Would you marry a woman who was a former stripper or X-rated star if she turned into a Christian ?

[Paidiske]

Is sexual promiscuity a positive or negative aspect we seek out in a partner as Christians?

Current sexual promiscuity would be an issue. I would argue that past sexual promiscuity, now repented of, in and of itself is neutral. There may be negative consequences for the person concerned. There may also be grace in which God has worked through that history for good. You'd have to actually get to know the person.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Current sexual promiscuity would be an issue. I would argue that past sexual promiscuity, now repented of, in and of itself is neutral. There may be negative consequences for the person concerned. There may also be grace in which God has worked through that history for good. You'd have to actually get to know the person.

This is an interesting line of reasoning. Since sexual promiscuity can be regarded as neutral after repentance, does that therefore mean the actions themselves were insignificant? You're saying there will be negative consequences, but one of those consequences can't be romantic rejection?

 

[Paidiske]

Since sexual promiscuity can be regarded as neutral after repentance, does that therefore mean the actions themselves were insignificant?

No.

You're saying there will be negative consequences, but one of those consequences can't be romantic rejection?

It can be, sure. What I'm looking at is the motivation for that rejection. If it's basically a devaluing of the person, I'd say, from a Christian point of view, that's a problem.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

No.

It can be, sure. What I'm looking at is the motivation for that rejection. If it's basically a devaluing of the person, I'd say, from a Christian point of view, that's a problem.

Sexual relations outside of marriage don't devalue us in your opinion?

 

[Paidiske]

Sexual relations outside of marriage don't devalue us in your opinion?

Not inherently, no. I'm not saying it's the right choice, I'm not saying it's wise behaviour, I'm not saying it's not sin; but I'm saying that it doesn't undermine our dignity as bearers of the divine image, or (for Christians) as full participants in the reign of God.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Not inherently, no. I'm not saying it's the right choice, I'm not saying it's wise behaviour, I'm not saying it's not sin; but I'm saying that it doesn't undermine our dignity as bearers of the divine image, or (for Christians) as full participants in the reign of God.

And it is inappropriate for a Christian, to use past promiscuity as a metric by which to reject someone for marriage? Because their inherent value remains intact?

 

[timothyu]

What I'm looking at is the motivation for that rejection. If it's basically a devaluing of the person, I'd say, from a Christian point of view, that's a problem.

As a human perhaps, but as a mate?

 

[Paidiske]

And it is inappropriate for a Christian, to use past promiscuity as a metric by which to reject someone for marriage? Because their inherent value remains intact?

I would argue that if a Christian rejects someone with a promiscuous past, because they believe that past has in some way degraded their value, (and there were some posts before my initial post which certainly seemed to at least suggest that kind of attitude), that would be inappropriate.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I would argue that if a Christian rejects someone with a promiscuous past, because they believe that past has in some way degraded their value, (and there were some posts before my initial post which certainly seemed to at least suggest that kind of attitude), that would be inappropriate.

By value do you mean value as a potential mate or value with regards to how we are before God? Are the two interchangeable in your opinion?

 

[Paidiske]

As a human perhaps, but as a mate?

Let me turn this around. Why should it matter? Someone has been promiscuous in the past. They are no longer. Let's further posit no ongoing health issues or trauma due to that past which would bring significant baggage into a new relationship. What is it about that past that devalues them as a prospective mate, when weighed against questions of character, godliness, compatible life goals, etc?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Let me turn this around. Why should it matter? Someone has been promiscuous in the past. They are no longer. Let's further posit no ongoing health issues or trauma due to that past which would bring significant baggage into a new relationship. What is it about that past that devalues them as a prospective mate, when weighed against questions of character, godliness, compatible life goals, etc?

Insecurity on part of the partner who was not promiscuous matters. One fir instance could imagine a woman, deeply uncomfortable being with a man who has been with women more beautiful than her and the sex they gave being above the sex she can give.

You could argue she needs to get over it, but does she? It's due to the sinful actions of the man that she feels this way in regards to him and had he been celibate and waited for her, the insecurity might not be as bad or there at all.

 

[Paidiske]

By value do you mean value as a potential mate or value with regards to how we are before God? Are the two interchangeable in your opinion?

