For those that waited until marriage to do the you know what

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Thanks. That is the list I had heard. But it has no time frame attached to it. It also seems like #11 was broken down to 3 or 4 individual steps. But that may have just been in the discussion and not part of th official list.

If memory serves, I think he said that it should take a year to a year and a half to go thru the list.

ANYWAY - how should the "wisdom" in this list affect how we look at the period of engagement?
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think the divorce rate would be much lower if this type of pre marriage was more common.
Can you give some specifics and some WHYs?


I have some ideas myself, but they may be too radical. I know many would say they are entirely inappropriate. And of course it may just be a reaction to the overly-negative approach of the congregation where we did our courtship and wedding.

But I do think that a regimen of premarital counseling that includes skill making for all of the notorious marriage breakers would help a LOT - and the more invasive the better. (because NOTHING is more invasive than being married)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The list: (from the above links)


1. Eye to Body.

2. Eye to Eye.

3. Voice to Voice.

Beginning friendship steps:

4. Hand to Hand.

5. Hand to Shoulder.

Beginning romantic steps:

6. Hand to Waist.

7. Face to Face. (hugging kissing)

8. Hand to Head.

The Final Steps. The last four levels of involvement are distinctly sexual and private. They are:

9. Hand to Body,

10. Mouth to Breast,

11. Touching Below the Waist,

12. Intercourse.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So what does anyone think of allowing (in some form or another) # 9 thru 11 for the engaged couple?

Practical pros and cons?

Spiritual implications?
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have a very tiny sample size that I'm judging this on but it seems to me that Christians who wait for marriage before sex are more likely to marry their eventual partner quicker than a couple whos already doing it. Does this sound about right? And if it is true then doesn't this lead to all kinds of issues and wrong intentions for marriage? I think waiting for marriage is a good thing but if you marry someone after a month or year just so you can do the deed then it seems counterproductive to the point of marriage. Perhaps people have experiences themselves or of others who waited a very long time but it doesn't seem likely from what I've seen around me.

My wife and I waited. Someone introduced us, but we didn't not even have a conversation. I met her about a year later when we had our first conversation. I was able to get a hold of her about a week later. We started seeing each other maybe within a week or so of that, calling ourselves 'friends' at first, but we went out to eat just about every night together. She went on a missions trip for a few weeks, and I proposed after that. We had our first conversation on February 15th and I asked her to marry me July 20th. I met her parents and got 'engaged' according to local custom when I got her permission in August, I think. We married in December. So we dated for less than a year.

Did we rush too fast? I do not believe so. I spent a lot of time with her. I 'prayed through' on it before I proposed. I didn't have any cold feet. I had peace about it through my experience in prayer and the Lord's work in our situation.

Were we rushing so we could have sex? Well, as a man in my '20's, the sex drive was there. The ironic thing was, after I met her, I was less sex obsessed. I knew if we married, we'd have sex, but I didn't sit around all the time fantasizing about it. (I can't say it never happened.) That sort of thinking was less of a struggle for me than before I met her, but maybe I got 'cleaned up' a bit in my thinking when praying about that issue and about wanting to get married. I'd been praying more intensely for a wife right before i met her, and I thought the Lord might have been telling me that I'd meet her that month.

I got to know her, found out about her beliefs, some of her expectations of marriage. I had some advice to give to young men of marrying age about what to look for in a wife that I'd written down. I looked back over my journal back then, and I'd hit the major points in finding out about her.

And it got to the point where I cared about her and started being more concerned about whether I'd be a good husband to her than being concerned about whether she'd be a good wife to me. And that was something else I had to pray about to make the decision.

There is some research, a bit dated, that indicates that women who were virgins at marriage (or only slept with the man they'd married) had much lower divorce rates than those who'd had sexual partners, (Teachman 1990).

Even if a virgin Christian couple marry fast because they are eager to have sex, they still could have some advantages over couples who've had multiple sexual partners who sleep with each other and date a long time. Claiming to be born again doesn't correspond with lower divorce rates, but certain evidences of devotion to the faith do. Church attendance correlates with lower divorce rates. Couples who wait to get marriage may also be more committed in marriage. If they have the tenacity to wait, they may wait in marriage as well.

Wives and husbands who waited could be more committed to Biblical roles for husbands and wives in marriage. Maybe they tend to follow more traditional gender roles as well. A study showed that couples where men and women followed traditional gender roles for work around the house had more sex. That might contribute to more satisfaction in one aspect of marriage.

