur today, as we have already mentioned a few times.
It is the Spirit who works in the body of Christ and accept that. Therefore, the decision that we fall in line with (God's) spirit and do not want in your own mind, thought or desire.
The willingness to give up what is to could require benefits for a better selection, the only requirement, nothing else, this fundamental willingness and attitude in one's life is (not only in a particular issue) is what a man to the disciples (followers) of Jesus does or not! Not to keep a certain standard, but constantly growing more and more.
2 Pt 1, 5-11 (
why is all zeal to connect to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, with the knowledge of the self-control, self-control with endurance, the endurance the piety, with the piety of brotherhood and of fraternity with the love. If this is available to you at all and grows, it takes you a slow, infertility, so that their Jesus Christ our Lord more deeply recognize. To whom it lacks, however, who is blind and shortsighted, he has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. Therefore, my brethren, you strive even more so that your calling and election,. If you do, you will never fail you. Then you will be richly provided for, enter into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. after STP )
+ + + +
6.1.11
RA writes:
Anonymous: "Neither marriage nor sex are sins. This assessment was not the theme "
RA. No one here has claimed that the Community regards sexuality as a sin. Also I do not. Look at all my comments carefully, having regard to the context. What I said was that it was for the community only a relic of the past. No sin, but pretty useless, not necessary ...
Perhaps you misunderstood my words. "God created sex, not Satan," I wanted to draw attention to the author of sexuality, because he has not made us that way, that it operate the community in this extreme need by practicing abstinence collective, every type of sexuality in our lives, kills, and even the few pictures that showed even the suggestion of sexuality, cutting out the reference books from the shelves of our community.
I probably do not exaggerate when I say that the vast majority were excluded from our Community are brothers for sexual sins. And the confession of sexual sins was not rare, but more often.
The Holy Spirit is no instruction, how to live without giving one the ability to follow these instructions. When I was in the community and have heard constantly confessions or accusations that this or that brother (including me) sinned sexually would, it seems to me that Paul's exhortation in 1 Corinthians 7, 9 fits perfectly with our special case (namely, the present state of our community): "If they can not live celibate supposed to marry her. It is better to marry than to eat in desire. "(To STP)
+++++++++
6.1.11. RA:
Anonymous writes: "Therefore, the decision that we fall in line with (God's) spirit and do not want in your own mind, thought or desire."
RA: It is easy to take responsibility for a strange decision another to pin the blame. Among the on Christianity based movements of the Holy Spirit is the most popular leaders, of course: "God's Spirit has told us that."
And truly God must endure our stupid decisions. He does it because of his grace, patience and love. But he's not the stupid decisions will bind in heaven that should bind his disciples in his name on earth.
I think in this crisis, the difficult situation of the Community, is the only way the full trust in God. But in the Community, there is about the marriage, the temptation to turn to common sense and the redemption by the wait for 'deus ex machina ". Nevertheless, when related to the question of sexuality: God does not give us the mind without meaning: we use it! Look what is happening in the "Spirit-led" community find and use your divine sight and the mind to understand what is going straight ahead.
++++++++++
6.1.11
Anonymous writes:
"With all my heart Trust in the Lord and lean not unto thine own understanding" (Proverbs 3, 5 EÜ)
love you can not explained by the human mind. If your heart is not deeply rooted in love, you will not use your mind properly.
"... love does not seek its own ... "1 Corinthians accommodate 13.5
"Do not you of itself, but on the other." 1 Corinthians 10, 24 EÜ
"I also search all in all, I seek not mine own benefit but the benefit of all, that they saved to be. "1 Corinthians 10.33
1 Cor 9, 24-27
Anchored in this position and with the help of Jesus (Mt 11, 28-30) are solved many questions easily.
++++++++++
7.1.11
RA: I wish you a happy new year, Anonymous.
Paul says, "I wish all people would be (not married) as I do. But everyone has his proper gift from God, one way the other way. " (1 Cor 7.7 EÜ)
We can thus understand that Paul sees his celibacy as a gift from God. And if the point is that not all gifts are the same, he concedes logical that everyone has his own gift from God. And several chapters later (1 Corinthians 12) he emphasizes with regard to other gifts that not everyone the same gift is given. God has distributed his gifts as he has defined it (1 Cor 12, 11) and 1 Corinthians 12 shows the economy of God, which promotes rather the variety of gifts.
Paul writes: "There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are several services, but the same Lord. There are several forces that , Contribute only one God. He causes all in all "(1 Corinthians 12, 4-6 EÜ) In this chapter Paul explains the close relationship of the faithful to each other at the image of a body. ALL are important. I would go with my interpretation further: ALL ALL believers and their gifts are needed for the work of God. Therefore, the marriage will not be considered as a gift of God useless.
In the next chapter (1 Corinthians 13) Paul speaks of course the greatest gift (love), which provides all the above-mentioned shares in the shade. But I think this administration does not solve these other gifts.
In the following chapter (1 Corinthians 14) Paul shows rather how it affects the work of the church, when applied by all the faithful of the same gift. It shows how she makes a fool if it is unilateral and the various gifts are not organized, connected to the common work. If the marriage as a gift of God is only one disturbing factor in our community, then, then something is wrong. If God is universal, then it is his church. To proclaim the Gospel to all nations, we need only one mouth, but the whole body. We need all the gifts of God. None of the gifts may be seen as an obstacle. Not even marriage.
