BF-GF relationships sinful?

[LovebirdsFlying]

MOD HAT ON​

Hello, just a friendly reminder that this is the Singles forum, and only unmarried members should be posting. There's been a cleanup removing posts made in error. If you're single but your post has been removed, it responded to one of those. Please continue your discussion.
​

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[TheApostleJohn]

Neither are Pringles.

Pringles are not part of the Biblical model for nourishing one's self and are therefore sinful.

Similarly, toilets are not part of the Biblical model for discharging ones bodily fluids and are thus also sinful. Christians can only use plumbing technology (or anything else) that comes from the 1st Century AD at the latest.

 

[Rajni]

After all, they are not in the Bible, and are not part of the Biblical model for finding a marriage partner.

I believe that they have no place in Christian life.

In my opinion, there should be no commitment until marriage is proposed and decided. The BF-GF relationship is just pointless, and is a false commitment. It wastes time if you're not actively seeking a marriage partner. God never meant for a couple to not know where their relationship was headed.

Therefore, I believe that dating should begin with the man stating his intentions (getting to know the woman and assessing their compatibility for the purpose of marriage), so there will be no guessing games, and there should be no exclusivity or conveyance of affection until engagement.

This is definitely not a popular view, so I welcome any comments!

Yes, but wasn't that part of the culture back then -- arranged
marriages or some such?

-

 

[Citanul]

The "wo" in woman stands for womb.

I'm not so sure about that. The two words appear to have different origins.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/woman?s=t
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/womb?s=t

 

[Greg J.]

Not only is one's view dependent on how one interprets Scripture, but even more dependent on what a BF-GF "relationship" means to you. There's as many definitions as there are boyfriends + girlfriends.

Since sexuality is often involved in the struggle to understand God's point of view, I will just say that even though Scripture doesn't say "Thou shalt not have premarital sexual encounters," Scripture demonstrates that this is God's command for us.

There isn't going to be a single set of rules for what actions please or displease God in a single male-single female relationship, because what matters is their heart attitude about it and related matters. (I'm not suggesting there is a heart attitude that makes premarital sex OK.)

This subject has been examined closely for a long time, although I think there is room for more good books. I can recommend anything written by Dr. Henry Cloud & Dr. John Townsend. They've written many books together, some of which are on various kinds of relationships. One of their books, Boundaries in Dating, is good.

 

[Elliewaves]

Do what you are comfortable with. .... just don't try to impose it on every other Christian or claim that anyone is ungodly for not doing it your way. I think it's pretty impossible to approach romantic relationships or arrangements the way they were done in the Bible by today's infrastructure. Even if you court by today's uber Christian culture it's no where near what it was actually like in a Jewish community during biblical times.

 

[Cearbhall]

It has always been understood that women are a part of Mankind. Therefore, the same laws also apply to women. The "wo" in woman stands for womb. Womb Man. Woman was taken from Man. Eve was created from Adam's rib.

Source?

Also, why would that particular etymology matter, seeing as English didn't exist even when the most recent books of the Bible were written?

 

[ViaCrucis]

After all, they are not in the Bible, and are not part of the Biblical model for finding a marriage partner.

The Bible doesn't have a model for finding a marriage partner. The Bible was written in different cultural contexts, most of the Old Testament was written reflecting a bronze age near eastern culture, while the New Testament was written in a Greco-Roman culture--finding a spouse would have been very different in both. And how one went about finding a spouse would have been very different in both cultures.

So there is no "biblical model" for finding a marriage partner. This isn't the sort of thing that the Bible is for, the Bible is Holy Scripture, by which we hear and receive Jesus Christ and His Gospel in the Church--it's not an all-comprehensive guide for how to conduct our lives, and if we try to make it that it's going to result in all kinds of silliness and absurdity. The Bible also doesn't provide us with instructions on how to dress, or what toppings to put on our pizza, how to order a coffee at your local coffee shop, or how to change a tire. It's simply not what the Bible is for.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Goodbook]

Sorry i dont recommend the boundaries books as they are confusing for someone who dont know what boundaries really are. It doesnt tell you and its wishy washy psychology mixed with scripture.
Just say no. Treat your brothers and sisters in christ how God treats you. Flee youthful lusts.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Source?

