Is God able to perfectly match us with the right spouse? Why or why not?

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Please, I was kind with you until about 6 messages ago when you started to go personal again with 'you just must not have as much knowledge to understand my ways/God's ways.'

That's what [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ed me off; super high and mighty Christians downing others because of their supposed 'perceived' lack of knowledge.
I hope you’re not including me in that because he chooses to provoke.
 
Upvote 0

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It kinda went off-topic. I have no idea how to answer the op... I think God’s perfect match may not be what we consider perfect. I live alone with my cat and even he has become a nuicense lately so I may not be the best opinion to seek.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Please, I was kind with you until about 6 messages ago when you started to go personal again with 'you just must not have as much knowledge to understand my ways/God's ways.'

Not my ways. For God's ways. For His ways are NOT our ways. His thoughts, are not how we think. Therefore... We all must have the needed knowledge. Its a must. Until then certain truths can not be properly assimilated...

That's what [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ed me off; super high and mighty Christians downing others because of their supposed 'perceived' lack of knowledge.

Not super high and mighty. Hardly.. I did not say you were dumb. I said, you lacked the needed knowledge. That's all. I have been challenged by others that left me feeling like I did not know what I was doing. But, I continued to grow in grace and knowledge, and along the way the Lord supplied knowledge that I would have not paid attention to unless first challenged. Sometimes that takes p__sing some folks off to get their memory locked in to something God wants them to come to know.

At worst... it will motivate you to gain the needed knowledge so you can do me a favor by refuting me in a manner that will stop me from being deceived..
 
Upvote 0

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not my ways. For God's ways. For His ways are NOT our ways. His thoughts, are not how we think. Therefore... We all must have the needed knowledge. Its a must. Until then certain truths can not be properly assimilated...



Not super high and mighty. Hardly.. I did not say you were dumb. I said, you lacked the needed knowledge. That's all. I have been challenged by others that left me feeling like I did not know what I was doing. But, I continued to grow in grace and knowledge, and along the way the Lord supplied knowledge that I would have not paid attention to unless first challenged. Sometimes that takes p__sing some folks off to get their memory locked in to something God wants them to come to know.

At worst... it will motivate you to gain the needed knowledge so you can do me a favor by refuting me in a manner that will stop me from being deceived..

The sarcasm of how you sit on the throne of the council of God because you have attained said secret knowledge and now choose to *humbly* tell others what you have learned is dripping my friend ...

I don't believe you.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The sarcasm of how you sit on the throne of the council of God because you have attained said secret knowledge and now choose to *humbly* tell others what you have learned is dripping my friend ...

I don't believe you.


You are to work out your own salvation in fear and trembling. Not trampling. It does not give answers that way.
 
Upvote 0

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You are to work out your own salvation in fear and trembling. Not trampling. It does not give answers that way.

The one who is trampling on God's word is the one who makes it say things it doesn't say ...
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
With every choice that we make during the course of a day, during the course of our lives, the Father (and I refer specifically to the Father in this consideration) knows which choice would move us closer to Him or father from Him. In many cases, it may not be that choice alone, but the choice we then make after that one.

We could always--as Jesus did--consistently look to the Father for every choice:

Jesus gave them this answer: "Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. -- John 5

But Jesus is the only man who does that consistently (although the Spirit only says what He hears the Father say).

All the rest of us mostly strive to satisfy our own desires and expect the Father to accommodate our choices.

With regard to our choice of spouse, God undoubtedly has in His omniscient mind all the correct choices that would keep us close to Him.

But nobody has ever taken that path, the path of all the correct choices.

And with every choice we make, there is probably the happy path from that point consisting of all the succeeding correct choices. Nobody ever does that, either.

We see in scripture (easily in the New Testament, but it's also in the Old Testament) that God expect one man to cleave onto one woman until death.

May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth. A loving doe, a graceful deer-- may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be intoxicated with her love. -- Proverbs 5

"The wife of his youth" was the wife that a young man's parents arranged for him, his first wife. When he was older and wealthier, he might arrange for additional wives of his own choice. But "the wife of his youth" is the wife he did not choose for himself.

Yet, that is the wife God expects him to love and cherish when he is old.

In fact, for ancient Hebrews, ancient Romans, and ancient Greeks, nearly all first marriages were arranged. Almost nobody chose his or her own first spouse.

And yet, scripture written for all those people, as they came into belief in the Lord, was for one man to cleave onto one woman until death.

Despite the fact that they did not choose each other.


What this means is that any Spirit filled man can be a satisfying husband to any Spirit-filled woman, and vice versa.

The key words here are "Spirit-filled" and "satisfying."

