would you still be a Christian...

[Tina W]

This thread makes me think:

Would you (anyone wishing to respond) become a spouse to someone and devote yourself to them and even let yourself love them if possible, knowing that they had nothing material to offer and never would (i.e. possessions, financial security, etc) ? In other words, a relationship based solely on devotion or love, and NO expectation of any kind of material security or gain ? I would think this wouldn't be that radical of a question to ask ... however ...

Yes I would, in a heartbeat! There's much more to life than money and and possessions.

 

[Tina W]

What about an "on purpose" big bang, or something like that?

LOL No kind of big bang.

I left it vague, because people devote themselves to others and love others for a wide variety of reasons. IOW, the answer to that question depends on the one asking it.

If you met someone whom you would WANT to marry, devote yourself to them, etc ... most people have some sort of set of ideals in mind when they imagine such a thing. Or a check list, or something they envision. Whomever the person is you would be considering to devote yourself to, has already done something for you, passed some muster, caused you to love them or want to devote yourself to them in the first place. That's the vague thing which would be specific to each person.

It may or may not be one-sided ... that's a perspective which depends on what causes the person answering the question to want to be devoted to another, or love them, in the first place.

For me, as long as the person also loved me, and I loved him, I would marry him no matter what kind of material possessions or financial possessions he could give. If he had nothing but love to give I would still marry him. There's more to life than money and possessions. I love people for who they are, not what material things they can or can't give.

 

[Tina W]

This thread makes me think:

Now to add a twist to this ... would you enter into a devoted/spousal relationship with such a person, KNOWING that at some point in the future they would choose to be with someone else and no longer want to be with you ? But you could at least enjoy them for a time, glean whatever you were going to glean, etc ... but that ultimately it was going to end in such a way ?

Okay now this second part I had to think about for a while because it didn't compute in my mind. LOL. The reason why it didn't compute is because for me marriage and love means forever, why would someone even enter a marriage without at least the intention of it being forever? That's what doesn't compute. That's like jumping into water knowing you don't want to get wet. LOL It doesn't make sense. So the second part I don't know how to answer because for me it doesn't make sense. But the first part about marrying someone who has no money or possessions to give, I would marry him if I loved him and he loved me. I think if he didn't intend for it to be forever he would not want to get married?

 

[RDKirk]

Okay now this second part I had to think about for a while because it didn't compute in my mind. LOL. The reason why it didn't compute is because for me marriage and love means forever, why would someone even enter a marriage without at least the intention of it being forever? That's what doesn't compute. That's like jumping into water knowing you don't want to get wet. LOL It doesn't make sense. So the second part I don't know how to answer because for me it doesn't make sense. But the first part about marrying someone who has no money or possessions to give, I would marry him if I loved him and he loved me. I think if he didn't intend for it to be forever he would not want to get married?

And that was Paul's point:

If the dead are not raised, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." -- 1 Corinthians 15

If there is no resurrection, Jesus is not superior to Aristotle, Epicurus, Confucius, or Buddha--just another man with some good ideas to live by.

 

[TillICollapse]

Okay now this second part I had to think about for a while because it didn't compute in my mind. LOL. The reason why it didn't compute is because for me marriage and love means forever, why would someone even enter a marriage without at least the intention of it being forever? That's what doesn't compute. That's like jumping into water knowing you don't want to get wet. LOL It doesn't make sense. So the second part I don't know how to answer because for me it doesn't make sense. But the first part about marrying someone who has no money or possessions to give, I would marry him if I loved him and he loved me. I think if he didn't intend for it to be forever he would not want to get married?

Well, it's not that this person didn't intend for it to be "forever". This may not be knowledge that he had, rather it was some type of knowledge YOU had. Some type of foreknowledge. Perhaps in his mind, he had no intention of ever leaving you, etc. But you ... on the other hand, you had some type of foreknowledge he would leave you. This may not be known to him though. I suppose you could look at it both ways ... perhaps he also had the foreknowledge, or perhaps he didn't.

Would you do it under either of those circumstances ?

Also, consider the idea that your own love may do something for this person, even though they may leave you. Let's say in this scenario, they too knew that at some point in the future they would leave you. But between now and then, there was an opportunity that your marriage ... or let's just say your devotion to them in some form ... benefited them somehow. What then ?

 

[agua]

nvm I just saw the retraction, your Honour

 

[Tina W]

And that was Paul's point:

If the dead are not raised, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." -- 1 Corinthians 15

If there is no resurrection, Jesus is not superior to Aristotle, Epicurus, Confucius, or Buddha--just another man with some good ideas to live by.

Oh okay I see, good point!

 

[TillICollapse]

And that was Paul's point:

If the dead are not raised, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." -- 1 Corinthians 15

If there is no resurrection, Jesus is not superior to Aristotle, Epicurus, Confucius, or Buddha--just another man with some good ideas to live by.

