- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Because, people tell me I'm not being "Christian" if I don't accept those who don't fit my preferences.
Upvote
0
-
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.
The Marriage Debate
- Thread starter William67
- Start date
- Status
Because, people tell me I'm not being "Christian" if I don't accept those who don't fit my preferences.
- Feb 9, 2014
- 24,483
- 10,532
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
The action is not as important as the reaction(sin --> repentance).
God found sin so disgusting and unconscionable that He sent His only begotten Son to die, bearing the weight of sin.
Yet even He who hates sin so much can forgive those that repent.
Why can't you? Do you feel cheated that they 'got away with it'? Because if you do you aren't angry at them, you're angry at God and His grace.
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
This isn't the first time Ive had this discussion. I didn't feel myself financially stable enough to really begin looking for a wife until just over 10 years ago. I thought to myself, "Well, I'm in my mid thirties, that isn't too late". But, it was. By that time, as BlackRibbon stated, most of the "good girls" were gone. So, for more than a decade I have heard "Well, if you don't accept my past you aren't a Christian". I actually began to relax my stance on whether or not to marry only a virgin. But, over the years I have heard the Hosea and Gomer, her past doesn't matter, that I actually began to have a physical reaction when I heard them. The clincher came when a woman actually told me that "even the worse woman is good enough for any man". That infuriated me and my attitude hardened on the issue. It wouldn't have made me any more angry than if she had actually spit in my face. At my worst, that was the one thing I managed to hold onto. At my worst, I had thrown away almost everything that made me Christian. Almost everything that had made me human. But, the one thing I had managed to keep was deemed worthless. So, I made that my hard and fast rule.
To me, it didn't matter what else a woman may be, as long as she wasn't "used".
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I put you on ignore awhile back. Occasionally, when I see that someone I have on ignore posts a comment, I get curious.
See, this is another tactic used by feminists. If you say something they don't agree with, they say things like "your acting immature", "woman hater", or something else they feel is an "insult" in order to try and "shame" you. I'm actually being pretty nice. I don't think I have tried to personally insult a specific person on this thread. Ive disagreed with many, but I haven't actually resorted to name calling.
Upvote
0
Citanul
Well, when exactly do you mean?
- May 31, 2006
- 3,509
- 2,686
- 46
- Country
- South Africa
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
But that's not how it should be calculated as it doesn't take into account the people already married at the start of the year. So if you wanted to get an estimate of the divorce rate you'd need to look at how many people who have ever married ended up divorcing. Calculating it that way reveals that it appears to have peaked at 41% but is showing signs of being on the decline (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/divorce-rate-its-not-as-high-as-you-think.html).
Granted, 41% is still quite a high percentage, but if you want to use the divorce rate in your argument then that's the number you need to quote, not the mythical 50%.
Upvote
0
Ubuntu
wayfaring stranger
Now, while I wouldn't express myself quite like @William67, I'll have to admit that I understand his frustration.
Furthermore, the fact that he (as a male) resents dating woman with multiple parters in the past, is actually quite atypical. Usually males are the ones who are the most promiscuous. Now, our brother here is obviously not afraid to speak his mind, but I'm not sure if anyone here would have protested if William67 was a woman, and a tad more soft-spoken.
For here is the thing, many Christian women seemingly agree 100% with William67 about this! If you're a guy with a past, Christian women will apparently more often than not, hold your past against you. For instance, check out this thread, where a young, nice Christian male admits that “good” female Christians won't touch him with a ten foot pole: http://www.christianforums.com/thre...bout-dating-a-man-with-a-sinful-past.7897344/
We also had a thread last summer where the question was, “would you date people with a past”, and the consensus seemed to be “it depends”. http://www.christianforums.com/thre...marry-someone-who-was-once-an-addict.7896880/
William67 isn't alone in stating that sometimes it's difficult to forget someone's past, even if they have repented and are forgiven by God. I had a quick look, and there are many threads like these on this forum. I think he actually describes a real phenomenon; if you're a person who have avoided sexual sins, it can be difficult psychologically to date someone who is, ahem, experienced. For some guys the mere thought of marrying someone who've had multiple partners in their past, is actually quite terrifying!
Here are some relevant threads about this:
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/bothered-by-fiances-past.7829484/
http://www.christianforums.com/thre...r-of-dating-girls-with-a-sexual-past.7735837/
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/im-curious-would-you-personally-marry-a-non-virgin.7660805/
To sum it up, William67 isn't always the most diplomatic person when it comes to the way he expresses himself, but I think that perhaps we've given him too much flak in this thread. We're talking about his feelings here, and it's not really possible to argue with emotions. We'll have to respect that he feels this way, in the same way that we have to respect all those women out there who are scared of guys with a past.