Sleeping around before marriage may make committing adultery after marriage or just divorcing and finding another partner seem like a lot less of a big deal. I would imagine if someone has slept with dozens of people of the opposite sex, changing partners doesn't feel like as big of a deal, even if marriage is involved.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It IS quite a dilemma. Statistics say even Christian marriages end over money issues or sex issues. If you do as Christians should and wait for sex until married, how will you know that you are sexually compatible?

I wonder how many husbands who slept with their wives before marriage found that they were insatiable gymnists before marriage, but could care less afterwards? I wonder how many women found their husbands romantic, attentive sex partners before marriage who changed afterwards? I've read of men complaining that their wives lost interest after the wedding.

At least with the two virgins, they go through the 'new and exciting' stage together after marriage. That may sex the tone for what marriage is to be like.

I also find this reason to experiment to be a very over-emphasized one. Unless there is a medical problem, the vast majority of males can copulate with the vast majority of females. The 'compatible' part is mainly mental and emotional, and that can change after marriage anyway.

So, while prior to marriage, I do not condone having sex, I DO recommend having some VERY candid, blunt, no holds barred conversations about sex...

I think that's a good idea, too.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So, while prior to marriage, I do not condone having sex, I DO recommend having some VERY candid, blunt, no holds barred conversations about sex...
That conversation was strictly forbidden in the congregation where Sharon and I got marred.

My home group leader gave me a book, Tim and Beverly LeHay's "The Act of Marriage," about a month before we were wed. He told me in no uncertain terms to not let ANYONE know he did that; as it could get him kicked out of the congregation.

In hind sight, if we would have had that conversation, we probably would not have married.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,991
5,854
Visit site
✟877,352.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And if you'd read a scant 3 paragraphs you'd realize the source isnt the Atlantic. It's the Journal of Marriage and Family.

But hey, conflate the report with the source why dontcha.


Here is the abstract:

Age at Coresidence, Premarital Cohabitation, and Marriage Dissolution: 1985–2009

The abstract notes that those who engage in co-habitation dissolve their marriage more often.

However, the point of the article is that when you take into account age at time of cohabitation this margin is reduced somewhat. Or to put it a different way, getting married or co-habitating at a young age increases the chance of relationship failure. Age was a bigger factor altogether, than whether one co-habitated or married, though those who co-habitated were still at an overall higher risk.


This study notes another factor, which could be inter-related:

How Does Premarital Cohabitation Affect Trajectories of Marital Quality?

The study indicates that co-habitation quality levels were lower than marriage, but that this was particularly true with non-marital births.

We find that premarital cohabitors experience lower quality marital relationships on average, but this is driven by cohabitors with nonmarital births.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,991
5,854
Visit site
✟877,352.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
maritalsatisf.jpg
The above is from a collection of data charts. The group that formed the document is the Heritage group, a rather conservative group. But the data is pulled from the CDC National Survey of Family Growth.

http://cdn.freedomainradio.com/FDR_2899_Marriage_Partners_Study.pdf



That 26 percent drop is a pretty sizable jump from zero to one non-marital sexual partners, in marital happiness.

In my view, it is possible that if you don't have sex before marriage you may not realize you have different drives, etc. However, you also will have no comparisons to other lovers, and that initial bond you form will be unique to that person. You will associate the sexual experience with that person.

This is what was intended. The two are to become one flesh. They are to bond together in a way that is different than how they bond with others.

Related to the current topic, the charts from page 18-21 shows greater overall dissatisfaction among all sexually active women as number of non-marital sexual partners increases, apart from just marital happiness.

The study shows similar data to the earlier one referenced, that delaying onset of initial sexual activity relates to higher satisfaction.

The two are related as statistically those who initiate sexual activity earlier tend to have more sexual partners over time.

So taking the data together overall, delayed sexual activity, and limiting sexual activity to one partner correlates with highest satisfaction.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,991
5,854
Visit site
✟877,352.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have a very tiny sample size that I'm judging this on but it seems to me that Christians who wait for marriage before sex are more likely to marry their eventual partner quicker than a couple whos already doing it. Does this sound about right? And if it is true then doesn't this lead to all kinds of issues and wrong intentions for marriage?

There are multiple factors. If the time period is too rush the people do not know each other that well yet, which can certainly lead to problems. They may not know the most important things about each other, such as shared values, commitment etc.