And yet interestingly, to add an added dimension to this ... Paul said the following:

"Romans 9 I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised![a] Amen."

One could interpret this to mean, that Paul would be willing to forsake his own eternal inheritance for the sake his own own people (people of Israel), if he could.

So on the one hand, from these perspectives, Paul has a view that if there is no resurrection, then it's all rather pointless. But on the other hand, he has such a desire for certain people to receive it, he would be willing to forsake his own so that they could participate.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by Tina W View Post
Okay now this second part I had to think about for a while because it didn't compute in my mind. LOL. The reason why it didn't compute is because for me marriage and love means forever, why would someone even enter a marriage without at least the intention of it being forever? That's what doesn't compute. That's like jumping into water knowing you don't want to get wet. LOL It doesn't make sense. So the second part I don't know how to answer because for me it doesn't make sense. But the first part about marrying someone who has no money or possessions to give, I would marry him if I loved him and he loved me. I think if he didn't intend for it to be forever he would not want to get married?

Well, it's not that this person didn't intend for it to be "forever". This may not be knowledge that he had, rather it was some type of knowledge YOU had. Some type of foreknowledge. Perhaps in his mind, he had no intention of ever leaving you, etc. But you ... on the other hand, you had some type of foreknowledge he would leave you. This may not be known to him though. I suppose you could look at it both ways ... perhaps he also had the foreknowledge, or perhaps he didn't.

Would you do it under either of those circumstances ?

Also, consider the idea that your own love may do something for this person, even though they may leave you. Let's say in this scenario, they too knew that at some point in the future they would leave you. But between now and then, there was an opportunity that your marriage ... or let's just say your devotion to them in some form ... benefited them somehow. What then ?

i would be thankful for the "warning" and extract myself from this big ol' disaster of a mistake with devastating consequences and thank God for the "heads up", because it would be like a "warning sign" or a "red flag" indicating "danger". I would heed it. Anybody marrying such a person does so to their own demise.

Wisdom and discretion is a GOOD thing.

 

[TillICollapse]

i would be thankful for the "warning" and extract myself from this big ol' disaster of a mistake with devastating consequences and thank God for the "heads up", because it would be like a "warning sign" or a "red flag" indicating "danger". I would heed it. Anybody marrying such a person does so to their own demise.

Wisdom and discretion is a GOOD thing.

So let's take it a step further.

Can you think of any scriptural examples where a person willingly devoted themselves to someone, or loved someone, even though that person betrayed them, or had ill will against them from the start, or they knew it was likely that person would not value or cherish what they did for them ? Or can you think of any examples where the person had foreknowledge that the object of their love would later leave them, or perhaps even harm them ... yet they loved them anyways and/or still devoted themselves to them ?

Consider also God Himself, as well as Christ on earth ... did they have any foreknowledge concerning the objects of their love which may have involved those people rejecting them, leaving them, turning them away, or perhaps even harming them ... yet choose to love them anyways and still be committed and devoted to them for some reason ?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by Tina W View Post
Okay now this second part I had to think about for a while because it didn't compute in my mind. LOL. The reason why it didn't compute is because for me marriage and love means forever, why would someone even enter a marriage without at least the intention of it being forever? That's what doesn't compute. That's like jumping into water knowing you don't want to get wet. LOL It doesn't make sense. So the second part I don't know how to answer because for me it doesn't make sense. But the first part about marrying someone who has no money or possessions to give, I would marry him if I loved him and he loved me. I think if he didn't intend for it to be forever he would not want to get married?

Originally Posted by TillICollapse View Post
Well, it's not that this person didn't intend for it to be "forever". This may not be knowledge that he had, rather it was some type of knowledge YOU had. Some type of foreknowledge. Perhaps in his mind, he had no intention of ever leaving you, etc. But you ... on the other hand, you had some type of foreknowledge he would leave you. This may not be known to him though. I suppose you could look at it both ways ... perhaps he also had the foreknowledge, or perhaps he didn't.

Would you do it under either of those circumstances ?

Also, consider the idea that your own love may do something for this person, even though they may leave you. Let's say in this scenario, they too knew that at some point in the future they would leave you. But between now and then, there was an opportunity that your marriage ... or let's just say your devotion to them in some form ... benefited them somehow. What then ?

Originally Posted by brinny View Post
i would be thankful for the "warning" and extract myself from this big ol' disaster of a mistake with devastating consequences and thank God for the "heads up", because it would be like a "warning sign" or a "red flag" indicating "danger". I would heed it. Anybody marrying such a person does so to their own demise.

Wisdom and discretion is a GOOD thing.

So let's take it a step further.

