"I Kissed Dating Goodbye" Author Changes His Mind (as do many others)

DogmaHunter said:

To give you an idea: I was in a deep and meaningfull relationship with my current partner for almost 2 years (2,5 - 3 if you also count the period of flirting / casual dating) before we shared a bed together. By that time, I dare say that we already had a much deeper connection then a lot of "abstinance" people by the time they get married in a hurry.

Click to expand...

This doesn't support your case. Your original question was a doubting of the claim that "abstinence is good", but then you admit yourself that your relationship was improved by abstinence for 2 years. I think you are supporting Sketcher's original claim.

Jon Osterman said:

When she is 21 it is entirely her own business of course. I will be kicking her out of the house anyway when she turns 18.

Click to expand...

Errr.... ok.
So you turned around fast.

Strange thing to say though.

I want her to stand on her own 2 feet and not rely on her parents.

Click to expand...

And the best way you can come up with to do that, is to kick her out the second you can legally do it?

So I disagree with your "she probably will".

Click to expand...

When you "kick her out" and if she goes to college, chances are that that will quickly change.
But it sounds like you will not be knowing it, if it does.

If I were her, I certainly wouldn't be telling you about the crazy parties at the dorm.

Jon Osterman said:

This doesn't support your case. Your original question was a doubting of the claim that "abstinence is good", but then you admit yourself that your relationship was improved by abstinence for 2 years. I think you are supporting Sketcher's original claim.

Click to expand...

"Abstinence" meaning to not engage in sexual relations before marriage.

We didn't have any single contractual or financial commitment towards eachother whatsoever. In the sense of: we could put a stop to the relation at any given time, with no ripple effect whatsoever. No kids, no house to pay off, no divorce to adminster, no common goods to divide... nothing.

We both lived with our parents still and the only relationship we had was emotional.
Abstinence, in context of this discussion means ANY pre-marriage sexual relations.
I even expanded that definition to also include living together, buying stuff together etc.

So no, it very much supports my case.

And as I said multiple times in the post you are responding to: the alternative to abstinence is NOT to sleep with someone else every weekend, or giving it all up on the first date or whatever.

Having said that, I wouldn't pass moral judgement on people who do sleep around (with mutual consent) in a "free love" kind of thing. I have no moral problems with one-night stands at all, as long as it is with mutual consent and if both parties act responsibly.

It's just no my cup of tea. Some people can detach emotion from sex. I'm just not one of those people. Nore would I be judgemental towards those that are.

DogmaHunter said:

Errr.... ok.
So you turned around fast.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I said I don't want her dating. But it is her call, and she is free to do it if she wants. She will just have to suffer my disapproval.

And the best way you can come up with to do that, is to kick her out the second you can legally do it?

Click to expand...

Absolutely! I have aquaintances with older kids who have let them stay with them for years, remaining dependent and frankly useless. It is much better for them to move out. That doesn't mean that we can't still give her support of course. But she shouldn't be under our wing anymore.

When you "kick her out" and if she goes to college, chances are that that will quickly change.
But it sounds like you will not be knowing it, if it does.

If I were her, I certainly wouldn't be telling you about the crazy parties at the dorm.

Click to expand...

We will see. At the moment she is very much mini-me. She thinks, acts and behaves very much like me. I have confidence in her and she has my trust. I hope you don't have kids, because you seem to think very poorly of them.

DogmaHunter said:

I disagree off course - regardless even of not believing in a god.
"the perceived authority commands it", is not a reason. That just obedience to a perceived authority. The answer to WHY does the authority command it, would be the actual reason.

Click to expand...

Since you presume no God exists, that would make sense to you. In Christianity, you have it backwards. God commanding anything is good enough reason to do what he commands you to do or avoiding what he commands that you not do. The other earthly benefits are just bonuses.

DogmaHunter said:

The alternative to "abstinence" is not "having unprotected sex with everyone you meet on the first date".

Click to expand...

Not true, abstinence is until marriage. And many of these consequences are consequences of sex between the second date and before marriage.

DogmaHunter said:

If in this day and age, you still get pregnant while not wanting/planning to, then some sex education might be in order.

Click to expand...

Abortions due to unwanted pregnancies happened quite a bit before Bush's abstinence-only sex education was established. These happened in spite of sex education that covered all manner of birth control.

