So Link - Another post of yours got me thinking

[DZoolander]

and I'm curious about how you'd view a scenario/question.

On another post - someone was having marital problems due to a sexual issue that was discovered after they got married. They had waited, so the thing in question wasn't known until it was "too late". The suggestion was made by someone else that maybe had they had sex before marriage - the issue could have been known and the marriage never would have happened (thereby escaping misery for all involved).

You took exception to that suggestion.

So here's what I'm curious about.

Let's say you could avoid a lifetime of sin, by committing a single sin. Would that be a worthwhile trade in your opinion?

 

[johndoo]

The problem is that you can't know that in advance so it seems a futile discussion.
If it could be known, then , yes , in my opinion, on a case by case basis, it may be justified.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Let's say you could avoid a lifetime of sin, by committing a single sin. Would that be a worthwhile trade in your opinion?

I'm curious what exactly the sin is that you commit that will somehow mean you avoid a lifetime of sin? Sex before marriage? Because its not like you have sex once before marriage and magically stop. It adds fuel to a fire and you'll just want more.

 

[DZoolander]

In the specific incident that prompted this post, a single encounter would have informed both parties on the issue that has now driven them apart and is causing unresolved (and most likely long term) strife.

 

[mkgal1]

.....and the "fuel to the fire" wouldn't be an issue (as that's the actual issue---no fuel. so to speak).

 

[DZoolander]

Yeah, in this case it would have shown that they were sexually incompatible. She would most likely have just decided not to see him any more, she could have politely bowed out of the relationship, he would have been blissfully unaware of why, and they both would have gone on with their lives.

But now, it's a mess.

 

[LinkH]

and I'm curious about how you'd view a scenario/question.

On another post - someone was having marital problems due to a sexual issue that was discovered after they got married. They had waited, so the thing in question wasn't known until it was "too late". The suggestion was made by someone else that maybe had they had sex before marriage - the issue could have been known and the marriage never would have happened (thereby escaping misery for all involved).

You took exception to that suggestion.

So here's what I'm curious about.

Let's say you could avoid a lifetime of sin, by committing a single sin. Would that be a worthwhile trade in your opinion?

I don't think the scenario you used is an example of committing one sin to prevent a lifetime of sin. If the woman hadn't slept around, she might have been a better 'match' for him physically, and she wouldn't have had some other idea of what things are supposed to feel like. If a man suspected he was on one or other side of the bell curve, before getting engaged or getting to far along in the relationship, he could let his potential partner know. If it was that important to her, she could have asked for dimensions beforehand. I'm not really recommending that as something women should do, but it would be better than committing fornication.

It would also be a bad situation if they did fornicate once to 'test drive' each other, and one decided the other wasn't suitable, and they decided not to marry. But she gets pregnant from the encounter.

 

[mkgal1]

You seem to be zeroed in on her past, Link. Maybe if you look at it from the perspective of *him* being the one to commit "one sin to prevent a lifetime of sin" that may help? He was a virgin when they married.....remember?

As for asking for dimensions.....umm...I don't think that's much of a solution (I don't think people typically measure or are aware of other's dimensions). The problem is (from what I can tell)....there was nothing that alerted him (or her) about this prior to marriage.

ETA: I do think, however, there are other issues (more complex) besides this in the actual scenario.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Once again, what is the hang up with sex?

 

[LinkH]

You seem to be zeroed in on her past, Link. Maybe if you look at it from the perspective of *him* being the one to commit "one sin to prevent a lifetime of sin" that may help? He was a virgin when they married.....remember?

I had his background and the fact that he was a virgin at marriage in mind when I posted. My post applies to that situation, his being a virgin, and her not, as well. Her background is the one that was flawed, since she lost her virginit before marriage. He did not, and so his background was normative for a Christian.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

I had his background and the fact that he was a virgin at marriage in mind when I posted. My post applies to that situation, his being a virgin, and her not, as well. Her background is the one that was flawed, since she lost her virginit before marriage. He did not, and so his background was normative for a Christian.

Judgemental much?

