Another sexless unconsummated marriage

DZoolander said:

...and did they make those things clear ahead of time so that both partners knew what they were walking into? Because that's a heck of a thing to get surprised by once the vows have been taken.

Click to expand...

The congregation I attended in college absolutely FORBADE any such kind of communication. They were known to dissolve engagements, even shipping one of the pair to another part of the country.

DZoolander is right. Dave-W's college congregation is not the model we should follow. Full sexual disclosure should occur during pre-marital counseling. Any trauma or sexual dysfunction should be fully vetted and known by both spouses before entering into the one flesh relationship. Each spouse should be able to determine if they are willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary to bring the sexually dysfunctional spouse to full sexual health.

But to surprise a spouse with unconfessed sexual trauma or past sin AFTER the vows have been spoken is tantamount to fraud and grounds for annulment. These damaged people need to get lots of help and they should stay as far away from marriage as possible. Marriage is by definition a sexual relationship. That is built into the deal and if someone is unable to fulfill the terms than they don't need to create more victims of their own trauma by marrying.

Ricky3369 said:

DZoolander is right. Dave-W's college congregation is not the model we should follow.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Ricky3369 said:

Full sexual disclosure should occur during pre-marital counseling.

Click to expand...

In the 1970s no one ever heard of premarital counseling. Their direction was if there was a problem the wife needed to submit. And had such a thing had existed then, the leadership would have INSISTED that absolutely no mention of sex ever come up in it. The most they would allow is discussing how many kids and when.

Ricky3369 said:

But to surprise a spouse with unconfessed sexual trauma or past sin AFTER the vows have been spoken is tantamount to fraud and grounds for annulment.

Click to expand...

As someone who had that surprise sprung on them about 6 weeks after the wedding, I can tell you it was not fun. And no amount of “submitting” fixed the problem.’’

However, I do not see it as a scriptural grounds for annulment. In Joshua, the Gibeonites made a covenant with Israel under intentionally false pretenses, and God made it stand.

Ricky3369 said:

if someone is unable to fulfill the terms than they don't need to create more victims of their own trauma by marrying.

Click to expand...

But God may have called them to marriage. And to be a parent.

For the Gibeonite analogy to work you would have to assume the deceived spouse was disobeying God by marrying in the first place. The Israelites were disobedient to God by entering into the covenant and God upheld it most likely as a punishment for their disobedience. A Christian spouse marrying another Christian who fails to disclose critical information prior to marriage is not disobediently entering a marriage covenant. Hence, the analogy DOES NOT work. And your statement that God may have called them to marriage further negates the analogy because the Israelites were called by God NOT to enter into the covenant with the Gibeonites.

You are very desperate to concoct a scenario where the sexually refusing spouse is without sin and the refused spouse is to blame. I wonder why you have such a low view of the marriage bed? You are constantly throwing arguments into the mix that you yourself don't agree with, like the church you went to or the lack of pre-marital counseling or the early church fathers you say you don't agree with.

I have also been the victim of a surprise sexual dysfunction being revealed years into a marriage as my wife confessed to having abortions years earlier when she was single and was too ashamed to tell me before we got married. But I stayed and fulfilled my commitments but at significant cost to sexual fulfillment in my marriage. She has refused counseling and prefers to argue, as you seem to, that I should stop making our sexless marriage into such a big deal. This is a pure deflection to keep the focus off her own dysfunction and to try to make me feel guilty for wanting to have a functioning sex life.

I officially retired from blaming myself for our sexual problems when she confessed the abortions. This was the first step I took in my path to healing. I will continue to fulfill my obligations and not abandon her. I will own my own sin, but I will never again allow myself to take the blame for things I didn't do wrong. Being the head of the household does not require me to be a scapegoat for every problem.

Ricky3369 said:

But to surprise a spouse with unconfessed sexual trauma or past sin AFTER the vows have been spoken is tantamount to fraud and grounds for annulment. These damaged people need to get lots of help and they should stay as far away from marriage as possible. Marriage is by definition a sexual relationship. That is built into the deal and if someone is unable to fulfill the terms than they don't need to create more victims of their own trauma by marrying.

Click to expand...

Quoted for truth.
If I had any idea about the sexual traumas my ex husband lived through/committed, I would NOT have married him.

iLove said:

There is sin in the marriage that must be dealt with asap. A sexless marriage is sin. Her body belongs to you; and your body belongs to her. This is why the scripture says come together often so you will not be tempted

Click to expand...