DogmaHunter said:

I'm not married. I have a kid. I can guarantee you that he has a MUCH more stable home then plenty of other kids I know of whom the parents ARE married.

And same as above: in this day and age, you have more then enough tools to avoid getting pregnant.

Our child was 100% planned. We've been together for 15 years before we decided to have a child. And needless to say, we had plenty of sex during those 15 years.

Click to expand...

If what you say is true, you're not in the majority. And in Christianity, a non-married cohabitation that is more stable than a bad marriage is not a justification for not marrying and putting in the work for a good marriage.

DogmaHunter said:

Again: the alternative to "abstinence" is not "sleep with everyone you meet on the first date".

Click to expand...

Again: Not only is abstinence more than not sleeping with everyone you meet on the first date, but many of the issues I cited start with sex that happens at some point after the second date and before marriage.

DogmaHunter said:

I know plenty of people with those problems. ALL of them got kids while married and then divorced. Every single last one of them.

Click to expand...

Plenty of cohabitators and non-cohabitators also have those problems. When people don't fornicate and cohabitate, there are less of them. And since all of the people you know who have these problems got married and then divorced and then had these problems (if I'm understanding your post correctly) then you haven't had the experience I've had of hanging out with people who panicked for a second when women they didn't recognize were greeting me. Why? Because these guys would get blackout drunk.

DogmaHunter said:

Those are the types of problems you end up with, if you sleep with anyone you meet on the first date. Once more: the alternative to "abstinence" is not "have sex with anybody before really getting to know eachother".

If you get to know eachother well first, you won't have such problems.

Click to expand...

Again, abstinence is more than that, and these problems are not limited to sleeping with people on the first date.

DogmaHunter said:

That is utterly false as every sexuologist will tell you.
In fact, the opposite is true. On both counts.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Does Sexual History Affect Marital Happiness?

DogmaHunter said:

Next to that, you're also wrong. Intimacy acts like a glue. Sex is just one form of intimacy and it's not even the most important one. There's far stronger glue. And that is honesty and open communication. To share and talk about your interests, your ambitions, your hopes and dreams, your childhood experiences, etc. To dig into eachothers minds and memories. That connects people a lot more then sharing an [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].

Sex surely is an imporant aspect, but in my experience, it is by far not the most powerfull "glue" in that sense. Talking and opening up "your soul" is.

Click to expand...

There are other forms of intimacy, sure. And they can cloud judgement at the wrong time. But do you seriously mean to suggest that talking about those things can cause people to look past gross irresponsibility and abusive behavior more than sex can?

DogmaHunter said:

To give you an idea: I was in a deep and meaningfull relationship with my current partner for almost 2 years (2,5 - 3 if you also count the period of flirting / casual dating) before we shared a bed together. By that time, I dare say that we already had a much deeper connection then a lot of "abstinance" people by the time they get married in a hurry.

Click to expand...

And I don't advocate marrying sooner than that, for the record. There are "abstinence people" that abstain for that long, and get married, and have children, and stay married. I'm friends with them. My parents didn't take quite that long to get married IIRC, but they're still together, and they have said that waiting helped their relationship.

My youth group read this book together when I was
in youth group and I thought it was so lame.

I started the book but never finished it.

Jon Osterman said:

When she is 21 it is entirely her own business of course. I will be kicking her out of the house anyway when she turns 18. I want her to stand on her own 2 feet and not rely on her parents. Hopefully she will be off to college/university so can stay in student accommodation for the first year. At the moment, she is very much like me, rather studious and introverted. Though that could change during puberty I think we have given her a good foundation to make her life choices. So I disagree with your "she probably will".

Click to expand...

Parents the world over are chuckling.

-CryptoLutheran

DogmaHunter said:

I don't think that making decisions that you are supposed to live with for a lifetime,

Click to expand...

As an atheist, on what grounds do you base your assumption that marriage is supposed to last a lifetime?

Newtheran said:

As an atheist, on what grounds do you base your assumption that marriage is supposed to last a lifetime?

Click to expand...

What an odd question to ask.

Sabertooth said:

So, the opposite of "not dating" is "try before you buy," then? Can't dating be chaste?

Click to expand...

