Question....

[HuntingMan]

That's a terrible reason to get married. But then again, the Bible isn't lacking in terrible advice.

Interesting.
So its a terrible idea to COMMIT if one is having casual sex.

And when a child is born and the womans life is forever changed ? What do you say then ?
Is it terrible for the man to marry her then ?

 

[Kai]

Interesting.
So its a terrible idea to COMMIT if one is having casual sex.

One can COMMIT to another without being MARRIED. That's the entire idea of dating: two persons commit to a relationship with each other and no one else. You just can't comprehend that because in ancient Hebrew times dating didn't exist: one's parents arranged both the relationship and the marriage. That's what all the old laws were based on.

And when a child is born and the womans life is forever changed ? What do you say then ?
Is it terrible for the man to marry her then ?

You're the only one adding this spurious dimension of a child being born, but so what? Even if that man doesn't marry her, in countries like the US he is still obligated by law to support the child financially. He also has visitation rights. Quit acting like you don't know these things. If he doesn't pay child support, the mother can take him to court and have him put in jail, and vice-versa.

 

[rppearso]

I just know some folks that say "ya never know what might happen, you may break up/get divorced" and while in a way that could be true I think it's kinda sad. Marriages take work and save adultery, abuse(and I believe that's of spouse or children, mental as well as physical) or abandonment you should be able to work through anything.

And to your last comment about at least ya hope it's the best time of your life...well I can't speak for Armistead's wife...but I know I'm worth waiting for so a man will have to work for this and prove he loves and is committed to me (by making me his legal bride)before I'll lay down for him.

Laying down with someone does not nessicarily translate to "best time of his life", dont get me wrong im glad you dont sleep around but it is very important to talk about specific sex acts before getting married. In fact I think church pre-marriage counseling sheets should have a list of sex acts each person fills out that way one person can say oh your not willing to do "that" well I guess its back to dating. The real sticky area is if you are a victim of a bait and switch (which can lead to a divorce but not before alot of time wasted, paper work and pain) that could happen if you were sleeping together before the marriage or not.

 

[HuntingMan]

One can COMMIT to another without being MARRIED.

Sex was given for marriage..all else is SIN !

but so what?

'nuff said.

Seems to be the attitude by a few here.

again
Sex was given for marriage..all else is SIN !

 

[Kai]

Sex was given for marriage..all else is SIN !

again
Sex was given for marriage..all else is SIN !

*sigh* Tipton, you're so predictable. This isn't the place to be debating the sinfulness of nonmarital sex. You'll have to wait until that thread reopens (and I'm more than willing to debate with you about it), because that topic wasn't at all the topic of your last few posts, and it wasn't what I was responding about--and both you and Questionist and I know it.

 

[HuntingMan]

*sigh* Tipton, you're so predictable. This isn't the place to be debating the sinfulness of nonmarital sex. You'll have to wait until that thread reopens (and I'm more than willing to debate with you about it), because that topic wasn't at all the topic of your last few posts, and it wasn't what I was responding about.

Give me a break.
Your exact words were;

One can COMMIT to another without being MARRIED.

So what was the context there, poster ?
Were we to actually believe that you werent talking about being in a relationship, sex included, without marriage?

Please give EXACT detail about what was meant by your statement above because if sex werent included, then there was no reason for you to even respond to me with that point.
I couldnt care less if a man lives with 80 women as long as they arent having sex that is reserved for marriage. What type of 'commitment' would there be in such a case ? What would be the point ? We're not talking about rental agreements or car leases here.

So what, exactly, is the intent of being committed without being MARRIED in your quote above ?

 

[HuntingMan]

Actually, dont bother. Its very easy to see what was being responded to, thus the context is quite obviously about sex outside marriage.

Originally Posted by HuntingMan
Interesting.
So its a terrible idea to COMMIT if one is having casual sex.

Originally Posted by Kai
One can COMMIT to another without being MARRIED.

Fairly obvious that you WERE responding in such a manner as to say that marriage isnt required for a sexual relationship.
If you didnt feel that THAT was an appropriate topic here, then YOU should not have responded to me and if you felt the rules were being broken you should have reported my post.

I know Ive said this half a dozen times at this point, Kai, but I keep hoping to read one of your posts thats NOT trying to bait me into another argument with you.
This was, again, nothing but baiting on your part.

I just going to pretend that you do not exist here from this point out.
I have yet to actually see a post from you that is genuinely contributing something to the discussion and not simply trying to bait me personally.
Find someone else to be obsessed with...

Have a nice life...

 

[Kai]

So what, exactly, is the intent of being committed without being MARRIED in your quote above ?

Here's the part you left out of your quote which gave the context:

That's the entire idea of dating: two persons commit to a relationship with each other and no one else. You just can't comprehend that because in ancient Hebrew times dating didn't exist: one's parents arranged both the relationship and the marriage. That's what all the old laws were based on.