NO am sorry but no one body belongs to another person how do you know she hasnt been abused in her past saying things like this
is dangerous its saying that rape is ok ITS NOT OK TO RAPE SOMEONE NO MATTER IF THERE IN A RELATIONSHIP OR NOT THERE BODYS ISNT LIKE A THING THAT CAN BE TAKEN THERE BODY IS THERES AND ITS SHOULD RESPECTED if she cant have sex SHE CANT HAVE SEX dont force her to have sex if she been abused she maybe been having flashbacks she needs help and love

GRACEOFGOD3 said:

NO am sorry but no one body belongs to another person

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 7:4
The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.


1 Corinthians 6:20
For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.

GRACEOFGOD3 said:

how do you know she hasnt been abused in her past saying things like this

Click to expand...

Of course there are abuse issues in her past. That is why it should not be brought up or corrected.

Ricky3369 said:

For the Gibeonite analogy to work you would have to assume the deceived spouse was disobeying God by marrying in the first place. The Israelites were disobedient to God by entering into the covenant and God upheld it most likely as a punishment for their disobedience. A Christian spouse marrying another Christian who fails to disclose critical information prior to marriage is not disobediently entering a marriage covenant. Hence, the analogy DOES NOT work. And your statement that God may have called them to marriage further negates the analogy because the Israelites were called by God NOT to enter into the covenant with the Gibeonites.

Click to expand...

IMO you are narrowing the situation with the Gibeonites to their specific circumstance rather than taking a general principle away from the story: That God honors and upholds covenant, EVEN IF IT IS MADE under false pretenses or in disobedience.

You are very desperate to concoct a scenario where the sexually refusing spouse is without sin and the refused spouse is to blame.

Click to expand...

So I am desperate to make myself the blame? I don't think so.

I wonder why you have such a low view of the marriage bed? You are constantly throwing arguments into the mix that you yourself don't agree with, like the church you went to or the lack of pre-marital counseling or the early church fathers you say you don't agree with.

Click to expand...

Those are brought up to show the status of the church in general, and that there are pockets of belief that line up with the very negative ECF position or the overly aggressive Victorian/Gothardian/Purity Culture beliefs that have brought great damage to young people and later on the marriages they end up in.

GRACEOFGOD3 said:

NO am sorry but no one body belongs to another person

Click to expand...

Honey, you're reacting from emotion and not from a Biblical perspective here.
Biblically, if you're married you have no authority over your body any more.
Your spouse has that authority.
That's kind of the whole point of marriage vows: to give yourself to that other person.
My brother-in-law even added the line "I give myself to you" in our marriage vows (he was our pastor) in addition to the traditional vows to emphasize that point.

Dave-W said:

The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.

Click to expand...

barefeetonholyground said:

Biblically, if you're married you have no authority over your body any more.
Your spouse has that authority.
That's kind of the whole point of marriage vows: to give yourself to that other person.

Click to expand...

I think this kind of thinking is very misleading, especially to couples that haven't a good grasp of scripture. Using this scripture out of context makes it seem like your spouse can have sex any time they want EVEN against your will. That's not true. That would be rape.

We must look at scripture as a whole. Husbands are commanded to love their wives like Christ loves the church and gave Himself up for her. Husbands that love like that are not going to demand their wives have sex with them if they do not wish to. Thinking like that is so very dangerous, not to mention archaic. It' all about mutual respect and understanding, especially when one half of you is not in a good place mentally.

barefeetonholyground said:

Honey, you're reacting from emotion and not from a Biblical perspective here.
Biblically, if you're married you have no authority over your body any more.
Your spouse has that authority.
That's kind of the whole point of marriage vows: to give yourself to that other person.
My brother-in-law even added the line "I give myself to you" in our marriage vows (he was our pastor) in addition to the traditional vows to emphasize that point.

Click to expand...

biblical or not RAPE IS RAPE and that kinda of attitude is dangerous and make women like there are a piece of meat....i am a new christian i dont know bible scripute myself , but Forcing you wife to have sex with you is wrong talk to her about ask her why she cant have sex maybe she is scared you need trust first between you both you need to ask her

Saricharity said:

I think this kind of thinking is very misleading, especially to couples that haven't a good grasp of scripture. Using this scripture out of context makes it seem like your spouse can have sex any time they want EVEN against your will. That's not true. That would be rape.

Click to expand...

That is a backwards way of looking at it. I am a bible literalist. In the first century world of the apostles, sex was a wife’s RIGHT and a husband’s responsibility. In fact that was written into the marriage contracts and later got formalized in the Mishnah and the Talmuds. So it would NEVER be a husband demanding sex from his wife, it would have been the other way around. (And there are 1st century court records of wives taking their husbands to court to force more sex out of him)

Remember that statement is prefaced by “Stop depriving one another.”

