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

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

Watchman1 said:
Choosing a life partner is much more involved than just looking at the person's past life. As I have said, a woman (or man) can be as pure and holy as the driven snow, yet can be unequally yoked. It all has to do with calling, personality, theology, and whether they actually like each other.

If a prospective life partner is rejected just because of their past, then that does show a lack of discernment about the shed blood of Christ on the Cross and what it achieved for the repentant believer. It demonstrates the belief that many religious people have, that Christ is a complete Saviour only for those who have been brought up in the church, having Christian parents, and no promiscuity in their past. Anyone who has had a deeply sinful past is made to carry the brand for the rest of their lives, even though Jesus died to take way their penalty for their sinful past, and God has totally justified them. For me, a genuinely repentant believer, who shows the fruit of repentance through a total transformation of heart and conduct, is so totally justified by God that they have no past and therefore right out of range of any church or person to have the right to exercise judgment on them.

The bottom line for choosing a life partner is: "Can I live with this person for the rest of my life?" The person's past is immaterial. If we are going to point the finger at another believer, then there are three pointing back at us.

Can you actually answer a question?

The Liturgist · Nov 24, 2023

Paidiske said:
- Not being able to trust that a man could love her
- treating the relationship as transactional rather than mutually loving
- not being able to negotiate, articulate or hold appropriate boundaries

Those come to mind for a start.

My general comment on the last couple of pages or so is that I'm not calling preferences into question; I'm calling into question the attitude of contempt I see coming through so clearly in many posts.

Exactly, there is a horrible lack of charity evident, particularly considering the circumstances.

RDKirk · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
So to get this straight, you are saying the sexually promiscuous cannot be rejected for their past promiscuity under any circumstance if they have repented? This is your claim, right?

I was talking to a pastor once about ten years ago. He was talking about a problem he'd run into in that regard. He related:

"If we have a prospective member who confesses to being a repentant gambler saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would be glad to accept him.

"Or if we have brother who confesses to be a repentant porn addict saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would be glad to accept him.

"But if we have a brother who confesses to being a repentant homosexual saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would say, 'You have to solve that problem first...then you can join us.'"

RDKirk · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Can you actually answer a question?

That wasn't a question, that was bait.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

RDKirk said:
That wasn't a question, that was bait.

It was a question, one which he will not answer.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

The Liturgist said:
Obviously Christian forgiveness must apply to both men and women who engage in this type of behavior, but it is the case that women are more likely to have been exploited than to have engaged in exploitation, simply because of how the human trafficking industry works, as a criminal enterprise. The fact is that young women, often underaged, as well as underage boys, are often victims of what is slavery, and such poor youths comprise a substantial percentage of those engaged in prostitution in the world.

But for those who do engage in prostitution willingly, if they repent they should be forgiven equally, whether male or female.

It's not about forgiving the willing prostitute, it's about whether or not a man should be shamed for rejecting her. Do you believe the burden is on the person in marriage who did the right thing, to marry those who did the wrong thing?

Would you accept this line of reasoning for any other circumstance besides female promiscuity?

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

RDKirk said:
I was talking to a pastor once about ten years ago. He was talking about a problem he'd run into in that regard. He related:

"If we have a prospective member who confesses to being a repentant gambler saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would be glad to accept him.

"Or if we have brother who confesses to be a repentant inappropriate content addict saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would be glad to accept him.

"But if we have a brother who confesses to being a repentant homosexual saying, 'I'm struggling with my addiction. I've slipped and I may slip again...I'll need help to get through this,' the congregation would say, 'You have to solve that problem first...then you can join us.'"

I'm not advocating getting rid of people from Churches, all I'm suggesting is that we are free to reject people for marriage whose pasts we cannot accept.

The Liturgist · Nov 24, 2023

Divide said:
She can turn tricks but she cant flip burgers? That is inane. No one is stuck in the sex trade. They wrok SW because they want to.

That’s completely false! Most people in prostitution have been coerced and are being raped by their pimps; a minority do engage in it willingly, but only a minority. You should listen to @Paidiske on this point.

Human trafficking used to be called “white slavery” but this term was replaced as it was misleading and racially insensitive, in that a great many black people are also victims of human trafficking, but with that information…you know parents used to sell their children out to panderers, and in some countries still do? And also that many children are abducted and forced to engage in various activities that children should not do? And still other youths are seduced by a pimp, who will get them addicted to a drug or otherwise gain coercive control over them?

As I said earlier in the thread, most prostitutes did not wake up one morning and say “I want to be a prostitute.”

The Liturgist · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
It's not about forgiving the willing prostitute, it's about whether or not a man should be shamed for rejecting her. Do you believe the burden is on the person in marriage who did the right thing, to marry those who did the wrong thing?

Would you accept this line of reasoning for any other circumstance besides female promiscuity?

I am only talking about forgiving the minority of prostitutes who became prostitutes willingly.

RDKirk · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
So to get this straight, you are saying the sexually promiscuous cannot be rejected for their past promiscuity under any circumstance if they have repented? This is your claim, right?

First, I'll point out that you--who demands an answer to your question--never acknowledged my question of your interpretation of Matthew 18:21-35.

But, okay, since you say your question is honest and not bait...I'll bite.