 

[mkgal1]

I had his background and the fact that he was a virgin at marriage in mind when I posted. My post applies to that situation, his being a virgin, and her not, as well. Her background is the one that was flawed, since she lost her virginit before marriage. He did not, and so his background was normative for a Christian.

I made that comment (that you seemed zeroed in on her past) because you posted it wouldn't be an example of committing one sin to prevent a lifetime.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

"Her background was the one that was flawed because she wasn't a virgin"

.... words escape me for a response.

 

[LinkH]

Judgemental much?

Singles are not supposed to have sex before marriage. That is called fornication.

 

[LinkH]

0

I made that comment (that you seemed zeroed in on her past) because you posted it wouldn't be an example of committing one sin to prevent a lifetime.

''

It wasn't necessary for him to sin to avoid this situation. He could have married a virgin, talked about 'dimensions 'beforehand (if she let him know it could be a really big deal.)

Of course, we lived in a society with warped thinking, where people think it is weird or bad to be a virgin at marriage, so virgins may be a little hard to find, but there are lots of other countries and cultures out there, too.

 

[LinkH]

"Her background was the one that was flawed because she wasn't a virgin"

.... words escape me for a response.

Wasn't yours? Paul asked, "What fruit had we then in those things of which we are now ashamed?"

What should be the believers attitude toward past sin?

 

[DZoolander]

I can't help but think that sure...it's all well and good to postulate on what people ought have done (which basically boils down to she ought not have had been with anyone else - which is removing the situation from reality...or he ought not have been with someone that wasn't a virgin which once again removes it from what was actually happening). But, in this very real scenario of a real guy falling in love with a real girl with a fixed and real past (most likely deciding to "overlook it" which is viewed as a very Christian thing to do) - her falling in love with him - etc...discussions on how things "ought have been" aren't really applicable to the situation.

In this very real scenario - one encounter would have probably cut the relationship short. Both parties would have been informed on stuff that apparently is important to them - and decisions would have been made based upon that information. Most likely, the relationship would not have progressed, and a marriage never would have happened.

Now, as it stands, even if she does come around (which may or may not happen), he's going to view all future encounters in that context. He's most likely going to be unsure about initiating, because it will be a source of insecurity and pain. The lack of frequency and fulfillment will have unknown consequences on her and their marriage over the long haul. These are not things that usually bring people together and lead to harmony.

And all of that could have been avoided with "one sin". He could have moved on to someone else that might not have such requirements and beliefs. He could have been far the better off for it, blissfully unaware of anything else, and lived the rest of his life in a content relationship that "glorified Him". She could have moved on and found someone more to her liking, and spent the rest of her life in a committed relationship that "glorified Him".

But...as it stands...

 

[Dave-W]

In the specific incident that prompted this post, a single encounter would have informed both parties on the issue that has now driven them apart and is causing unresolved (and most likely long term) strife.

Not really. DW and I were fine on our honeymoon. It was after we got back that the bad stuff set in, and it was almost immediate.

 

[DZoolander]

In this scenario, there's a very specific issue that the wife has and that's causing the problem. Arguably the only reason she stuck with it is because she didn't know what she was dealing with.

A single encounter would have shown her.

 

[LinkH]

EZoolander,

I definitely don't believe that someone should commit fornication to prevent some future struggles. If he had, then she could have made a comment about his anatomy before rejecting him that scarred him for life, or he could have been hurt badly emotionally without the comment. He could have gotten her pregnant from that one time, only to have her reject him.

I had a cousin who was either engaged or close to it, and she got pregnant. He didn't believe in abortion. She had one. He was heartbroker. She was a foreigner from a country where women just generally did not have babies out of wedlock. If he hadn't fornicated, that may not have happened.

One of the problems with utilitarian ethics is that people will try to decide what to do based on what the outcome will be, rather than based on whether their actions are right or wrong. Deontological ethics teaches against doing immoral actions. The Bible takes the same approach. The individual is told 'Thou shalt not steal" and "Thou shalt not commit adultery." We should consider the outcome of our actions, but we don't sin against the Lord because we think it would save us some hardship down the line to do so. We don't hold the future in our hands. It is guesswork.