Furthermore, the fact that he (as a male) resents dating woman with multiple parters in the past, is actually quite atypical. Usually males are the ones who are the most promiscuous. Now, our brother here is obviously not afraid to speak his mind, but I'm not sure if anyone here would have protested if William67 was a woman, and a tad more soft-spoken.
For here is the thing, many Christian women seemingly agree 100% with William67 about this! If you're a guy with a past, Christian women will apparently more often than not, hold your past against you. For instance, check out this thread, where a young, nice Christian male admits that “good” female Christians won't touch him with a ten foot pole: http://www.christianforums.com/thre...bout-dating-a-man-with-a-sinful-past.7897344/
We also had a thread last summer where the question was, “would you date people with a past”, and the consensus seemed to be “it depends”. http://www.christianforums.com/thre...marry-someone-who-was-once-an-addict.7896880/
William67 isn't alone in stating that sometimes it's difficult to forget someone's past, even if they have repented and are forgiven by God. I had a quick look, and there are many threads like these on this forum. I think he actually describes a real phenomenon; if you're a person who have avoided sexual sins, it can be difficult psychologically to date someone who is, ahem, experienced. For some guys the mere thought of marrying someone who've had multiple partners in their past, is actually quite terrifying!
Here are some relevant threads about this:
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/bothered-by-fiances-past.7829484/
http://www.christianforums.com/thre...r-of-dating-girls-with-a-sexual-past.7735837/
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/im-curious-would-you-personally-marry-a-non-virgin.7660805/
To sum it up, William67 isn't always the most diplomatic person when it comes to the way he expresses himself, but I think that perhaps we've given him too much flak in this thread. We're talking about his feelings here, and it's not really possible to argue with emotions. We'll have to respect that he feels this way, in the same way that we have to respect all those women out there who are scared of guys with a past.
Upvote
0
- Dec 16, 2014
- 4,123
- 2,896
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- UK-Labour
I know you put me on ignore! I am not bothered. The whole point of ignore is too well ignore them, not for you to pick and choice to grace me with you superior presence
I wasn't saying you acted like a 2 year old over your posting, I was saying your attitude towards me is worse than a 2 year, that has NOTHING to do with what you have been replying back here etc because their is no point in debating with someone like you or even raising points were you aren't correct.
Saying you act like 2 year old is NOT name calling and clearly that post again just shows how low you would actually stoop.
My comment about you ignoring me has nothing to do with feminism.
And I think you have insulted people they just won't come out and tell you.
Upvote
0
Elliewaves
Untouchable internet saint
Your standards are fine to have. I agree with them. No one should marry anyone that they don't want to marry. But, your rant sounds a lot like the rantings of my former co-worker. My vote is that you don't get married. Marriage is a ministry to your spouse and your children. You do sound like you would be suspicious of your spouse even if she was a good and honest "good" girl. They are out there; I know more than a few. But, I doubt they would be charmed by your attitude towards women specifically and your rage unless you hid that from them. I don't say that to insult you; it's just reality. Calling women "harlots" isn't very attractive even if their behavior is questionable. Rahab was a prostitute and a liar and yet repented and then married and was in the direct line of Christ; so obviously God doesn't think women with pasts are useless and unfit for marriage or to raise children. Boaz turned out pretty well, I guess. You don't have to marry someone with a past; but to be so hateful and angry towards anyone that has changed is not really in line with God. Just don't marry them. It's pretty simple really.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Aug 3, 2014
- 9,171
- 7,365
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
That right there tells me that they have not forgiven themselves of their past when they became born again/baptised. When one becomes baptised, his/her past is forgiven and should only be used as a testimony of how they overcame with Jesus. This whole... ultimatum of accepting one's past is just childish and tells me that they don't understand His ways (light reading the Bible, only getting the surface message instead of drinking it in). Assuming they are Christian themselves, that is...
Last edited:
Upvote
0
SnowyMacie
Well-Known Member
- Apr 12, 2011
- 17,008
- 6,087
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
No, it's not, but hatred and unforgivness are...which are the only things most of us are seeing from this thread.
Upvote
0
SnowyMacie
Well-Known Member
- Apr 12, 2011
- 17,008
- 6,087
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
1) The tone of your post seem to brag about your family and your violent sentences. You seem proud of it.
2) "These are people who are much worse than I" - You are not better than those who have had sex before marraige, regardless of what you think. That attitude is the definition of self-righteousness and the attitude of the pharisees.
3) "Your name calling and insults..." if you didn't have a problem without your pride, toughness, and masculinity, you wouldn't have said that sentence.
The people who don't think they have a pride problem are generally the ones who have a pride problem.
Exactly part of your problem if you see the people on only words on a forum.