At least somewhat interchangeable. If you truly believe their past has not damaged a person's value before God, why should it lower their value as a potential spouse? The rejection as a spouse on those grounds alone suggests a lingering sense of unworthiness over that person.

 

[com7fy8]

If an attractive women that was a former sex-worker

Genesis 29:31 > the LORD wanted Jacob to love Leah, even though she was not attractive like Rebecca. But his love depended on if a woman was very beautiful.

So, he did not know how to love. He missed out on having real love . . . until later, I think, when he learned how to love.

So, your attraction needs to not be only because someone is attractive. And if it is, you do not even know who you are attracted to!

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

At least somewhat interchangeable. If you truly believe their past has not damaged a person's value before God, why should it lower their value as a potential spouse? The rejection as a spouse on those grounds alone suggests a lingering sense of unworthiness over that person.

Alright, let's test the hypothesis. Let's say there is a man who was a former child molester. He's repented, done his time and is seeing a woman. She is not allowed to reject him for his past, right?

 

[Paidiske]

Insecurity on part of the partner who was not promiscuous matters.

Yes, it does, but it doesn't speak to the value or worth of the person who was promiscuous. This is why I was attempting to tease open the question of motivation.

One fir instance could imagine a woman, deeply uncomfortable being with a man who has been with women more beautiful than her and the sex they gave being above the sex she can give.

You could argue she needs to get over it, but does she?

"Needs" might be a strong term. I'd suggest that that kind of insecurity is likely to come out in some way, regardless of the past of her husband, and that it would probably benefit her to address it.

had he been celibate and waited for her, the insecurity might not be as bad or there at all.

Maybe... but I'd say that kind of insecurity is usually pretty deep-seated and not really about the other person at all.

Now; that doesn't oblige her to marry a man with a promiscuous past! Nobody is so obliged. But it's a question of what motivates our choices.

 

[Paidiske]

Alright, let's test the hypothesis. Let's say there is a man who was a former child molester. He's repented, done his time and is seeing a woman. She is not allowed to reject him for his past, right?

I think issues of abuse (and ongoing propensity to abuse) are of a whole different calibre than questions of whether or not someone's had sex before marriage.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Yes, it does, but it doesn't speak to the value or worth of the person who was promiscuous. This is why I was attempting to tease open the question of motivation.

"Needs" might be a strong term. I'd suggest that that kind of insecurity is likely to come out in some way, regardless of the past of her husband, and that it would probably benefit her to address it.

Maybe... but I'd say that kind of insecurity is usually pretty deep-seated and not really about the other person at all.

Now; that doesn't oblige her to marry a man with a promiscuous past! Nobody is so obliged. But it's a question of what motivates our choices.

Let's say for the sake of the argument she wouldn't feel insecure had he been a good Christian.

Her feelings are then a direct result of his sin, no? I've seen many stories on Reddit of men who have discovered their partner's past promiscuity and it changed their entire perspective of that person. So these things do happen.

Would you say there is a need for those who feel deeply uncomfortable with a potential partner's past to get over it? That the primary fault isn't with the promiscuous partner, but with how the non promiscuous partner feels?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I think issues of abuse (and ongoing propensity to abuse) are of a whole different calibre than questions of whether or not someone's had sex before marriage.

So Christ's forgiveness doesn't cover child molesters? Is their value degraded forever?

 

[com7fy8]

was a former sex-worker

If she has become a Christian, she is your own sister in Jesus.

Are you going to say she can not be part of the Bride of Christ??

How you judge her is how you judge Jesus.

Luke 7:41-43 >
From this scripture I see how the former sex worker forgiven much might love much, and she might much more greatly appreciate being forgiven.

 

[Paidiske]

Would you say there is a need for those who feel deeply uncomfortable with a potential partners past to get over it?

Sometimes.

That the primary fault isn't with the promiscuous partner, but with how the non promiscuous partner feels?

I'm not sure it's even helpful to frame this as a question of fault. But if we look at the situation where a formerly promiscuous person is seeking healthy, Christian relationships, the attitudes of others may well be the primary obstacle to fulness of life for all concerned.