With an understanding of Matthew 18:21-35, a Christians cannot continue to hold another of Christ's servants to account for an offense that Christ, the master of us both, has forgiven. In Jesus' parable, the money owned by the lesser servant to the greater servant was part of the money owned by the greater servant to the master. When the master forgave the greater servant, that eliminated the debt of the lesser servant as well. That's because all offenses are actually ultimately against Him, not against us, therefore what He has forgiven is completely forgiven all the way down the line.

Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 18:21-35 that the unforgiveness of others for offenses that are actually against Him (why else is promiscuity a sin, except that He has said so?) is itself a damnable sin.

Therefore, the repentant sexually promiscuous cannot be rejected for their past promiscuity under any circumstance if they have repented. There may be other issues involved, and having an STD might be one of them if that's the case. Psychological trauma and other issues might be involved, and might be too difficult for a prospective mate to handle.

But for Christians, rejection for the moral sin is not permitted if they have repented.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

The Liturgist said:
I am only talking about forgiving the minority of prostitutes who became prostitutes willingly.

And I'm only talking about rejecting them for marriage. There is no obligation to accept them in that context and if the rejection is on the basis of their past, it is a consequence of their own actions.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

RDKirk said:
First, I'll point out that you--who demands an answer to your question--never acknowledged my question of your interpretation of Matthew 18:21-35.

But, okay, since you say your question is honest and not bait...I'll bite.

With an understanding of Matthew 18:21-35, a Christians cannot continue to hold another of Christ's servants to account for an offense that Christ, the master of us both, has forgiven. In Jesus' parable, the money owned by the lesser servant to the greater servant was part of the money owned by the greater servant to the master. When the master forgave the greater servant, that eliminated the debt of the lesser servant as well. That's because all offenses are actually ultimately against Him, not against us, therefore what He has forgiven is completely forgiven.

Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 18:21-35 that the unforgiveness of others for offenses that are actually against Him (why else is promiscuity a sin, except that He has said so?) is itself a damnable sin.

Therefore, the repentant sexually promiscuous cannot be rejected for their past promiscuity under any circumstance if they have repented. There may be other issues involved, and having an STD might be one of them if that's the case. Psychological trauma and other issues might be involved, and might be too difficult for a prospective mate to handle.

But for Christians, rejection for the moral sin is not permitted if they have repented.

Just so we're clear, this is within the context of marriage right? If a man likes a woman but this is his only problem with her, he is obligated to marry her?

The Liturgist · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
And I'm only talking about rejecting them for marriage. There is no obligation to accept them in that context and if the rejection is on the basis of their past, it is a consequence of their own actions.

I am merely saying that having been a prostitute should not automatically disqualify someone as a candidate for marriage; the Orthodox Church does allow its members to marry even if one of them was at one time a prostitute. Indeed I know of no canonical impediments in Eastern Orthodoxy to marrying someone who had been a willing prostitute, but repented.

I do have a copy of the Rudder of St. Nicodemus (the most authoritative book that contains the canonical guidance of the Eastern Orthodox Church, hence its name) at the ready if there is something you think I am missing…

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

The Liturgist said:
I am merely saying that having been a prostitute should not automatically disqualify someone as a candidate for marriage; the Orthodox Church does allow its members to marry even if one of them was at one time a prostitute. Indeed I know of no canonical impediments in Eastern Orthodoxy to marrying someone who had been a willing prostitute, but repented.

And I'm not suggesting that a man should never under any circumstance marry said woman. All I'm suggesting is that he's free to reject her and there should be no shaming him for this decision.

Is this unreasonable?

RDKirk · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Just so we're clear, this is within the context of marriage right? If a man likes a woman but this is his only problem with her, he is obligated to marry her?

If he plans to marry, and that's truly the only problem with her, that is not a reason for rejection acceptable to Christ. That is unrighteousness. He can choose to go to hell for refusing to forgive what Christ has forgiven. Jesus was pretty clear that was the option for refusing to forgive what Christ has forgiven.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

RDKirk said:
If he plans to marry, and that's truly the only problem with her, that is not a reason for rejection acceptable to Christ. That is unrighteousness. He can choose to go to hell for refusing to forgive what Christ has forgiven.

Alright. Is this universal, regardless of the sin and gender? That is if we want to marry someone but they have done something in the past that was a sin but have repented, they cannot be rejected for it?

Presbyterian Continuist · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Can you actually answer a question?

Probably not when you have already determined the answer for it yourself.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Nov 24, 2023

Watchman1 said:
Probably not when you have already determined the answer for it yourself.

My opinion doesn't prohibit you from having yours.

The Liturgist · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
And I'm not suggesting that a man should never under any circumstance marry said woman. All I'm suggesting is that he's free to reject her and there should be no shaming him for this decision.

Is this unreasonable?

No.

RDKirk · Nov 24, 2023

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Alright. Is this universal, regardless of the sin and gender? That is if we want to marry someone but they have done something in the past that was a sin but have repented, they cannot be rejected for it?

Oh, so you're going to give that bait a little bit of a jerk to set the hook?

I've said all that is necessary, in simple and direct assertions, to display my point of view.

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

Dissident

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Dissident

Dissident

Dissident

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Dissident

Dissident

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Dissident

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Dissident

Senior Veteran

Dissident

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Similar threads