Also, why would that particular etymology matter, seeing as English didn't exist even when the most recent books of the Bible were written?

A quick Google search also indicates that the etymology for "woman" actually comes from an archaic form basically meaning "wife-man". "Wif" and "wer" are the archaic terms for female and male respectively, with "man" as the generic term for human being. Wifman became woman.

So the previous etymology given is a false one anyway.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

I think I read, on here actually, that he basically recanted his whole book or something.

People who are in the business of trying to promote "biblical models" for living typically promote things that just don't work, end in failure, and really don't do anything productive. Because it's usually trying to use the Bible for things it's just not supposed to be used for, and that results in what is essentially trying to recreate cultural standards ripped from any meaningful cultural context of the time and place, and forced into our alien culture. It doesn't work because of course it's not going to work. Trying to build modern romantic relationships upon models of bronze age people isn't going to work in the 21st century because we aren't those people, the way we think and operate is alien to how they thought and operated--and in a lot of ways that's a good thing because there was nothing particularly more sacred about their culture and their culture had just as many problems--if not more--than ours. Where women are functionally little more than chattel, the property of the father until becoming the property of the husband, that's not a particularly good way of doing things, but that was part of the cultural backdrop of the times.

Scripture doesn't serve the purpose of trying to make us live like people 2-3 thousand years ago from the Eastern Mediterranean, that's not why the Church has Scripture; the Church has Scripture because we believe that it functions as the word of God pointing us to Jesus, the Bible is about Jesus, not how to put on our trousers in the morning.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Goodbook]

Actually there are guidelines in The bible about realtionships, and one of the big ones is do not be unequally yoked. Dont be friends with the world as friendship with the world is enmity with God. Bad company corrupts good character.

People just want to ignore what God says, basically thats what it comes down to.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Actually there are guidelines in The bible about realtionships, and one of the big ones is do not be unequally yoked.

Read that passage, you'll notice that the Apostle isn't talking about romantic relationships at all. The statement to not be unequally yoked says nothing about romantic relationships, but considering the temple language he employs probably is more concerned with the Christians in Corinth participating in activities that would compromise their faith by engaging in implicit or explicit idol worship. Chances are if dating someone could result in you worshiping other gods or participating in Pagan rites such as offering sacrifices to idols or the like--then absolutely, probably don't date that person. But I'm going to go ahead and say that's probably not going to be a terribly large concern for most Christians in the predominantly Christian west.

There are certainly valid reasons to probably reconsider dating someone from outside the faith, but this passage really isn't what that's about. Valid reasons would mostly center around having shared values, having common ground in a shared faith, and long term--marriage--how to function as a family. But these same concerns are important even when both persons are Christians, for example two Christians from different denominations/traditions, say a Catholic and a Baptist. Even more of an issue when children come into the picture.

As a Lutheran if I ever have children I'm going to want them baptized. That's not just an issue if my future spouse is a non-Christian, that could be a significant issue if my future spouse is a Christian from a tradition that practices credobaptism.

So of course there are valid concerns here--but those concerns stem from a more practical vantage point rather than because there is some explicit biblical prohibition.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[John Davidson]

After all, they are not in the Bible,

Neither is cell phones, cars, Facebook, and pizza but most people still find use for those.

 

[John Davidson]

Therefore, I believe that dating should begin with the man stating his intentions (getting to know the woman and assessing their compatibility for the purpose of marriage)

Isn't that what being boyfriend and girlfriend is? Isn't it a form of dating and getting to know each other further with the possibility of marriage?

 

[John Davidson]

After all, they are not in the Bible, and are not part of the Biblical model for finding a marriage partner.

I believe that they have no place in Christian life.

In my opinion, there should be no commitment until marriage is proposed and decided. The BF-GF relationship is just pointless, and is a false commitment. It wastes time if you're not actively seeking a marriage partner. God never meant for a couple to not know where their relationship was headed.

