Pep,

What is the purpose of marriage?
It is not to "make us happy"... it can, and often does...but that is a benefit, side effect, whatever you want to call it and I suspect one that can really only occur if you keep the purpose in proper perspective?

So the purpose....to COMPLETE each other? An environment where two individuals can grow into "wholeness", something which cannot be accomplished alone?

My Christian view paints this picture....here we are, all creations of God....little extensions of Him, male and female each being a different expression of who God is, but neither being a complete picture by themselves...sort of a two-piece puzzle. Original sin was a result of one extension of God trying to be complete in and of itself. Then you have this one piece of the puzzle running around looking for the other piece but refusing to "hook up" with it because it is afraid of losing the control it wants and "thinks" it needs, essentially trying to be more like GOD, which they can never be without the other piece. Occasionally this piece may find another piece that seems to fit...the shapes may match up but the picture doesn't, but it doesn't care because at first it just "feels right. And they can't see the "big picture" unless they stand back and LOOK at it.

Now each piece IS important...each has PART of the picture, and neither is either more or less important with what they bring to the puzzle, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to become whole without the other piece.

Before we are married, we may choose from any number of other single puzzle pieces...in this way we are "co-creators" with God. We are given free will and choice. Once married, the puzzle begins to take a different and unique shape and picture as we add "new" pieces (children, life experiences, etc). A bond forms as we continue to co-create and expand this puzzle together. We are "as one". But if one of the original pieces becomes dissatisfied with the current shape/form/picture of the puzzle, it may misunderstand this as a "sign" that they don't really belong in the puzzle instead of seeing that it is their original, independent piece trying to be "me" instead of "we". It "forgets" that it was co-creator of the puzzle it is in and that possibly it is the "taking back" of some of it's original self that is what caused the bond to begin to break.


We think we can be complete by ourselves. It's impossible.

Onlywords

OW,

Not saying you are wrong, as I have not formed my opinion on why we marry. This if from Corinthians:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> 1 Corinthians 7
Marriage
1 Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. 2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This reads like marriage is a concession because physical passion/temptation is so hard to resist. Also reads like it is not necessary -that a devout, single life is preferred.

If it took a M to be "complete," are you condemning the single people to an incomplete life? Thought only God was required to complete us.

What bothers me personally, is that if this is true (the scripture above) it is a pretty base reason to marry. I would like to think there is a little more romance to it. A little more ordainment. And again, this is only one verse and there are lots more on the subject. Still, it sounds pretty clear.

Paraphrase -> You take a spouse to help resist the urge to mate like rabbits with everyone you meet so the gifts you do have can be of service to the Lord.

NCW

Originally posted by onlywords:
Now each piece IS important...each has PART of the picture, and neither is either more or less important with what they bring to the puzzle, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to become whole without the other piece.

I don't know the purpose of marriage....but it must have a purpose.... It's worth thinking about.

Using your puzzle analogy... what if we changed it to colors?

Red marries Green and together they paint a colorful picture...
but what happends if red gets mixed in with the green? Gray or some other non-vibrant color.

Does Red "complete" Green? or "compliment" Green? or "offset" Green?

The picture becomes muddy if Red bleeds into Green.......

Just trying to come up with something about marriage.... can't quite put my finger on it yet...

hmmmmmmmmm

Pep

NCW,

Yes, I see what you're saying...Need to tweak that puzzle thing. So, you have a bunch of individual puzzle pieces. To become complete you need to "become one" with God. When you do, you can no longer behave as if you are an independent piece...two pieces become one.
As in the case of marriage...the two that marry can no longer behave as though they are single.

God compares His relationship to Christians (who together make up the "Church") to a marriage...the Church is His bride. We are now ONE with God. We cannot take all the benefits of that "oneness" and still expect to be able to behave selfishly.

As for that passage you quoted....I don't understand it myself. I mean, He created us as sexual beings, and that passage seems to condemn that gift....but then, I think maybe it's like any gift you're given....people are likely to abuse that gift by using it selfishly, so there has to be some boundaries.

I don't know....!!! And sex is the means to perpetuate the species, which is right and good in God's eyes, isn't it? Why would he say not to?

Onlywords

PEP!!!!

Are you kidding me? You mean, all this time that I thought you were leading me to find the answers for myself and that you already knew them that you really DON'T know the answers?

AAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!
Well, then, I guess we better keep trying to figure this out together!

Maybe NCW can help, too.

We really are all in this together, aren't we?
Not as different from each other as we think sometimes.

Onlywords


P.S. Hershey Park was great....but I still don't like those rollercoasters. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Originally posted by onlywords:
PEP!!!!

Are you kidding me? You mean, all this time that I thought you were leading me to find the answers for myself and that you already knew them that you really DON'T know the answers?