The question then comes (to a literalist like myself) what happens when the person “takes authority” and demands their spouse shut down their sex drive?

From how I read the text, she is well within her authority to say that. And he has to live with it.

GRACEOFGOD3 said:

but Forcing you wife to have sex with you is wrong talk to her about ask her why she cant have sex maybe she is scared you need trust first between you both you need to ask her

Click to expand...

Which is soooooooo backward. It is all on HER terms, not on his.

Ricky3369 said:

I wonder why you have such a low view of the marriage bed?

Click to expand...

I do not have a low view of the marriage bed, I have a high view of scripture and an old fashioned idea of what it means to be a man.

Scripture says love covers a multitude of sins, so the husband is to love the wife and cover her sins, not imputing anything against her. Is that not how Christ loves us? Does He ever get anxious or mad at us when we fall short? Of course not.

As a man, I am supposed to be able to take anything without negative response. Including chronic sexual refusal. Especially when there is a good reason for it.

Dave-W said:

As a man, I am supposed to be able to take anything without negative response. Including chronic sexual refusal. Especially when there is a good reason for it.

Click to expand...

There is never a "good reason" for chronic sexual refusal. It is always a sin. Your excuses for your rebellious wife may make you feel like the loving sacrificial man but what have you done to hold your wife accountable? Is she refusing accountability before the church? Is she content to live in her condition without seeking help? Does she feel entitled to your loyalty despite her betrayal? Does she care what this does to you? There is a line between being sacrificial and being a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] using their own victimization for crass virtue signaling. "Oh, look at me. The suffering saint, willing to endure being treated unfairly while I do literally nothing to stop the unfair treatment."

Is your attitude what we should expect wives to have when dealing with their husband's inappropriate content problem? Or are women given the right to expect better treatment whereas men are expected to be treated badly and be perfectly okay with it?

Ricky3369 said:

Your excuses for your rebellious wife may make you feel like the loving sacrificial man but what have you done to hold your wife accountable?

Click to expand...

Accountable?? Don't make me laugh. Your "nuclear option" Ignores 2 very important scriptures and an important principle.

Romans 12:18
If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.

1 Peter 3:7
You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.

Dragging her in front of some religious court to "hold her accountable" would neither be peaceful nor understanding.

And besides, where do you come off judging my wife as "rebellious?" You have never even met her.

FYI: this situation has been discussed with pastors and counselors on occasion for the last 40 years. So it is not a hidden thing.

Ricky3369 said:

Or are women given the right to expect better treatment whereas men are expected to be treated badly and be perfectly okay with it?

Click to expand...

I suggest you get a book from First Fruits of Zion: Adam Loves Eve.

GRACEOFGOD3 said:

biblical or not RAPE IS RAPE and that kinda of attitude is dangerous and make women like there are a piece of meat....i am a new christian i dont know bible scripute myself , but Forcing you wife to have sex with you is wrong talk to her about ask her why she cant have sex maybe she is scared you need trust first between you both you need to ask her

Click to expand...

Oh so when I tell my husband he has to have sex with me even if he's not in the mood I'm raping him?
I don't know where you got the idea from my post that this mentality only applies to one side.
Both spouses are responsible for making sure one another's sexual needs are met.

Dave-W said:

I suggest you get a book from First Fruits of Zion: Adam Loves Eve.

Click to expand...

Just make a point. I don't have time to read every book you throw at me as a substitute for an argument. What is this author's relevant idea?

On the issue of accountability: Church discipline applies to sex refusing wives just as much as it applies to inappropriate content addicted husbands. Are not women told they must hold their husbands accountable for maintaining sexual purity? Even though they are under his authority? Living with my wife in an understanding way does not preclude me from exercising my headship authority to hold her accountable either. You have simply emasculated male headship if there are no consequences for rebellious wives. Habitual sexual refusal is the very definition of rebelliousness or moredet. If you reject holding your wife accountable then you must also reject her holding you accountable for sexual purity. And I am so looking forward to your argument against wives holding their inappropriate content using husbands accountable for their lack of sexual purity. And I want to hear all about how outrageous it would be for a wife to take her husband to the elders for his sexual sins.

Ricky3369 said:

If you reject holding your wife accountable then you must also reject her holding you accountable for sexual purity.

Click to expand...

Not by a long shot. Sexual refusal is NOT having sex with someone else. inappropriate content IS having sex with others, even if only in the mind. BIG difference. One is called adultery in the bible. (Matt 5) You will find no such biblical passage calling refusal adultery.

And I want to hear all about how outrageous it would be for a wife to take her husband to the elders for his sexual sins.

Click to expand...

Her doing that is ABSOLUTELY within her prerogative per Matt 18.