The Bible nowhere calls marriage a necessity for the Christian. That's a rather stark contrast to what Paul said about it, isn't it? Besides, people back then were often in arranged marriages. It was probably easier to avoid singleness back then.
And, for sure, if you have strong sexual desires, being single will be quite the challenge. it certainly is for me. But it's not impossible. It may be impossible if Jesus was incapable of helping us.
A lot of times when people talk about the "gift of singleness," they'll say that, if you have the ability to be single without any problems or struggles, then you have that gift. So, uh, if I have the "gift of marriage," then that means I have the ability to enjoy a marriage without any problems or struggles? Wow. Gee, that sounds nice. lol.
A popular idea that Christians have is that singleness requires some sort of "special calling." That the "gift of singleness" is some sort of superpower God gives certain people. Of course, if you need a special supernatural ability to be able to deal with singleness, well, then singleness must be objectively awful. It's like the "gift" of anesthesia during a surgery.
Also, singleness is celibacy is not listed among the classic "spiritual gifts" that Paul listed, is it?
I know this is an older post, but it is "straight fire," as the kids say (do the kids still say that?). I, too, have long been frustrated by the prevalence of the "belief that the one thing in my life which I am destined to not be able to exercise self-control over, that I’ll eventually end up needing to gratify, are my sexual desires."
Though I could never put it into words quite so clearly, I was always bothered by the way that Christians have essentially taken on the logic of the secular world. The world says that our sexual desires must be gratified in order for us to live healthy, fulfilled lives. Protestants, it seems, say much the same, but with the limitations of heterosexuality and monogamy.
One more thought: Calling sexual temptation an indication of one’s divinely-ordained *need* to be married seems to me to besmirch marriage, by conceptually making a spouse into…how do I say this with tact?...a mere outlet for one’s uncontrollable urges. It also implies a failure to note how either lust (ungodly) or good sexual desire (godly) can occur both within and outside of marriage.
Good stuff.
The Bible nowhere calls marriage a necessity for the Christian. That's a rather stark contrast to what Paul said about it, isn't it? Besides, people back then were often in arranged marriages. It was probably easier to avoid singleness back then.
And, for sure, if you have strong sexual desires, being single will be quite the challenge. it certainly is for me. But it's not impossible. It may be impossible if Jesus was incapable of helping us.
A lot of times when people talk about the "gift of singleness," they'll say that, if you have the ability to be single without any problems or struggles, then you have that gift. So, uh, if I have the "gift of marriage," then that means I have the ability to enjoy a marriage without any problems or struggles? Wow. Gee, that sounds nice. lol.
A popular idea that Christians have is that singleness requires some sort of "special calling." That the "gift of singleness" is some sort of superpower God gives certain people. Of course, if you need a special supernatural ability to be able to deal with singleness, well, then singleness must be objectively awful. It's like the "gift" of anesthesia during a surgery.
Also, singleness is celibacy is not listed among the classic "spiritual gifts" that Paul listed, is it?
I know this is an older post, but it is "straight fire," as the kids say (do the kids still say that?). I, too, have long been frustrated by the prevalence of the "belief that the one thing in my life which I am destined to not be able to exercise self-control over, that I’ll eventually end up needing to gratify, are my sexual desires."
Though I could never put it into words quite so clearly, I was always bothered by the way that Christians have essentially taken on the logic of the secular world. The world says that our sexual desires must be gratified in order for us to live healthy, fulfilled lives. Protestants, it seems, say much the same, but with the limitations of heterosexuality and monogamy.
One more thought: Calling sexual temptation an indication of one’s divinely-ordained *need* to be married seems to me to besmirch marriage, by conceptually making a spouse into…how do I say this with tact?...a mere outlet for one’s uncontrollable urges. It also implies a failure to note how either lust (ungodly) or good sexual desire (godly) can occur both within and outside of marriage.