In general though, if they are dating with the intent of getting married in a Christian context then they may be willing to grow with each other and adapt within the framework of Christian values, and still do well.

But it is probably best to let some months pass to get to know each other.

Long engagements though, multiple years, etc. can cause their own issues if you intend to wait for marriage, as they increase the time of possible temptation.

And they just might not be necessary. Are you compatible on the most bedrock values? Do you get along? Are you wanting to marry? Then there is not much benefit in waiting unless you are too young to really have formed thoughts or stability.
 
Upvote 0

Tropical Wilds

Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
Oct 2, 2009
4,790
3,135
New England
✟195,052.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Any man who says SEX is not a big part of why he got married is not being honest. Of course there is love AND commitment, BUT sex is a MAJOR reason Christian men get married!

Women NEED to understand this, while NOT condoned, if YOU don't meet your husband's sexual needs, there are PLENTY of women out there willing to..

Men...we need to do our part as well and make sure that we honor, protect, provide, and spiritually lead our wives as well...

So either my husband isn’t really Christian or he’s not actually a man...

I also like the “women, this is why you need to be on the ball sexually because your man is going to cheat,” and the footnote of “oh by the way, men... Honor, protect, lead, etc etc.”
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
View attachment 204945 The above is from a collection of data charts. The group that formed the document is the Heritage group, a rather conservative group. But the data is pulled from the CDC National Survey of Family Growth.

http://cdn.freedomainradio.com/FDR_2899_Marriage_Partners_Study.pdf

This is women over thirty, and stable marriages means they had been in the marriage for five years. That sounds like cherry picking, and setting a low (and irrelevant) bar for 'stable marriages.' Teachman's (1990) study showed a link between number of sexual partners and lack of marital disruption. But the measures used for this particular chart you posted seem rather meaningless. Maybe they cut the data until they could get an impressive-looking chart.

Methodologically, if they are dealing with the whole population, splicing data to see patterns are okay. If it's a random sample, doing so doesn't show much. Every data-set has its own peculiar patterns. Data mining to find a pattern in randomly sampled data violates regression assumptions of hypothesis testing (using the more conventional approach. Bayesian statisticians may have a different approach.)
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have a very tiny sample size that I'm judging this on but it seems to me that Christians who wait for marriage before sex are more likely to marry their eventual partner quicker than a couple whos already doing it. Does this sound about right? And if it is true then doesn't this lead to all kinds of issues and wrong intentions for marriage? I think waiting for marriage is a good thing but if you marry someone after a month or year just so you can do the deed then it seems counterproductive to the point of marriage. Perhaps people have experiences themselves or of others who waited a very long time but it doesn't seem likely from what I've seen around me.

I can't think of anyone I knew who got married after a month. I haven't noticed this as a real trend with those who wait until marriage. But I can understand how the desire for 'physical intimacy' might drive a couple to marry sooner to avoid fornication. I just don't know that it is a wide-spread problem.

There is some evidence that marrying a virgin female is lower risk for divorce than marrying a non-virgin. I don't know of any studies that show this for men.

If we are talking about Christians who are devoted enough to the Lord not to engage in fornication like the world around them when so many compromise, people who are marriage-minded, who just might be involved more in church, and who just might not believe in divorce, those are already some good ingredients for a marriage that is more likely to be successful.

Regularly attending church services correlates with lower divorce rates. I think the figure I read was 20%. Just claiming to be 'born again' did not in the surveys I read about. (Lot's of preachers will declare you born again if you just repeat a prayer after them, these days, whether you have faith or not, without bothering to inform you of such details as the fact that Christ rose from the dead.)

Two serious Christians who marry after a whirlwind romance may be more likely to be better off than a secular couple who didn't care who they slept with before they got married, who don't have any specific values when it comes to marriage, who don't subscribe to any Biblical values toward their duties to one another as husband and wife.

In some traditional societies today, and certainly in the past, couples married without really knowing each other first. This can work if values and expectations support the idea that they should marry that way and stay married and if male and female roles in marriage are clearly defined by society.

But I don't know much about couples who meet and get married in a month. If you can really get to know someone enough to know you are a good fit for each other, screen that individual, get buy in from the families involved, and get married in a month... that seems rushed.

I had my first conversation with my wife February 15th one year (the day after Valentines day.) We figured out later that we had been introduced, briefly, before. I proposed in mid July. I met her family and got her father's approval in July or August. We got married in December. We were both virgins. I also spent just about every hour I could with her for about three months of that time, going to church and Bible studies together, taking her out to dinner pretty much every night, etc. I got to know her well and found out about her values.