Therefore, I believe that dating should begin with the man stating his intentions (getting to know the woman and assessing their compatibility for the purpose of marriage), so there will be no guessing games, and there should be no exclusivity or conveyance of affection until engagement.

This is definitely not a popular view, so I welcome any comments!

Being boyfriend/girlfriend gives you the opportunity to get to know each other without the further commitment of marriage.

Why do you take issue with that?

 

[com7fy8]

do not be unequally yoked

I would think you would not want to get very involved with someone who does not help you to grow in Jesus. You would want to share with various others who help us grow and mature in how God has us loving, and this would not mean relating only with some one person who is not even a Christian. We can get charmed, though, by someone's smart talking, how they act and tone their voices, then suppose we are in real love with the person. But we might really be in love with what we want to use the person to get. People of the world have learned the "you can use me" act > talking smart so we think we can trust someone to give us what we want, acting charming so we feel they will be nice about it.

Bad company corrupts good character.

But, then, our good example can help others to become how Jesus wants. So, with each person, stay with good example. And do not accept less than others joining us >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Simply, offer good example and do not go along with what isn't. And someone else will choose if he or she wants to stay with us. I think part of our Christian example, in seeking a marriage person, is we share with various other Christians who are obviously helping us be corrected by God > Hebrews 12:4-11 > and encourage anyone to join us; and do not isolate ourselves in dating someone who will not share in our family prayer and scripture study and helping each other to gain God's correction.

Isn't that what being boyfriend and girlfriend is? Isn't it a form of dating and getting to know each other further with the possibility of marriage?

I think we do well to share with ones of interest to us, but while in family sharing with other Christians, since God our Father is about family, not isolation relating with only one other and a favorite person whom we don't even really know > "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46)

It seems a number of daters turned married find out they did not really get to know each other . . . often, I think, while they isolated themselves mainly only with one another, and have not first found out with God how to truly get to know someone and how to relate > Ephesians 4:2-3 with Ephesians 4:31- Ephesians 5:2.

Also, I think there is such a thing as a Christian celibate covenant companionship correction committed couple who help each other and others to learn to relate with God and learn how to relate in His love with any and all people.

 

[Goodbook]

the whole point of being engaged, is so others know you are serious about marriage, and that the other person is 'taken' or 'espoused'. You can break an engagement at any time.

Why there has to be a run around before that I don't know. I always feel that its unhealthy for people to get so attached just to one other person when there's no reason to be exclusive. Also its a disservice to the woman especially, who maybe strung along, hoping for marriage but its just not gonna happen.

Its far better to be free and have lots of girlfriends/boyfriends ie. brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[com7fy8]

In my case, Good Book, I have a lady friend; and it looks like we are not going to get married. But if we do things loosely, then there could be one or more women who might want to try to get me to marry them, when in fact I have no interest in them. She helps me learn how to have compassion for any and all people, and I think that only in a close involvement we can learn how to relate more and more maturely, but then use this in all our relating. Others who have shown interest in me have not been my helpers, like this. I think it can be more efficient to be exclusive, than to get into discussions, now and then, with interested persons about how they compare with her and therefore I am not interested. Ones have a way of wanting to know "why".

Being exclusive can help others not to deceive their attention, but while they know we give our attention to them generously. Before I got involved with her, I made sure with a male friend of hers, about if he had something for her. And I have encouraged her to keep on loving and helping the ones she already knew before I came along; and they know they can use me to help them So, she has added me to how she can love and help people. And we partner in reaching people who have problems. But our outreach has taken us to different churches and ministries while we still share with her family and neighbors.

Even while we may have different activities and outreaches, I find it is good to have one steady person for sharing intimately and helping each other get more real with God. And sexual stuff is not necessarily a love thing, though it can be a humble part of deeper intimate sharing. And I find how God does not drive someone crazy for what one does not really need.

I did not plan this, but I have been discovering this If we do what God has us doing, we can discover His good which is His reason better than what any amount of my theorizing was telling me

 

[Greg J.]

... its wishy washy psychology mixed with scripture.
Just say no. ...

What is "wishy washy" about it to you? I have always found everything they write to be psychologically spot on.