Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Good point. Sex before marraige requires abstainance according to Christian standards. That can also spiritually be looked at as not being adulterous with the world but finding satisfaction within Christian structure, usually according to conscience, being careful what the conscience is allowed.Genuine Christian fellowship can be extremely deep and satisfy all the characteristics of marriage, except sexual intimacy.
It's my understanding that the 144k are literal Jews that have turned to Christ during the time after the rapture of the church and before the tribulation has ended.
Virgins of the Christ are also those betrothed to Him and awaiting the marraige supper. Their 'old husband' has died, leaving them free to remarry.
Good point. Sex before marraige requires abstainance according to Christian standards. That can also spiritually be looked at as not being adulterous with the world but finding satisfaction within Christian structure, usually according to conscience, being careful what the conscience is allowed.
Not to be dogmatic but Israel was the northern kingdom and the book of Amos (who was Judaen) and the book of Hosea (who was of the northern kingdom) tells me different. I pointed out that they would be after the church age so they actually would not be "like us"Hi meadow. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I've heard this interpretation several times before, based on Rev 7 where it talks about 144k of the children of Israel being sealed.
However, if you look carefully you will see that it is not possible for this 144k to be literal Jews, because the tribe of Judah is only one tribe out of the 12.
All the other tribes have been lost. It is impractical and a bit contrived to assume that God will bring back all those other tribes for this purpose, when the message of Jesus and the NT writers very much suggests that God is not longer concerned about the flesh, but looks at the heart and motivation.
Jesus tells the Jews of his time that if they were really the children of Abraham, then they would have the faith of Abraham. (john 8)
Paul mentions the distinction several times, but he goes into the most detail in Galations, where he says that the promises to Abraham to to Abrahams seed (not seeds) and that seed was Jesus.
On a more practical note, regardless of scriptural evidence, it makes no sense that God would choose to use people who openly deny his son's authority and divinity, especially in a situation where the description of these people says that they "follow the lamb whithersoever he goeth".
If any Jews WERE to turn from their ways and accept Jesus, then they wouldn't be Jews anymore; they would just be followers of Jesus like the rest of us.
It's my understanding that the 144k are literal Jews that have turned to Christ during the time after the rapture of the church and before the tribulation has ended.
Virgins of the Christ are also those betrothed to Him and awaiting the marraige supper. Their 'old husband' has died, leaving them free to remarry.
Some have interpreted them that way and others adhere because it seems the right interpretation according to their research. Others follow blindly with no research. But because it's left to interpretation it's all doctrines of men. That's what makes it debatable material that whole forums have been designed to accomadate end time doctrines, theories etc.I have found these to be the doctrines of men.
Revelation 14:1
1 And I saw, and behold, the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him a hundred and forty-four thousand, having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads
A hundred and forty-four is twelve times twelve. Times a thousand is ultimate.Twelve times twelve signifies the ultimate perfection and eternal and perfect completion. The city proper is like a mountain with a height of twelve thousand stadia, whereas the wall itself, from the foundation to the top, has a height of a hundred and forty-four cubits.Revelation 21:17
And he measured its wall, a hundred and forty-four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel.
Matthew 22:30
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
I have found these to be the doctrines of men.
But because it's left to interpretation it's all doctrines of men. That's what makes it debatable material that whole forums have been designed to accomadate end time doctrines, theories etc.
I'll stick more to the spiritual aspects and leave "man" to debate.Another interpretation is that of completion, which is the spiritual aspect. There's always the material and spiritual at work.
A hundred and forty-four is twelve times twelve. Times a thousand is ultimate.Twelve times twelve signifies the ultimate perfection and eternal and perfect completion. The city proper is like a mountain with a height of twelve thousand stadia, whereas the wall itself, from the foundation to the top, has a height of a hundred and forty-four cubits.
In resurrection mankind will be like the angels . Hence, the measure of a man, that is, of an angel indicates that the wall of the city is not natural but is in resurrection.
I've been into celibacy for over a decade yet I've never considered it a criteria for the exclusive 144000. The reason being is that Jesus was never into being exclusive. It does give me the freedom to focus more on the Kingdom but much can also be said about the lessons learnt in the sanctioned marraige (spiritual lessons about how the Bridegroom relates to the Bride) that those who are celibate never get to experience.
I am a 49 year old virgin and that does not make me in a 'higher' position than one married and raising children. Each pathway or vocation to God has it's own particular challenges. I can sit back and admire parents raising children in a Godly way more than of myself just because I feel called to not have sex or touch. I quite simply do not feel called to that vocation. And in ways I see that as tougher than not giving into lust.
Hey meadow. It's interesting that you are also a celibate. I think the point of the spirit being able to flow where ever it wants is that God can be exclusive and inclusionist whenever he wants to based on the motives of those he's judging.
I also agree that celibacy is not a requirement for inclusion in the 144k. I think the virginity mentioned probably refers more to a spiritual attitude than a physical state (which is consistent with Jesus' teachings about how God looks on the inside while man looks on the outside).
I believe the spiritual virginity being talked about here relates more to our attitudes towards emotions and sex, where we refuse to let our emotions influence us in situations where a rational examination of the situation is necessary. I think this is consistent with what Jesus said about forsaking family etc.
Celibacy provides an advantage in this area because it requires us to face those issues head on.
hi forge. WOW! 49? Congratulations on that kind of discipline. I only made it to 18
I belive that when it comes to a "higher" spiritual position, we cannot make a rule about it one way or the other. Celibacy really could put someone in that position, or it could mean nothing in God's eyes. So much depends on our motivations.
Paul made it quite clear that there really are spiritual benefits to staying single and Jesus described it as something that people do "for the kingdom of Heaven's sake". Celibacy is the superior option, but only if it's done for the right reasons.
It does give me the freedom to focus more on the Kingdom but much can also be said about the lessons learnt in the sanctioned marraige (spiritual lessons about how the Bridegroom relates to the Bride) that those who are celibate never get to experience.
To be fair and true it wasn't a choice I made from the beginning. I was shy and awkward. Later on in life I accepted it as my vocation but only after great frustration and struggle. Now I see it as an offering to God and a calling. I have accepted it.
The same argument can be made for those who think that gay marraige is sanctioned....its not scriptural but if those who kept themselves exclusive of sexual dealings would still be within Christian structure.Actually, I think I've said before that, from what I can see, the only difference between a married couple and Christian singles can be sexual intimacy. Single Christians can experience what marrieds experience in areas like taking responsibility for one another, dealing with tensions, dealing with finances, looking after children (i.e. the children of couples in the community), sharing with one another about life experiences or spirituality in general, and working together.
I've heard it argued that the same thing it takes to be a caring, responsible Christian single is precisely what is most likely to make that person more attractive to Christians of the opposite sex. The same qualities it takes to have successful Christians relationships between Christians are the same qualities it takes to have a successful marriage.
At least, that's what I've heard from other married couples in various Christian communities I've lived in.
Interesting, because I kinda feel something similar in my own case. I feel I have also accepted it as my calling, though it wasn't always like that for me. Even now I still struggle with the emotional cuddlies which can come from marriage, though I don't feel those struggles are enough to convince me that I should abandon my conviction.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?