I was carefully looking for a woman I could spend my wife with, trying to find someone who would not divorce me who was a good match for me. As I got to know her, I became very concerned with making sure I was a good match for her.

Did I rush to marry her just to have sex with her? No. I suppose I'd had a sense of urgency about that for quite a while into my late 20's, but I'd put up with it. After I met her, though, that wasn't really the driving factor. The emotional aspects of the relationship seemed to actually put a damper on that. I felt like my thoughts were cleaner during that period, too, not as big of a struggle as it had been. I'd prayed about that before I met her, and this may have been God's grace in response to that. I really wanted to marry her so we could be together. I knew sex was a part of that and was happy that that was going to happen, too. I also realized i wouldn't have to pick her up and take her home if we got married. Just being together all the time would be really good.

Once I knew I wanted to marry her and had prayed through on the issue, I saw no need to delay and drag out the decision.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What do you think of a congregation that has a policy and teaching that you should court and marry ONLY someone you have absolutely NO sexual chemistry and attraction to? Only a romantic emotional connection?

I have no idea where this group you were a part of got such weird and unbiblical ideas. Paul actually recommends marriage as a remedy for preventing fornication, and recommends it for those who would otherwise 'burn'.

How does one parse out the difference between 'romantic emotional connection' and 'sexual chemistry and attraction'.

What if someone had said, "I feel emotionally attracted to her. As far as sexual attraction goes, I think she's pretty, and I don't think I'll have any problem being sexually attracted to her once we get married. Right now, we are focusing on our friendship and of course, mainly on God.' Would they have broken them up over that.

What I don't get is why they wouldn't just approve marriages if the families approved and if there weren't any complicated issues like past divorces and remarriages, being close kin, or different religious beliefs. Maybe if one of them had a child and they didn't think the other could handle parenting just yet, I could understand why someone might have some pastoral concern. The Bible never makes the choice of spouse the decision of church elders. Fathers, yes to some extent, but, church elders, no.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have no idea where this group you were a part of got such weird and unbiblical ideas.
IMO it was a reaction to the "free love" idea from the 1960s' sexual revolution. The founding pastor had been a part of that (and a Maoist revolutionary) before coming to faith.
Paul actually recommends marriage as a remedy for preventing fornication, and recommends it for those who would otherwise 'burn'.
There is something that gets lost in translation in that verse in 1 Cor 7. It is addressed in the feminine, NOT the masculine.

In Hebrew, Aramaic, ancient Greek and Latin, gendered nouns can tell us a lot. (gender is lost in most English words) If you have a group of people, 1000 women and just ONE man, the masculine version would be used. ONLY if males were completely excluded would the feminine be used; and Paul used the feminine.
What I don't get is why they wouldn't just approve marriages if the families approved and if there weren't any complicated issues like past divorces and remarriages,
It was a control issue. Biological family opinions were completely ignored. Even with highschool students living with their parents, they (elders) took the reigns of natural family order.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There is something that gets lost in translation in that verse in 1 Cor 7. It is addressed in the feminine, NOT the masculine.

In Hebrew, Aramaic, ancient Greek and Latin, gendered nouns can tell us a lot. (gender is lost in most English words) If you have a group of people, 1000 women and just ONE man, the masculine version would be used. ONLY if males were completely excluded would the feminine be used; and Paul used the feminine.
'Used the feminine' in which verse? What are you talking about?
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
'Used the feminine' in which verse? What are you talking about?
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

"Unmarried," "widows," and "them" are feminine.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟43,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

"Unmarried," "widows," and "them" are feminine.

I've looked at the Greek parsing there for verses 8 and 9, and I just see feminine there for the widows. The unmarried are masculine, which could include men and women. Gender-wise, English translations seem to render it pretty close to the Greek, with no gender-specific language except for 'widow.' The other interpretation would be he's talking about only male unmarried people and widows, but that would seem an unnecessarily specific interpretation and the gender neutral language captures a valuable ambiguity, IMO.

Paul says it is good for 'them'-- masculine-- if they so abide. I'm assuming masculine here includes male and female. I can't find any gender specific language in the next verse.

1 Corinthians 7:8 Greek Text Analysis
1 Corinthians 7:9 Greek Text Analysis

Is there something I couldn't find with these tools?
 
Upvote 0