We have to have our heads Spirit-filled and screwed on right. We have to have those "transformed minds" that Paul was talking about in Romans 12.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,113
7,243
Dallas
✟873,884.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
God has perfectly planned the lives of every human being that has walked this earth. But does this also include our spouses? I'm asking this question because sometimes God's "choice f ok f us can be emotionally and physically abusive, not interested in sex... the list goes on. Are these "bad" marriages ever planned by God? Before you go to say of course not! These were just "test" marriages. I wont accept that answer because God HATES divorce. He wouldn't plan for you to get divorced he would plan on the two of you to stay together if an abusive spouse was in his plans. Yes sometimes God tests us with abuse and "bad" stuff in our lives. So surely if we get divorced we failed the test right? Is this in Gods plan? Since he planned out every aspect of our lives? Why or why not?

God has given us the free will to make our own choices.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The one who is trampling on God's word is the one who makes it say things it doesn't say ...


The Word does say that angels had sex with women.
Just Google - angels genesis 6 ...

Many a Bible student and pastors will agree with what it says. Some will resist for personal reasons.

It also says that those angels are now locked up in chains of darkness. And, that Jesus needed to make a proclamation to them when he went below the earth during the three days before the resurrection.

Is it wrong to tell you that you need knowledge? You seem to think "knowledge" is a dirty word. That its an insult to tell someone that they need to learn something in order to understand it.

I have patience. I don't take your reactionary ways personally. Its just a part of the package.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Word does say that angels had sex with women.
Just Google - angels genesis 6 ...

Many a Bible student and pastors will agree with what it says. Some will resist for personal reasons.

It also says that those angels are now locked up in chains of darkness. And, that Jesus needed to make a proclamation to them when he went below the earth during the three days before the resurrection.

Is it wrong to tell you that you need knowledge? You seem to think "knowledge" is a dirty word. That its an insult to tell someone that they need to learn something in order to understand it.

I have patience. I don't take your reactionary ways personally. Its just a part of the package.

All we are going to do is go around in circles, and the circles I have gone around you have decided not to address. such as:

#1) Only ONE Critical Text manuscripts use the term 'angel' and at that, David Daniels showed that the one text was tampered. The rest of the manuscripts (including manuscripts I really don't believe are God's word) do not go so far as you do to say angel. Only ONE document hints that the Sons of God are angels - and it's an extra biblical source, the book of ENOCH. Even Jasher doesn't go this far. Are you allowing a pagan book to tell you what the Bible means?

#2) Yes, there are angels that are locked up in chains of darkness according to Revelation. I completely understand the correlation that some make with 1 Peter 3:19 and the angels ... and while part of it is the modern Alexandrian text (which I don't trust) might in one isolated part use the terms angels in Genesis 6:2 - actually - the majority of modern translations do not use that word. This verse below is actually a link to many translations, and you can see that if the English translators thought it was an angel, they did not clear it up in their translation.

Genesis 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.

#3) Yes, it is wrong to tell other Christians - "well, you just need some knowledge". This infers you have something they don't have and it infers that because you have have that something the other does not have, you are better than them. That might not be what you MEANT to say .. .but it is what I HEARD.

#4) I don't particularly care about your patience because error thrives in patience. I care about the TRUTH and representing God's truth accurately. It is manhandling Genesis 6 to claim it is angel procreation, especially in light of what we already said Jesus said about angels - "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." Matthew 22:30.

As I already said, this must mean one of two things: a) there is no procreation in heaven, just like there is no procreation among angels OR b) if someone is going to try to divorce marriage from the marital act (which God as a rule does not do, it is man that tries to do it) - then you'd have to say there is free love in heaven if you absolutely want to insist there is sexuality among angels.

I already admitted to you that 'angelic' theory is held by others; others who do not go so far as you do it apparently with female angel sexual beings ... this is murky waters, but you've decided the waters are clear.

#5) I also told you that the reason why Genesis 6:2 is in reference to the godly line of Seth is because Genesis 5 tells us so ... the context goes to great lengths to show the lineage of godly believers in the God they understood and knew as far as Genesis 5 went.

#6) I also said in a previous message that you COULD BE absolutely right ... but it is an untested theory that does not come from the text, which you clearly admitted. When we get to heaven, God may inform me otherwise. But if He does, it will be new information He has not revealed in the Bible. We have no business speculating where the Bible is not clear. It does not matter if every Pastor in the entire world "believes it", it doesn't make it true.

Now everything I said here I've already said ad infinitum. Deal individually with these items; that's discussion.

Or just ignore what I said and keep talking about how spiritually dense I am in order to avoid grappling with the very specific holes in your theory. Quite frankly, if your theory has any muster to it - you'll deal with the objections given to it. That's how discussions occur.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
All we are going to do is go around in circles, and the circles I have gone around you have decided not to address. such as:.
.