Sex isn't mentioned because it doesn't need to be: it's irrelevant as to whether one can be committed to another. A couple can be committed to one another regardless of whether they are having sex or not before marriage. Even if they are an abstinent couple, the reason they marry is because they have been committed to one another during all those months/years of dating.

I don't know why you place all this stress on the word "commit." It's all just semantics in the end. It's not even biblical, so unless you can show me word in the OT or NT translated as to "commit" and that it is shown meaning sex within marriage alone, it doesn't matter.

Fairly obvious that you WERE responding in such a manner as to say that marriage isnt required for a sexual relationship.
If you didnt feel that THAT was an appropriate topic here, then YOU should not have responded to me and if you felt the rules were being broken you should have reported my post.

Easy with the caps. Your assumption is wrong, as your spin on the word "to commit" was the subject. It's not at all apparent that "commitment" means "sex within marriage" and you certainly didn't define it that way in the beginning. It's not fair for you to antagonize me for not seeing that when it can't even be shown biblically to be so with the ancient Hebrews.

I know Ive said this half a dozen times at this point, Kai, but I keep hoping to read one of your posts thats NOT trying to bait me into another argument with you.
This was, again, nothing but baiting on your part.

Well, you're wrong. I already said I don't want to argue here off-topic subjects like the sinfulness of nonmarital sex, which was what I felt I was being baited into.

 

[MissLady]

Laying down with someone does not nessicarily translate to "best time of his life", dont get me wrong im glad you dont sleep around but it is very important to talk about specific sex acts before getting married. In fact I think church pre-marriage counseling sheets should have a list of sex acts each person fills out that way one person can say oh your not willing to do "that" well I guess its back to dating. The real sticky area is if you are a victim of a bait and switch (which can lead to a divorce but not before alot of time wasted, paper work and pain) that could happen if you were sleeping together before the marriage or not.

I plan on talking to my future husband before marriage. There are lot of things besides sex that could be deal breakers for me, so I plan on talking about lots of things to see if a guy is the one for me or not. I'm a virgin not an idiot. And just because I haven't had sex yet and won't till after I'm legally wed doesn't mean I haven't thought about it. I could (won't but could) tell you right now what I'm willing and not willing to try.

 

[MissLady]

I'm gonna jump into the debate between Kai and HuntingMan...Yes a person can be committed. Heck you NEED to be committed in order to get married. On another site a man said he thought couples should write their own vows when they marry cause the traditional vows "love, honor, cherish, in sickness and health...etc." should actually be considered ENGAGEMENT vows cause if you can't expect someone to do all those things before you get married then how can you expect them to do them once you are married? I agree (with the concept but I think I will stick with saying the tradional vows if the Lord gives me a hubby) BUT for me part of showing your committment would be following me in following God's will to save the sex for the actual marriage.

 

[Kai]

BUT for me part of showing your committment would be following me in following God's will to save the sex for the actual marriage.

That's absolutely fine and I bet Tipton would agree with you--all I was saying was that saving sex until marriage is not all that commitment is. There has to be some commitment to each other before the couple marries, otherwise why date, and why decide to spend the rest of their lives together if their devotion to one another is supposed to magically appear only after they marry?

 

[HuntingMan]

I'm gonna jump into the debate between Kai and HuntingMan...Yes a person can be committed. Heck you NEED to be committed in order to get married. On another site a man said he thought couples should write their own vows when they marry cause the traditional vows "love, honor, cherish, in sickness and health...etc." should actually be considered ENGAGEMENT vows cause if you can't expect someone to do all those things before you get married then how can you expect them to do them once you are married? I agree (with the concept but I think I will stick with saying the tradional vows if the Lord gives me a hubby) BUT for me part of showing your committment would be following me in following God's will to save the sex for the actual marriage.

Absolutely
Marriage is the public expression of that commitment.

One has to wonder about the intregrity of someone who is 'committed' enough to have sex with a woman, but not 'committed' enough to lock things in by promising himself in marriage to her.

Additionally, if a person wont go the extra step of making it a 'marriage, then they need to stop pretending like they are married by having sex, which is reserved FOR marriage .

 

[MissLady]

That's absolutely fine and I bet Tipton would agree with you--all I was saying was that saving sex until marriage is not all that commitment is. There has to be some commitment to each other before the couple marries, otherwise why date, and why decide to spend the rest of their lives together if their devotion to one another is supposed to magically appear only after they marry?

Exactly!

Absolutely
Marriage is the public expression of that commitment.

One has to wonder about the intregrity of someone who is 'committed' enough to have sex with a woman, but not 'committed' enough to lock things in by promising himself in marriage to her.

Additionally, if a person wont go the extra step of making it a 'marriage, then they need to stop pretending like they are married by having sex, which is reserved FOR marriage .

One also has to wonder about the intregrity of a woman who does not want to truly settled down and be married but is willing to be "committed" and give the goods to a man. It's not all about men being pigs. There are women out there who are aggressive and pursue the physical side of the relationship when sometimes the man wants to chill. Frankly I'm not even willing to kiss a man till he proves he's truly interested in only me and not playing the field or just wanting to get the goods.

