Sex during separation

[dad]

Moved from another area of forum... The Op was this.

" Is dating wrong?

If a marriage breaks up, is dating wrong? I don't think so. Maybe someone does?"

...The example used was a man that was forsaken by his wife for no good reason. The wife did have a history of adultery. But the reason for the breakup is not known.

The dumped man is dating. So far we have looked at the Hebrew root meanings of fornication, and adultery, and saw that these do not apply. They apply to cheating, and this example marriage is already dead and gone. And also to harlots, but doesn't apply either.

We had seen the verse from the sermon on the mount, about how it will work in the kingdom raised. (even looking on a woman to lust is adultery..) But no one obviously can make a case that we are to obey that here and now. Otherwise no one will succeed.

So, is dating wrong, after the marriage ends, for the innocent party?


I say no. Anyone think the bible disagrees? If so, come with the verses.

If you don't like heat in debate, maybe look elsewhere.

 

[allhart]

Dating is courting to marriage or proceeding marriage,so to consider dating is considering to marry again. To consider marriage again is to understand that what ever you had in the first marriage you are bring into the next and you should end one relationship before you start another..,..

 

[dad]

Dating is courting to marriage or proceeding marriage,so to consider dating is considering to marry again.

I assume you mean that your opinion is that according to the bible, dating is to be seen in that light. Ok. That is another topic maybe. For example we have almost all the fathers having had other women than their wife, right or wrong in your book. Then, we could look at exceptions. For example, were Christians not told to obey their masters? Use your imagination..

"In a Roman household sex was in plentiful supply. Except, so it seems, between the actual married couples. The existence of slaves in the house naturally mean that, particularly the men, but also the women (although with the risk of pregnancy and disgrace), had access to sex whenever they so required.
"
http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-household.html

But back to the topic.

To consider marriage again is to understand that what ever you had in the first marriage you are bring into the next and you should end one relationship before you start another..,..

The poor hubby in the example used here did not end anything, the wife did. So what is it you think he is supposed to bring?

And, one could envision an adult male dating and dating, looking for a new wife, but dying before ever finding one! According to your criteria, apparently looking is fine. OK.

 

[allhart]

I assume you mean that your opinion is that according to the bible, dating is to be seen in that light. Ok. That is another topic maybe. For example we have almost all the fathers having had other women than their wife, right or wrong in your book. Then, we could look at exceptions. For example, were Christians not told to obey their masters? Use your imagination..

"In a Roman household sex was in plentiful supply. Except, so it seems, between the actual married couples. The existence of slaves in the house naturally mean that, particularly the men, but also the women (although with the risk of pregnancy and disgrace), had access to sex whenever they so required.
"
http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-household.html

But back to the topic.


The poor hubby in the example used here did not end anything, the wife did. So what is it you think he is supposed to bring?

And, one could envision an adult male dating and dating, looking for a new wife, but dying before ever finding one! According to your criteria, apparently looking is fine. OK.

Romans practiced a secular way of life. Christians are known by their fruit,also the criteria to be a Christian is to be Christ like and for what you proceed to acquire doesn't come with approval or with Gods graces....

 

[allhart]

People don't take marriage serious and they live by no covenant. Only to what feels good or strokes their ego. Loving my wife is the hardest thing I have ever committed myself to,however I love her not just when it feels good.
Loving my wife in a covenant is like loving a blood relative. You love them no matter if they are bad or good. If it hurts or not and to leave my wife would be to leave her to violence. When we betrayed God did he find a greater love some where else and give up on you.

 

[KRAZYCAT]

From another point of view. It is OK to have friends, go out but keep it simple. You don't want to have anything to regret if the separation is temporary. This would be a tough time, so spend it with friends and family or at church and keep busy.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

From another point of view. It is OK to have friends, go out but keep it simple. You don't want to have anything to regret if the separation is temporary. This would be a tough time, so spend it with friends and family or at church and keep busy.

I cannot see why there would even be any question of getting back together as he would just be setting himself up for more emotional trauma in the future. And why would he ever regret dating or having sex with someone while separated, that does not remotely seem logical.

 

[max1120]

Dad, I do not see anything wrong with your desire to "date" or have sex at this point. You are also correct about sex in the Roman household. Slaves were used sexually by males and also by females. Romans had a very healthy view of sex.

 

[KRAZYCAT]

Well, separation implies there is a chance of reconciliation. If they know it is over, and they can't get over it, then why not just divorce. And get on with life. In the Bible separation is for a break, fasting and prayer and remorse. NOT for making things more complicated, as outside sex and excitement would DO. It takes time to heal, that is not something one can rush, even if they try. He should not make it more complicated.