I never said they were irredeemable. I said I didn't want to marry someone with an immoral past.
"For her doctor, it was chemo or nothing. He offered her no alternatives. The day after her funeral, I had an almost overwhelming urge to grab a rifle and put 15 rounds into her doctor's worthless skull." - Controversial Opinion thread, post#146
Most of the other posts have been removed, but the countless times you've talked about how your family has killed various people from business rivals to police officers.
In one of those "You Test" threads back in the summer/fall, you went into detail about how you would essentially brutally kill anyone who crossed you.
You main claim to be the lowest sinner, but you're not those people. It doesn't matter how low you claim to be if you don't actually act like, which sense you've essentially made two threads now calling out and shaming people because you haven't done what they have done, shows that you don't actually believe you are as low of a sinner as ever walked the Earth.
Upvote
0
rickster
Member
Based on the "bad boy" thread I was going to see if you were a member of that forum. It looks like they're under new ownership and my 12 year old account is gone so I wasn't able to search the member list.
MGTOW and theredpill are highly toxic communities. The majority are atheist/agnostic. It looks like MGTOW removed their religious sub forum and replaced it with a philosophical one instead. MGTOW has a strong preference for using escorts/prostitutes/massage parlors instead of having serious relationships.
The one useful piece of information from MGTOW was that if you wanted to get married, you should marry someone from an eastern country (one that is not feminized). You already made reference to that, so maybe you are an old member or a quick reader?
Have you thought about moving to Japan or Eastern Europe?
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Until recently, I never knew they existed. I happened upon them while watching some music videos on youtube last week. Never liked the Japanese for familial reasons. WW2 and the things the Japanese did to some of my relatives. Same thing for certain states in the US. As for eastern Europe, there are worse than the US when it comes to sexual immorality.
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
There is an old saying, "Plain talk is easily understood". I am a blunt person, always have been. Ive always seen "hemming and hawing" around a subject to be a form of cowardice masquerading as civility. Some people see that as being rude or "harsh", but its just being honest.
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
It isn't rage I feel, its disgust and anger than that type of sin is so readily accepted, as if it is nothing. I fully understand that people make mistakes in life, but its their attitude of "Pffft! That's nothing, that bothers me." And as my experience with all those women have tinged my view of sexual immorality, so to does your experience with your "former co-worker" seems to have tinged your view of me.
Upvote
0
- Sep 26, 2014
- 5,025
- 2,241
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Stating how I felt, and the thoughts I had, after a traumatic event does not mean "bragging about murder". As far as the "you test" thread, IIRC I stated that I would kill someone who posed a threat to me or my family. "A threat", meaning put them in danger, threatened their lives. I don't deny that, but it wasn't "bragging". As for my family's history, still not bragging, but I posted those as more of a warning about self-control, because none of them possessed that.
Upvote
0
Gnarwhal
☩ Broman Catholic ☩
- Oct 31, 2008
- 20,851
- 12,575
- 38
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
The point is @William67 , you go way beyond what's necessary (or appropriate) language for an online community. None of us care to hear that you would liked to have put 15 rounds in some doctor's skull, it's enough just to say you were furious or livid. I'm sure more than a few of us can relate to that sort of anger because at least a couple of us on here have gone through medically-related family tragedies.
So when your language is "excessive" like that, it just comes across like you're trying to prove how macho you are, and frankly it backfires on an online forum because everyone knows there's no onus on you to prove your masculinity. Therefore, the more you talk, the less we believe you.
None of us are disputing that maybe you had a rough life and that your mom was a saint who raised you right. Nobody here is arguing your right to have a preference for what sort of woman you would like to marry. The problem lies in the way you express those preferences. You make generalized statements that lead everyone to assume you believe that anyone who has made mistakes—mistakes that they have repented of and turned from—are second class citizens.
Is that what you actually believe? Do you view people who have committed sexual sins the same way white Americans viewed black slaves prior to the Civil War?
Like I said, if all of this is just you not wanting to date/marry a woman who has slept with someone before - that's fine. Most of us would actually agree with you. You're not going to find much disagreement here about the sexual morals of our national and global culture. What you will find however is a willingness to say we've all fallen short, and "even if I don't want to marry someone who was promiscuous, I believe you still have an inherent dignity simply because you bear the image of God".
We need you to understand these things. Now you can fight back and play the victim or martyrdom card all you want, but the truth remains that everything you've said in this thread, and the violent, judgmental and hateful comments you've made in threads past are not what this community is interested in. I have it on good authority that in this one thread you've already lost friends because of your chosen language.
You have two choices in front of you: clean it up, or put on your cloak of pride and continue believing you're the morally superior member to the rest of us.