For Paul was ridiculous that of community in which everyone was talking in tongues. Incidentally noticed - I think our community was skeptical when we visited some Pentecostal churches, where everyone spoke in tongues. We had great doubts as to whether that was a gift from God. It seemed to us strange, useless, and perhaps a little repulsive, that almost all would get the same strange gift. But I can imagine: If Paul visited today one of the winter meeting of our community where all members come together, and he sees that all are not married: He would probably also find it strange.
Going back to 1 Corinthians 7: I believe Paul knew it was nonsense to do the same gift (celibacy) for all others. The Community could no longer work properly. Sooner or later, the community would be in the twilight of their time, if one or the other gift that God has given or will be ignored or rejected. Therefore, he added in 1 Corinthians 7, 7 according to his wish that we were all so he, to: "But everyone has his proper gift from God, one way the other way."
++++++++ +
7.1.11 RA:
why I do not know why we should appreciate the gift of celibacy higher than the gift of marriage.
Perhaps mystified both gifts to the community very much. We are born as single, so we have the gift of celibacy from birth. So have the divine gift of celibacy and all who do not as yet unmarried adults live.
And then there is a natural process in our body. We are growing and awakening sexuality, which has its proper place in marriage. It is to marry the divine gift of marriage, but also infidels and we can not say that there would be no marriage between unbelievers band.
In the Bible we can both arguments for marriage and celibacy for the find. In the Bible we find both arguments to the single life, and arguments in which the single existence is seen more negatively (Gen 2, 18).
The community sees the Marriage idealistic. A certain selfishness is subordinated to the desire for marriage. It would sound strange, artificial and hypocritical to say: ". Moeche I marry you because I think it's best for you, the community and all humanity"
Therefore, I think, considered our community's desire to marry more than selfish, and therefore sees no good reason to proudly accept it when someone talks about this desire. Always it seems as that of selfishness in it has the upper hand. And I think there are in the community not an appropriate time to get married now, nor will there be such a time in the future if a certain "selfishness" is not accepted.
This "selfishness" and the sexual stimuli were created by God to unite man and woman in marriage. This is not "selfish", but FALL IN LOVE (I think everyone has experienced in the community, what that is). You can not choose whether and how much you fall in love (fall in love): "Please do, dear God, that I'm in love a little bit, only in part." It is rampant, and it MUST be distributed. Gatt has it set up to link man and woman in marriage.
Sure, the season of love will not last forever (at least not in the same intensity as in the beginning), but being in love has its function in God Plan for this couple.
Strong feelings are not always a reason to marry, but when our community is trying to prevent (and it is a fact that the community also tried to separate those who have expressed their feelings openly to the community), then the ...
"assessor" for themselves what it is.
+++++++++ +++++++++++
7.1.11. RA
Anonymous writes:
"Therefore, the decision that we fall in line with (God's) spirit and do not want in your own mind, thought or desire."
"With all my heart Trust in the Lord, building not on your own understanding "(Proverbs 3, 5 EÜ)
" When your heart is not deeply rooted in love, you will not use your mind right "
RA". Jesus answered, "You shall love the Lord your To love God with all thy heart and with all your soul and with all thy mind. "(Mt 22, 37 EÜ)
I encourage you again, that your mind is involved, to love others. Do not be afraid to use it, because there are many believers in the world that are "not sufficiently anchored in love", but nevertheless try to do good by them depend on their common sense. In my "Assessment" manage to the sometimes really good. In the end it's not bad.
*
My conclusion: There are advantages to the rational mind in the charity involvement. The life and love will then color and you see danna uch the other way, to love God in marriage and serve.
to a somewhat funny (but "secular") history of YouTube. Do not understand it as an attack, rather than an encouragement to use your mind as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RjXY_-PUbo +++++++
08.01. 11: RA
It is also significant that although our community on their website the topic of "divorce", but not the subject of "marriage" deals. This happens probably because the marriage FOR THE COMMUNITY is not currently present or that they want to avoid a subject on which they hold strange and questionable positions.
Nonetheless, the issue of marriage is a very topical issue outside of our community (such as whether it should homosexuals be allowed to marry, etc.).
It would be logical in the above-mentioned discussion of the divorce to begin with remarks about marriage, meaning, value and importance. But in it there are only two small sections that explain the importance of marriage.
+++++++++++
01/13/2011: K writes:
On the issue of marriage and selfishness ...
I see that my opinion is also quite complex to explain here that simple ...
It is not easy, but I think that erotic love can be free from selfishness. Benedict XVI. describes in "Deus Caritas Est" God as someone who loves all the "Eros" - in the sense of love as a choice. And this love is pure in Him "agape". We want to follow Him.
Over the centuries there were conflicting views on sexuality. Paul can be understood that it was better to get married, if someone has problems with sexuality. He is finds that one can give selflessly to others through sexuality as a gift.
But that would be a topic for a book, not for a blog comment. Anyway, I think it is a correct position on marriage: "I want to marry you because I want the best for you." ("Agape"). Why you? This is the result of my choice ("eros"). (Or: because I choose you)
But this is a really serious issue.