 

[max1120]

Krazycat, Perhaps, but from what I am reading from Dad's post was he is not planing on reconciliation in the future. I am not speaking for Dad so if I am wrong please let me know. I agree take his time. But if he finds he wants to move on more quickly and date..maybe without strings..go for it!

 

[dad]

Romans practiced a secular way of life. Christians are known by their fruit,also the criteria to be a Christian is to be Christ like and for what you proceed to acquire doesn't come with approval or with Gods graces....

Yes, but Romans had Christian slaves! Were they noot to submit? Would that mean they are guilty of adultery if the owner was married?
I think you are suggesting here, that the seperated man in the example ought to cross his legs and look at the tree tops till hell freezes over?

 

[dad]

People don't take marriage serious and they live by no covenant. Only to what feels good or strokes their ego. Loving my wife is the hardest thing I have ever committed myself to,however I love her not just when it feels good.

So did the man in the example. So? She dumped him anyhow. Move on here, and lrt's look at the situation being discussed.

Loving my wife in a covenant is like loving a blood relative. You love them no matter if they are bad or good. If it hurts or not and to leave my wife would be to leave her to violence. When we betrayed God did he find a greater love some where else and give up on you.

Leave her to violence?? No idea what you are talking about. In the example the wife left anyhow. Try to focus.

 

[dad]

I cannot see why there would even be any question of getting back together as he would just be setting himself up for more emotional trauma in the future. And why would he ever regret dating or having sex with someone while separated, that does not remotely seem logical.

Good questions. Apparently many Christians are under some notion that the bible wants innocent parties that got dumped to suffer.

 

[dad]

From another point of view. It is OK to have friends, go out but keep it simple. You don't want to have anything to regret if the separation is temporary. This would be a tough time, so spend it with friends and family or at church and keep busy.

In the example here, it is over, finito, kaput. The wife, say was withholding sex, and insisting on physical separation, violating all previously agreed upon arrangements.

Men do not just need to go to a building, or work hard all the time. They need a woman. Some here seem to think that the innocent party should go without their needs indefinitely. maybe they should also fast till the whole thing got resolved!?

Seems like a popular misconceptionn that can't be supported by the bible to me.

 

[dad]

Dad, I do not see anything wrong with your desire to "date" or have sex at this point. You are also correct about sex in the Roman household. Slaves were used sexually by males and also by females. Romans had a very healthy view of sex.

Actually, it was not personal here, just an example, to explore a few points. I takt that as one vote that the man in the exampple can date away.

 

[dad]

Well, separation implies there is a chance of reconciliation. If they know it is over, and they can't get over it, then why not just divorce. And get on with life. In the Bible separation is for a break, fasting and prayer and remorse. NOT for making things more complicated, as outside sex and excitement would DO. It takes time to heal, that is not something one can rush, even if they try. He should not make it more complicated.

Outside of WHAT????! Outside of nothing, in thiis example. While healing, the man might still have wine, and food, and go on with life. What better way of healing! Why not let wounds heal, and enjoy life? Let the wife that dumped, and adulterated, and witheld do the fasting! -And the doing without sex for the rest of her life!!

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Good questions. Apparently many Christians are under some notion that the bible wants innocent parties that got dumped to suffer.

I have heard some Christians say that couples should stay married regardless, that is the worst thing that can happen to those that are emotionally or physically abused and it sounds like your friend has been emotionally abused.

 

[allhart]

Yes, but Romans had Christian slaves! Were they noot to submit? Would that mean they are guilty of adultery if the owner was married?
I think you are suggesting here, that the seperated man in the example ought to cross his legs and look at the tree tops till hell freezes over?

I think that Gods wisdom rules out your logic in your intent to have sexual per miscue relations on slaves. Give me a break!!!

 

[dad]

I have heard some Christians say that couples should stay married regardless, that is the worst thing that can happen to those that are emotionally or physically abused and it sounds like your friend has been emotionally abused.

Not friend, example in the thread. The complication in this example, and I think I never mentioned it over in this area, was that there was kid(s). Also, since the guy got dumped, there was no option to stay together.

The issue that some Christians seem hung up on, is that, legally, they may still be married.

But the same type of people claim that divorce for any reason other than adultery is wrong. ( I agree, but there was no choice in the example) Therefore I suppose they look at 95% of people on a Christian dating site as adulterers.

While divorce is always a result of sin, in this case, even though wrong, one party is onnocent, and never wanted to separate.

 

[dad]

I think that Gods wisdom rules out your logic in your intent to have sexual per miscue relations on slaves. Give me a break!!!

I have no such intent. Neither would the man in the example. Why make stuff up?
The example of exceptions was given, and the bible does tell slaves to obey their masters. So how would you falt the slaves of the day that were ordered to come across?

By the way, if you claim God's wisdom on some issue, pony up the bible support. Opinions are only opinions, after all.