 

[Leah]

One also has to wonder about the intregrity of a woman who does not want to truly settled down and be married but is willing to be "committed" and give the goods to a man. It's not all about men being pigs. There are women out there who are aggressive and pursue the physical side of the relationship when sometimes the man wants to chill. Frankly I'm not even willing to kiss a man till he proves he's truly interested in only me and not playing the field or just wanting to get the goods.

Word!

And I also agree with Kai's post, too!

 

[rppearso]

I plan on talking to my future husband before marriage. There are lot of things besides sex that could be deal breakers for me, so I plan on talking about lots of things to see if a guy is the one for me or not. I'm a virgin not an idiot. And just because I haven't had sex yet and won't till after I'm legally wed doesn't mean I haven't thought about it. I could (won't but could) tell you right now what I'm willing and not willing to try.

I actually think sexual things (likes/dislikes) should be talked about within the first week or so of dating (or whatever deal breakers you have) to ensure your not spending time building something that will not go anywhere or eventually fail.

 

[Trashionista]

How do you "feel married"? Either you ARE or you're NOT.

Not everyone feels the need to make a public committment or get that slip of paper. Its common.

Personally, I wouldn't stay with someone who didn't want to marry me. And it's not really the sex issue. It's the fact that we'd be looking for two very different things [assuming I wanted to be married, and the other person didn't.]

 

[dayhiker]

Thanks for the great read. I find this an interesting topic.

From my read of history and cultures across the world, it seems to me that marriage is viewed in many different ways. No way is the correct way as best as I can make out. Mordern antropology hasn't been able to come up with a defination that works for all marraiges.

I've also talked with 3 couples that "did marriage right." But two of them knew they had made a mistake on their honeymoon and one found serious sexual issues as their marraige went along. So I don't see that anyone one way garentees that a marriage will work.

As to sex and marriage, I'd not marry a lady who wanted to wait till marriage. I did that the 1st time around, not interested in walking that path again. I remember that I was taught that if one had sex before marriage that one wouldn't develope a good relationship when I was young. That can happen and will most likely happen if the couple is taught that sex makes them evil people till they are marriaged. But relationships is a fuction of communication and doing things together and including God in that relationship.

dayhiker

 

[theQuestionist]

Interesting.
So its a terrible idea to COMMIT if one is having casual sex.

And when a child is born and the womans life is forever changed ? What do you say then ?
Is it terrible for the man to marry her then ?

No, that is a misrepresentation of the claim of the Bible. The original claim is that if one is filled with lust, it is less consequential to find a girl to marry, than it is to have unmarried sex. I find that to be absurd.

Forming a commitment does not necessarily entail marriage. "Marriage" is a subset of "commitment". One might form a commitment and then discover that the other person is ultimately incompatible with them (emotionally, physically, whatever). If they had immediately gotten married, they would have just doubled their troubles.

 

[Kai]

No, that is a misrepresentation of the claim of the Bible. The original claim is that if one is filled with lust, it is less consequential to find a girl to marry, than it is to have unmarried sex. I find that to be absurd.

It's just bad advice. The right thing Paul should have said would be, "Resist lust and fight it off," not slake it through marriage and have a marriage based entirely on lust, lust being always a vice, not a virtue. "Then, once lust is subdued, if you want to marry, begin to seek out a mate who is compatible with you in many, many more areas than just sex." It is highly doubtful any woman would want to marry a man only because he wants to have sex and needs to have an outlet for his lust. Wanting to assuage lust through marriage is just as bad as wanting to assuage lust through unmarried sex.

 

[HuntingMan]

No, that is a misrepresentation of the claim of the Bible.

Im sorry, where did that post say anything about representing scripture with that particular query ?
*I* asked you the question.

The original claim is that if one is filled with lust, it is less consequential to find a girl to marry, than it is to have unmarried sex. I find that to be absurd.

I find it absurd that a person would claim to be 'committed' yet be unwilling to put it in writing (or even a verbal promise to be husband and wife), yet expect pleasures that God intended FOR marriage.

Forming a commitment does not necessarily entail marriage.

Where two people having sex is concerned Gods word shows that it is to be the case, otherwise it is fornication.

"Marriage" is a subset of "commitment".

By mans defintion, not Gods...the One who created the institution, and sex for it.
In Gods word marriage IS the commitment...as vows and oaths ALWAYS are.

One might form a commitment and then discover that the other person is ultimately incompatible with them (emotionally, physically, whatever).

yeah, it happens all the time...we call it 'divorce'.

If they had immediately gotten married, they would have just doubled their troubles.

proving just what Ive said...that without that COMMITMENT its just too easy to walk out unhindered.
Meanwhile the woman is the one getting stuck with the 5 kids in most cases.
Convenient for the man, no doubt, he just moves on to the next unsuspecting victim.