Can you think of any scriptural examples where a person willingly devoted themselves to someone, or loved someone, even though that person betrayed them, or had ill will against them from the start, or they knew it was likely that person would not value or cherish what they did for them ? Or can you think of any examples where the person had foreknowledge that the object of their love would later leave them, or perhaps even harm them ... yet they loved them anyways and/or still devoted themselves to them ?

Consider also God Himself, as well as Christ on earth ... did they have any foreknowledge concerning the objects of their love which may have involved those people rejecting them, leaving them, turning them away, or perhaps even harming them ... yet choose to love them anyways and still be committed and devoted to them for some reason ?

Several times you indicate that the one who betrays possibly "knew" they would betray the person who is devoted to them, beforehand.

That's deceptive and dishonest, and with forethought and deliberation, devastating someone and for all intents and purposes, deliberately destroying the one betrayed.

Wisdom is a GOOD thing. For the one that is betrayed to "see" that beforehand is a God-send and a blessing. It is a protection that i would be thankful for and heed.

The betrayer is the equivalent of an "earthquake" that's comin', and not only for the one betrayed, but for any children in the mix and all that has been built up in the home. It is essentially "ripped out" from an entire family.

Nowhere in the Bible you and i read is there any support for it. What there IS , is an urging for is to use wisdom, discretion, and discernment, and to "guard our hearts", brother.

It's ALL IN Proverbs, the Book of Wisdom.

Thank you kindly.

 

[TillICollapse]

Several times you indicate that the one who betrays possibly "knew" they would betray the person who is devoted to them, beforehand.

That's deceptive and dishonest, and with forethought and deliberation, devastating someone and for all intents and purposes, deliberately destroying the one betrayed.

Wisdom is a GOOD thing. For the one that is betrayed to "see" that beforehand is a God-send and a blessing. It is a protection that i would be thankful for and heed.

The betrayer is the equivalent of an "earthquake" that's comin', and not only for the one betrayed, but for any children in the mix and all that has been built up in the home. It is essentially "ripped out" from an entire family.

Nowhere in the Bible you and i read is there any support for it. What there IS , is an urging for is to use wisdom, discretion, and discernment, and to "guard our hearts", brother.

It's ALL IN Proverbs, the Book of Wisdom.

Thank you kindly.

So you can't think of any scriptures that would suggest the following then concerning any people involved ? ---

Can you think of any scriptural examples where a person willingly devoted themselves to someone, or loved someone, even though that person betrayed them, or had ill will against them from the start, or they knew it was likely that person would not value or cherish what they did for them ? Or can you think of any examples where the person had foreknowledge that the object of their love would later leave them, or perhaps even harm them ... yet they loved them anyways and/or still devoted themselves to them ?

Consider also God Himself, as well as Christ on earth ... did they have any foreknowledge concerning the objects of their love which may have involved those people rejecting them, leaving them, turning them away, or perhaps even harming them ... yet choose to love them anyways and still be committed and devoted to them for some reason ?

 

[brinny]

Re: post 52, (but mostly in post #52) what would the "love" you describe be based on, brother?

Thank you kindly.

 

[TillICollapse]

Re: post 52, what would the "love" you describe be based on, brother?

Thank you kindly.

That's why I kept it vague lol If I limit the definition of "love", or even what it is based on, then any responses may be influenced by me, rather than the responder. It would be like asking, "What's your favorite food ? Pizza or Sushi ?" A person may come back with some other food entirely, but at the same time, I may have indirectly influenced them to be thinking along the lines of Italian, or Japanese ... etc. So I tried to be vague. If I added to it, it was to get the ball rolling.

For example: suppose a person believes that their love will benefit the other person, and this brings them great joy. So even if they had foreknowledge that at some later point in time, such a person would leave them (let's keep it simple and just say "leave", not necessarily betray with thought out maliciousness) ... perhaps they believed in love itself to the degree that they valued love so much, they believed it was a treasure worth sharing, even if it was just for a time. Or let's say that their very nature was loving, to the degree they would willing sacrifice aspects of their own life for another ... even if it meant the other person may not even care about it one whit, or may even throw it on the ground. What if some point later in life, after such a person left ... what if they had a change of heart years later ? Learned that they actually valued what they had before ? And that it actually DID make a difference in their life at some point ?

I even kept the scenario "vague" for that reason as well ... because suppose there is a scenario where there is a CHANCE that the person would later return and have a change of heart ? Or what if they didn't ever return, but took the love that was given to them finally and passed it on to others ?

By keeping it vague, it lets the responder respond with the scenarios that they/themselves can imagine. For example, I would immediately think of such a scenario: where a person may leave, but what if there was a chance that the love and devotion shared would EVENTUALLY pay off in such a way, that it benefitted them in the long run ? What if they had kids, and even passed it along to their own children ? What I did today, would reflect in the future, even though I may not see the physical result the way I would want to right here and now. And this relates right back to the OP in a lot of ways ... consider Hebrews 11 and the list of individuals who supposedly didn't receive certain promises in this life, etc, because their reward was elsewhere. But I didn't want to directly bring any examples I may could think of up, I wanted to see what any responder may or may not consider.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny View Post
Re: post 52, what would the "love" you describe be based on, brother?