Ha! Yep. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

What makes you think I think I know answers? I have opinions, not answers.

Pep

Our MC has a simplified version of showing what marriage is, and what it shouldn't be. He holds up his two hands, each with the thumb and middle finger making a circle. Each hand represents each partner in the M - as individuals. He then holds the circles close toghther, letting parts of the circles overlap eachother. The overlapping part is the M, with parts of the individuals outside of that.

I believe when a M gets into trouble is when the circles do not overlap at all and become totally seperate, or (as was the case with me and my H), the circles are completely on top of one another. I think I thought that is how marriage was supposed to be. Literally two becoming one - in thinking, togetherness, values, emotions, everything.

So, H and I became our own complete circles, by ourselves, during our separation. Now, we are learning how to overlap in healthy ways, while also retaining our individuality. I think this is a very simplified version of marriage, but you have to start somewhere, right?!?

SS

OK. Let's try this as a framework.

We have Corinthians telling us that if we CAN, it is better to go through life single with a close relationship to God. Now that makes sense. If I was close to God - and I mean really close, like Paul - I could draw some comfort on him directly. I mean it would feel "real" to me. Further, I would not have a spouse to "give" to, so my efforts and outpourings would be to the community. Better for His will, essentially He gets more bang for the buck if I am single as I don't have a garden to tend.

But now we are all imperfect. And there are times in our weakness when we NEED to feel the outpouring of unconditional love. "Agape" love, from the greek? What is the nearest form to "agape" love on earth? It is arguably either parent-child or spouse-spouse.

The interesting thing about parent-child is there is no CHOICE. I love my 3DS with agape love because they are MINE. No matter how much I tell them how great they are, in the back of their minds they will have the nagging thought that "one of the reasons dad loves us because he had us." Sure, I may also love them for who they are, but I cannot do that COMPLETELY because the fact that they are my children cannot be changed and that is a large component of my love for them. BTW, that also makes it easier to love them "no matter what."

Now. Onto my spouse. CLEARLY she was a CHOICE. That agape love towards her is because I want to because of who she is. No "yes, but" there as to why I love her so much. I choose to.

So there you have it. The "walk" to show agape love to our children may be easier, but the message of agape love to our spouses is stronger because it is COMPLETELY based on their intrinsic value and our choice.

Maybe marriage is a fleshly venue by which we can see examples of God's love for us - the agape love. Thus, through that example we learn and grow and see how to apply it to others. And of course, like everything fleshly, that love is subject to error and temptation and unfortunately somtimes submits to it.

But with all things, God can turn it to good. I have always felt, probably mistakenly, that RAP thought we married too young and was not my first choice. I never felt that she REALLY knew that she was my CHOICE. And now I get to finally demonstrate that indeed, she IS my choice. By choosing to stay now. Not because I feel I owe her, or need to show her something, simply because I love her with as much agape love as I can muster.

In a nutshell, perhaps marriage is then the closest worldly example of Christ's love for us. Now to wrap an analogy around it ...

NCW

PS - "agape" is not agape, like my mouth is agape. It is pronounced uh-GAH-pay and is one of the declentions from latin for love, the unconditional love. There are two others, one of which is phileo (fih-LAY-oh) meaning brotherly love. I can't remember the last one (little help would be nice) and it is love for an object. Like I love pancakes.

EDIT
Thanks to KAT: eros is the third one, the lustful love or desires of the heart. See below.

<small>[ July 30, 2004, 03:36 PM: Message edited by: ncwalker ]</small>

pepperband's "color" analogy made me think of those cheap watercolor sets you get when you're a kid. You try to keep the colors separate, but no matter how hard you try, eventually they get all mixed and messy and blend into one big gray-brown mess.

Sounds like relationships to me. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

But how about this. You have three jars of paint. A blue jar that is your spouse. A red jar that is you. And a yellow jar that is God. Between these three things, you can make any combination of colors in the spectrum. Everything you need to paint a beautiful picture.

The canvas is your life. The palette is your marriage. How well you "blend" the colors on the palette is how well you observe appropriate boundaries. When you mix up what should be Blue (solely your H's) and Red (solely yours) and Yellow (solely God's) in a haphazard fashion, you end up with murky, indistinct colors. When you carefully blend the appropriate amounts of each, though, you can make more beautiful, clear colors than you started with. In the same way that you, your H, and God interacting in healthy ways can create some things that are much more than you could accomplish alone.

You're going to end up with some murky, shadowy colors. But maybe they add depth to the total picture. Mistakes to be learned from have a beauty of their own.

Or perhaps I should just go back to work now and leave the psychic fingerpainting to the professionals.

NCW: You're forgetting "eros" ...