It does not say "angels." It says "sons of God." Whom were called sons of God in the OT? Not man... Job spoke of the sons of God being present at the foundation of the earth's creation. That the sons of God shouted with joy.

Now.. you are telling us that they were men? Deduction is what is going on. Interpretation often times will require the process of deduction. That is why I said you need more knowledge. Which offended you...

For example?

The NIV scholars interpreted "sons of God" as angels...


Job 38:6-7 New International Version (NIV)

6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—

7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels
[a] shouted for joy?

Footnotes:
a. Job 38:7 Hebrew the sons of God.

Please... go study!
 
Upvote 0

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
.

It does not say "angels." It says "sons of God." Whom were called sons of God in the OT? Not man... Job spoke of the sons of God being present at the foundation of the earth's creation. That the sons of God shouted with joy.

Now.. you are telling us that they were men? Deduction is what is going on. Interpretation often times will require the process of deduction. That is why I said you need more knowledge. Which offended you...

For example?

The NIV scholars interpreted "sons of God" as angels...


Job 38:6-7 New International Version (NIV)

6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—

7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels
[a] shouted for joy?

Footnotes:
a. Job 38:7 Hebrew the sons of God.

Please... go study!

Do you not read what I write to you? This will be the third time I've addressed this. I provided a link of all the Bible versions and how most of them don't use the term 'angels'.

I also said in a past message that there are 11 times in the KJV that the terms Son of God is used; I already gave you all of Job. But the remaining 8 times, 'sons of God' means godly men.

Now you tell us the NIV 'interpreted' Job 38:7 as angels. But you failed on two points: a) to understand that Bible translations are not to be INTERPRETED, but rather TRANSLATED. That's why I appreciate the KJV because the job of the Bible translator is not to interpret. It's to translate. But b) you also failed to see the irony that the NIV translators ADMITTED they interpreted rather than TRANSLATE by placing in the footnote "Hebrews, the sons of God". That is in direct contradiction to your previous statement that the Hebrew says 'angels'. The NIV admits it - the Hebrews does *not* say angels.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Do you not read what I write to you? This will be the third time I've addressed this. I provided a link of all the Bible versions and how most of them don't use the term 'angels'.

I also said in a past message that there are 11 times in the KJV that the terms Son of God is used; I already gave you all of Job. But the remaining 8 times, 'sons of God' means godly men.

Who was called a son of God? Back then? Only angels!

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God,
these are sons of God.. "
Rom 8:14​


No men in Genesis could be called sons of God! For the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit could not be given until after Jesus was glorified!

No man could be called a "son of God" until after the resurrection and ascension of Christ!!! Only angels could be called sons of God in the OT for they are led of the Spirit.


Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood
and cried out, saying, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me
and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From
his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’”

But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed
in Him
were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given,
because
Jesus was not yet glorified." Jn 7:37-39​


There were no men being called sons of God in Genesis!!!!!!
Why? Jesus was not yet glorified!

Like I said. Knowledge! You need more knowledge! We all do!

And, there you have some more.

Will you?

Reject it? Fight it? Distort it? Or, accept it?

grace and peace.....
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Who was called a son of God? Back then? Only angels!

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God,
these are sons of God.. "
Rom 8:14​


No men in Genesis could be called sons of God! For the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit could not be given until after Jesus was glorified!

No man could be called a "son of God" until after the resurrection and ascension of Christ!!! Only angels could be called sons of God in the OT for they are led of the Spirit.


Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood
and cried out, saying, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me
and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From
his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’”

But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed
in Him
were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given,
because
Jesus was not yet glorified." Jn 7:37-39​


There were no men being called sons of God in Genesis!!!!!!
Why? Jesus was not yet glorified!

Like I said. Knowledge! You need more knowledge! We all do!

And, there you have some more.

Will you?

Reject it? Fight it? Distort it? Or, accept it?

grace and peace.....

I'm happy to address your poor exegesis ...

After you address the 6 objections I brought up. I think that's the least you can do.
 
Upvote 0

GenemZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
22,139
1,372
73
Atlanta
✟75,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I'm happy to address your poor exegesis ...

After you address the 6 objections I brought up. I think that's the least you can do.
I really believe you are an agenda agent... For, this makes no sense at this point. You have shown that you know already way too much to not know what you should know.

So... Go ahead... You can claim I can not refute you, if you wish. At this juncture, I think it best just to put you on Ignore. Just like you have been willfully ignoring what the Word teaches.

Go argue with the scholars... If you have the guts to try. You are locked into an agenda-think.

At this point you will only become an endless cycle. Never being able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3:7

You can claim I can not refute you, if you wish. I know a bottomless pit when I see one.