So when your language is "excessive" like that, it just comes across like you're trying to prove how macho you are, and frankly it backfires on an online forum because everyone knows there's no onus on you to prove your masculinity. Therefore, the more you talk, the less we believe you.
None of us are disputing that maybe you had a rough life and that your mom was a saint who raised you right. Nobody here is arguing your right to have a preference for what sort of woman you would like to marry. The problem lies in the way you express those preferences. You make generalized statements that lead everyone to assume you believe that anyone who has made mistakes—mistakes that they have repented of and turned from—are second class citizens.
Is that what you actually believe? Do you view people who have committed sexual sins the same way white Americans viewed black slaves prior to the Civil War?
Like I said, if all of this is just you not wanting to date/marry a woman who has slept with someone before - that's fine. Most of us would actually agree with you. You're not going to find much disagreement here about the sexual morals of our national and global culture. What you will find however is a willingness to say we've all fallen short, and "even if I don't want to marry someone who was promiscuous, I believe you still have an inherent dignity simply because you bear the image of God".
We need you to understand these things. Now you can fight back and play the victim or martyrdom card all you want, but the truth remains that everything you've said in this thread, and the violent, judgmental and hateful comments you've made in threads past are not what this community is interested in. I have it on good authority that in this one thread you've already lost friends because of your chosen language.
You have two choices in front of you: clean it up, or put on your cloak of pride and continue believing you're the morally superior member to the rest of us.
Upvote
0
I personally think that a sin committed against another is worse than a sin against our own body....because there are victims in the former. A sexual sin is usually a person looking for love even if they are looking in the wrong places so an admission of loneliness. A violent sin such as assault against another is just that "violent" and not a representation of the Christian "turn the other cheek".
I'd rather marry a man who had a less than perfect sexual past than one who had a past that included being violent to others. But neither man is to be trusted with self-control. I'd seriously worry about the first time I said "not tonight" when you were feeling sexually worked up.
I am guessing that you couldn't marry a woman who was raped or sexually abused either even though she was completely innocent of the act of sexual impurity. She would still be considered "damaged goods" in your eyes.
I'd rather marry a man who had a less than perfect sexual past than one who had a past that included being violent to others. But neither man is to be trusted with self-control. I'd seriously worry about the first time I said "not tonight" when you were feeling sexually worked up.
I am guessing that you couldn't marry a woman who was raped or sexually abused either even though she was completely innocent of the act of sexual impurity. She would still be considered "damaged goods" in your eyes.
Upvote
0
Ubuntu
wayfaring stranger
I'm certainly not suggesting that you should be dishonest, honesty is generally a virtue. But so is tact. I agree with Darth Bagel, it seems as if what people are reacting to isn't first and foremost your feelings about marriage, but your tone, the way you express yourself. Because I don't see why anyone would protest against your desire to marry a virgin, that's purely a matter of personal preference. Also, I'm quite sure that many of us agree with you that it's wrong to downplay the seriousness of sexual sin.
However, an important thing to remember is that there is a difference between discussions at a forum such as this, and conversations people have in real life. In real life we would see your smile, we hear your tone of voice, we would notice your gesticulations. In other words, its generally easier to emphasise with someone who is physically present...
What I'm trying to say (and this applies to all of us) is that it's really easy to come across as being too “edgy” when speaking our minds at forums such as this, because people don't see the person behind the words. I know that you're just trying to be honest, but actually the Bible itself extols gentleness. So we need to ask ourself if we can find a way to combine honesty with tact and gentleness. Because it is possible to combine these things: “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” - Proverbs 15:1
* * *
Speaking of which… This is off topic, but here is a short comment about the discussion you and @TX_Matt had about anger… (Whether or not anger is a sin.) The bible does actually portray anger as something that is destructive in itself. (The exception being “holy anger”, which is something different.)
Check for instance out these verses:
"Do not let yourself be quickly provoked, for anger resides in the lap of fools." Ecclesiastes 7:9
"Better to be slow to anger than to be a mighty warrior, and one who controls his temper is better than one who captures a city." Proverbs 16:32
"For as the churning of milk produces butter and as punching the nose produces blood, so stirring up anger produces strife." Proverbs 30:33
"You have heard that it was said to those of old, You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment. But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, You fool! will be liable to the hell of fire." Matthew 5:21-22
So clearly, anger is a negative emotion that comes from our “Old Adam”, from our fallen nature. In the words of Christ, the worst case scenario is that our uncontrolled anger would cause us to be judged by God himself, and that is obviously not something to be desired. Anger is therefore something that all of us here on this forum should strive to conquer by the grace of Christ. It's not only the actions which anger produces that are wrong, anger itself is addictive and detrimental to our spirituality.
(I'm not suggesting that you're ignorant of these passages, instead this issue is something that I'm sure we all need to be reminded of now and then.)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