Thank you kindly.

That's why I kept it vague lol If I limit the definition of "love", or even what it is based on, then any responses may be influenced by me, rather than the responder. It would be like asking, "What's your favorite food ? Pizza or Sushi ?" A person may come back with some other food entirely, but at the same time, I may have indirectly influenced them to be thinking along the lines of Italian, or Japanese ... etc. So I tried to be vague. If I added to it, it was to get the ball rolling.

For example: suppose a person believes that their love will benefit the other person, and this brings them great joy. So even if they had foreknowledge that at some later point in time, such a person would leave them (let's keep it simple and just say "leave", not necessarily betray with thought out maliciousness) ... perhaps they believed in love itself to the degree that they valued love so much, they believed it was a treasure worth sharing, even if it was just for a time. Or let's say that their very nature was loving, to the degree they would willing sacrifice aspects of their own life for another ... even if it meant the other person may not even care about it one whit, or may even throw it on the ground. What if some point later in life, after such a person left ... what if they had a change of heart years later ? Learned that they actually valued what they had before ? And that it actually DID make a difference in their life at some point ?

I even kept the scenario "vague" for that reason as well ... because suppose there is a scenario where there is a CHANCE that the person would later return and have a change of heart ? Or what if they didn't ever return, but took the love that was given to them finally and passed it on to others ?

By keeping it vague, it lets the responder respond with the scenarios that they/themselves can imagine. For example, I would immediately think of such a scenario: where a person may leave, but what if there was a chance that the love and devotion shared would EVENTUALLY pay off in such a way, that it benefitted them in the long run ? What if they had kids, and even passed it along to their own children ? What I did today, would reflect in the future, even though I may not see the physical result the way I would want to right here and now. And this relates right back to the OP in a lot of ways ... consider Hebrews 11 and the list of individuals who supposedly didn't receive certain promises in this life, etc, because their reward was elsewhere. But I didn't want to directly bring any examples I may could think of up, I wanted to see what any responder may or may not consider.

Thank you kindly for you response, brother.

 

[StephanieSomer]

If you found out there was no heaven?

If you found out, let's say through divine revelation, that there was no such thing as heaven or hell, we all just die and that's pretty much the end of it, for you at least, would you still believe in Christ?

I don't know if this is the right section for this question. If it isn't, I don't mind it being moved to the appropriate subforum.

Yes, I would. Those who hold that salvation is about going to heaven are sadly in the dark. I'm quite sure heaven is a wonderful place. But, surroundings aren't that important to me. What IS important to me is who and what I am. My character. Salvation transforms worthless character into beauty. THAT is what I want.

BTW, Scripture does NOT say we will be going to live in heaven anyway. Heaven is coming here, to Earth. Man was created to live here, to rule this part of God's creation. He will make His home among us.

 

[agua]

...
BTW, Scripture does NOT say we will be going to live in heaven anyway. Heaven is coming here, to Earth. Man was created to live here, to rule this part of God's creation. He will make His home among us.

I agree Stephanie. Which denomination are you, because this is considered unusual doctrine, these days.

 

[TillICollapse]

BTW, Scripture does NOT say we will be going to live in heaven anyway. Heaven is coming here, to Earth. Man was created to live here, to rule this part of God's creation. He will make His home among us.

I actually thought the scriptures said something more along these lines as well ... to be more precise, that the current heavens and earth were going to pass away, and that at least for a time, there would be the Kingdom of God on *earth*. But I'm so used to people saying, "When you die you go to heaven," I hardly even question it anymore, I just let it slide. This is an example where those who claim "correct Christian teaching," etc ... yet contradict one another ... collide.

 

[Tina W]

Well, it's not that this person didn't intend for it to be "forever". This may not be knowledge that he had, rather it was some type of knowledge YOU had. Some type of foreknowledge. Perhaps in his mind, he had no intention of ever leaving you, etc. But you ... on the other hand, you had some type of foreknowledge he would leave you. This may not be known to him though. I suppose you could look at it both ways ... perhaps he also had the foreknowledge, or perhaps he didn't.

Would you do it under either of those circumstances ?

Also, consider the idea that your own love may do something for this person, even though they may leave you. Let's say in this scenario, they too knew that at some point in the future they would leave you. But between now and then, there was an opportunity that your marriage ... or let's just say your devotion to them in some form ... benefited them somehow. What then ?

Hmmm.... those are interesting questions, I'll have to think about that.

 

[TillICollapse]

Hmmm.... those are interesting questions, I'll have to think about that.

No worries