Have a nice Day.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

PeterJames0510

Blessed more than I deserve
Jan 28, 2019
512
308
47
Lee
✟65,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I really believe you are an agenda agent... For, this makes no sense at this point. You have shown that you know already too much to not know what you should know.

So... you can claim I can not refute you if you wish. Yet, at this juncture, I think it best just to put you on Ignore. Just like you have been willfully ignoring what the Word teaches.

Go argue with the scholars... if you have the guts to try. You are locked into an agenda. At this point you will only become an endless cycle. Never being able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3:7

You can claim I can not refute you, if you wish. I can see a bottomless pit when I see one.

Have a nice Day.

I'm happy to have you have the last word if it's an hones critique of the objections I brought up. Otherwise, it's you that is doing the avoiding.

I have no desire to argue with scholars since they normally become skeptics.

So to sum up - if instead of just coming up with new arguments to prove your point - address the ones that I've already given. I won't respond and we can let the readers decide.
 
Upvote 0

fwGod

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2005
1,404
532
✟65,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
PART ONE
Peterjames0510 said:
#1) Only ONE Critical Text manuscripts use the term 'angel' and at that, David Daniels showed that the one text was tampered.
I wouldn't accept the teachings of David Daniels, nor would his statements about a text being tampered with be authoritative since he is a kjoa who believes that all the modern versions have been tampered with.
Peterjames0510 said:
The rest of the manuscripts (including manuscripts I really don't believe are God's word)
Here you show yourself to also be kjvoa.
In the interest of not derailing the thread, the topic of validity or not of the kjo claims will not be discussed by me.
Peterjames0510 said:
..do not go so far as you do to say angel. Only ONE document hints that the Sons of God are angels
I have found three verses from the kjv Bible that indicate that "the sons of God" are speaking of angels.

KJV Job 1:6 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them."
These sons of God could not be speaking of men or the godly sons of Seth or of Cain. They are angels, of the angelic class- demons.

KJV Job 2:1 "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD."
This is similar to (1:6).

KJV Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"
This verse is stating that the morning stars and the sons of God are all angels, not men.
Both “the morning stars” and “sons of God” refer to angels, a figure of speech called a Hebrew parallelism.

These therefore show that the "sons of God" from Genesis 6:2 are angels. I will give an important point why.
KJV Gen.6:1-2 "Now when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them,
2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose. "

The men had daughters. The "sons of God" saw that the daughters of men.."
#1. What is the point of saying "the daughters of men" while the sons of God are not called "the sons of men."?
From the context it can be understood that the "sons of God" are not human while it says that the daughters are of men.
If the sons of God are human then why would it say that they saw the daughters of men. Does any man look at a beautiful woman and say "There's a pretty daughter of man!"

The answer would be no. However, to make a distinction in contrast of the sons of God not being of the same class of being.. it says that "they saw the daughters of men".

#2. Which means that each instance of these verses Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 in correlation with Gen.6:2 show that there are two different classifications of beings being spoken of in the latter text.

#3. And therefore it means that the teaching that "the sons of Seth" are "the sons of God" in Genesis 6:2 is incorrect.

#4. If the sons of God are the godly sons of Seth, then there is no explanation for the result of the intimate relationship being the Nephilim human + divine.. Giants.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 person
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fwGod

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2005
1,404
532
✟65,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
PART TWO
Peterjames0510 said:
#2) ..actually - the majority of modern translations do not use that word.
I have given three verses that use the phrase "sons of God" in the kjv.
Peterjames0510 said:
you can see that if the English translators thought it was an angel, they did not clear it up in their translation.
The translators did their job. The words "sons of God" are different words in Hebrew {ben elohim} than the word in Hebrew for "angel(s)" {malak}.

Most commentaries, depending on the scholar do "clear it up". But, you most likely wouldn't accept that?
Peterjames0510 said:
#3) It is manhandling Genesis 6 to claim it is angel procreation,
On the contrary, it's manhandling Genesis 6 to claim that there was no angelic/demonic procreation.

In Genesis 6:1-4, the offspring of the Sons of God and the daughters of men are called Nephilim, who are the “heros of old, the men of renown.” Literally, the word nephilim means “the fallen ones” and is a common euphemism for “the dead” in Hebrew.
Peterjames0510 said:
..especially in light of what we already said Jesus said about angels - "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." Matthew 22:30.

Peterjames0510 said:
..you'd have to say there is free love in heaven if you absolutely want to insist there is sexuality among angels.
Jesus mentioned only those angels who have remained obedient to God when speaking of humans who've remained obedient to God.
But those angels should not be thought of as in the same grouping with those fallen angels, the demons who rebelled.. As in Genesis 6:2.

Jude 1:6 "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."
Peterjames0510 said:
I care about the TRUTH and representing God's truth accurately.
Do you?.. Do you really?
 
Upvote 0