Most people seem to think not, today. I managed, back in the day, once I got serious about God, asking him to bring me only this person (list of traits, from critical to simple desires), and I'm married several decades, so....

I got every single one of those items, except one unimportant one (not about character).

Harris recently announced he and his wife are separating. It's sad when any marriage ends and I think there was probably a lot of human pressure on their relationship. I know plenty of people who were miltantly pro-courting who are now divorced. I always thought there were lots of problems in a young single person telling hordes of other young singles how to be and stay married when they haven't even really talked to members of the other sex much less understood how to be a friend or be in a relationship with them. I do think it's possible to interact and yes date members of the opposite sex in a healthy and God honoring way. If you sincerely want to honor God in any relationship in your life, you will.

I am currently single in this life never have had a girlfriend before and find my life is fine where I am at.

mina said:

Harris recently announced he and his wife are separating.

Click to expand...

essentialsaltes said:

LINK

Click to expand...

I wish them all the best.

I like how transparent he is being throughout his journey.

I also commend them for remaining friends in spite of it all. Perhaps they can be models of how to split without it being a War of the Roses melodrama.

One of the reasons splitting up has such negative connotations is because it's often not handled maturely. Just as marriage requires a certain level of maturity, splitting up probably requires at least double that. An amicable parting can make all the difference in the world, and it certainly makes things easier on the kids.

mina said:

I always thought there were lots of problems in a young single person telling hordes of other young singles how to be and stay married when they haven't even really talked to members of the other sex much less understood how to be a friend or be in a relationship with them.

Click to expand...

Religious celibates lecturing the rest of us on how we should conduct our marriages and sex lives is anything but new.

I know people disagree, but I resigned aspiring to be chaste. Sure, it probably was still a real option in the old days where more people could get partnered up sooner but today it has become an oppressive catch-22 for more of us. Either get married (with less odds and options of finding someone who will be guaranteed to commit AND fit your attractiveness ideals) or give up on dating together/be involuntarily celibate.

essentialsaltes said:

Further update:

Joshua Harris now says “I Am Not a Christian”

My heart is full of gratitude. I wish you could see all the messages people sent me after the announcement of my divorce. They are expressions of love though they are saddened or even strongly disapprove of the decision.⁣⁣
⁣⁣
I am learning that no group has the market cornered on grace. This week I’ve received grace from Christians, atheists, evangelicals, exvangelicals, straight people, LGBTQ people, and everyone in-between. Of course there have also been strong words of rebuke from religious people. While not always pleasant, I know they are seeking to love me. (There have also been spiteful, hateful comments that angered and hurt me.)⁣⁣
⁣⁣
The information that was left out of our announcement is that I have undergone a massive shift in regard to my faith in Jesus. The popular phrase for this is “deconstruction,” the biblical phrase is “falling away.” By all the measurements that I have for defining a Christian, I am not a Christian. Many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this, but I’m not there now.⁣⁣

Click to expand...

Interesting!

Often, I think that our respective religions / belief systems are just rungs on a ladder, or steps on a staircase, leading onward to something far greater that we can't even comprehend right now. They have value, of course, if only for a season.

I read a similar article pointed to from Facebook. Unfortunately when I go back to Facebook I don't see the same things, so I don't have a pointer. My reaction was that he was unwilling to face up to the things that had led him to his false conclusions. In that article he hadn't yet said he wasn't a Christian. But it was clear that he was more willing to leave Christianity than to consider that he might have misunderstood Jesus' intention, and to look at what approach to Scripture led him to that mistake.

He made a very telling observation. If he abandoned traditional conservative Christianity, what guarnatee did he have the 100 years from now people wouldn't find even his new understanding wrong? He seemed to think that Christianity was useless if it didn't stay the same forever.

I'm sorry, but even the Catholic church isn't the same now as 100 years ago, in the 16th Cent, in Augustine's time, or in the early church.

To me, it's a real danger if Christians have such an unrealistic concept of human knowledge that when they realize they've made a mistake they leave Christianity rather than trying to see why they made the mistake and fix it.

There were some actual theological problems behind purity culture, starting with the fact that purity was the Pharisees' ideal, and not Jesus'. Jesus' ideal was obedience. They're not the same thing, and they have different pastoral consequences. By simply giving up, he's avoiding facing the mistakes that he made.