This Is My Fireproof Thread

[mkgal1]

I was lecturing? I thought I was empathizing.

I'm not for women "sticking it out" or women divorcing (or men for that matter). My mom "stuck it out" and I believe she did it in her own strength (weakness) not out of obedience. Staying married is not necessarily a virtue, commitment and obedience to God are.

You don't get a special halo or bragging rights for putting up with a crappy marriage, doing that doesn't make you "SuperSpouse". You don't suddenly become the adult in the relationship. Again,you are either obedient to Christ or you are not.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
(Eph 2:8-10)

I think this actually needed to be said, because as I read along....it seemed that the opposite was being said.

 

[I Art Laughing]

No. You didn't answer the question as to why it's okay for you to have those options but you judged me for having the same (called it lack of commitment and lack of love).

As I clearly stated before I have one choice (as do you). Obedience to Christ or rebellion. All the rest of the hand waving going on here is just obfuscating that single choice.

Also, the "Fireproof" thread is where you came to "support your sisters"? Really? What are you supporting them with? What did you get out of the film? How did it help you to be a better wife? Did it inspire you to submit to your spouse unconditionally as Caleb did?

Are you encouraging them to commit to their marriages the way Caleb did to his? Are you encouraging obedience to Christ? Are you edifying them to unconditional love?

Of course you don't need to answer me. But when I think of support these are the kinds of things I would consider as being support. Is it necessarily rude to challenge each other?

 

[Chaplain David]

Well, I guess I'm going to have to see the movie. I didn't know it was a movie until about half way through the thread LOL. Aside from the discussion, sometime tame and at other times quite passionate, is it a good movie to see? There's a lot of junk out there and you never quite know unless folks you know give you good reviews.

 

[Psalm63]

His response was rude (although I noted he at least apologized later in the thread). Two wrongs do not make a right. You have no idea what it is like to be his wife or what he is like IRL because of some post on an internet debate thread. He has never treated me like I need to "answer to him". Have you ever seen me posting complaints about my husband on here or any of the women's forums? No? There's a reason why not - because I am enjoying my marriage. I see other women complaining about always arguing in their marriage, their husbands not wanting sex with them, their husbands using porn, cheating, being verbally and/or physically abusive, lazy and not helping with (insert responsibility here) etc... yeah I don't have any of those issues to deal with. The best I could do right now is to say I find it annoying when he doesn't wipe his crumbs off the counter and I don't get why he likes to argue on the internet. I don't want to come off like I am trying to start an argument or be offensive, because I am not. I enjoy your posts and you seem like a nice person most of the time. I get why you reacted the way you did. The reason I am responding is because only I want to make it known that my husband, in spite of what his internet presence might sometimes suggest, is NOT a "blankety blank".

I'm relieved to hear that. Didn't really follow this whole discussion, but I just wanted to say that Luther has been polite and respectful in his exchanges with me in the past. I just hope he isn't negatively influenced by the prevailing winds around here

 

[Psalm63]

Well, I guess I'm going to have to see the movie. I didn't know it was a movie until about half way through the thread LOL. Aside from the discussion, sometime tame and at other times quite passionate, is it a good movie to see? There's a lot of junk out there and you never quite know unless folks you know give you good reviews.

It frustrated me. Too unrealistic. NO children, and the husband drops the porn and starts trying to be loving and godly the minute he "gets saved".

Pie in the sky.

 

[JaneFW]

I was lecturing? I thought I was empathizing.

I'm not for women "sticking it out" or women divorcing (or men for that matter). My mom "stuck it out" and I believe she did it in her own strength (weakness) not out of obedience. Staying married is not necessarily a virtue, commitment and obedience to God are.

You don't get a special halo or bragging rights for putting up with a crappy marriage, doing that doesn't make you "SuperSpouse". You don't suddenly become the adult in the relationship. Again,you are either obedient to Christ or you are not.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
(Eph 2:8-10)

Where did I say I - or anyone else - is a "superspose"? It's amazing how things get made up around here.

So, what if obedience means staying with your spouse, regardless of how crappy your marriage is? It's not about happiness ya know, or "feelings", it's about obedience. If God says not to divorce other than adultery, then "crappiness" doesn't come into that equation, does it?

 

[hijklmnop]

Someone in this thread said plainly, no, I will not commit to being married to my husband no matter what......and I dont expect he do so to me


Tell me, how is that a wits different from unbelievers views? How it is not celebratory of serial monogamy in place of holy matrimony?

That someone was me.

As a believer I know that there is Biblical allowance in cases of adultery. I stated quite plainly that the only reason I don't commit to "till death no matter what" is because I would leave if the infidelity started up again, nor do I expect him to stay if I do the same (cheat on him). Either of us CAN if we feel led to (so far I have), but it's not a MUST as a believer. That doesn't make me an unbeliever. *rolls eyes* And where did I say anything about wanting "serial monogamy"? That was a leap of logic inserted by yourself, not me.

 

[c1ners]

His response was rude (although I noted he at least apologized later in the thread). Two wrongs do not make a right. You have no idea what it is like to be his wife or what he is like IRL because of some post on an internet debate thread. He has never treated me like I need to "answer to him". Have you ever seen me posting complaints about my husband on here or any of the women's forums? No? There's a reason why not - because I am enjoying my marriage. I see other women complaining about always arguing in their marriage, their husbands not wanting sex with them, their husbands using porn, cheating, being verbally and/or physically abusive, lazy and not helping with (insert responsibility here) etc... yeah I don't have any of those issues to deal with. The best I could do right now is to say I find it annoying when he doesn't wipe his crumbs off the counter and I don't get why he likes to argue on the internet. I don't want to come off like I am trying to start an argument or be offensive, because I am not. I enjoy your posts and you seem like a nice person most of the time. I get why you reacted the way you did. The reason I am responding is because only I want to make it known that my husband, in spite of what his internet presence might sometimes suggest, is NOT a "blankety blank".

I agree, my post was a little hasty and not very nice. Because of this I have edited it. However, pushing people's patience until they can take it no longer it is not a quality in a man that I favor much.

 

[Luther073082]

I'm relieved to hear that. Didn't really follow this whole discussion, but I just wanted to say that Luther has been polite and respectful in his exchanges with me in the past. I just hope he isn't negatively influenced by the prevailing winds around here

Nah I don't like to get nasty with people just because they are wrong.

 

[hijklmnop]

At times I feel like I have a "hostage" collar on. Attached to it is 15 lbs of C-4. When I go about my day and come into inevitable temptation I am faced with the possibility of it going off. The enemy is right their to let me know I'm going to fail, that being tempted alone is failure and that I'm ALL alone. As I'm averting my eyes, or leaving the place, or turning off the T.V. (fleeing temptation) I struggle with "the line", have I crossed it? Did I just commit "adultery"? Was there a part of me that wanted to see that?

BOOOM!

It doesn't "go off" unless you give in to the temptation and actually sin. Being tempted isn't a sin. Jesus was tempted. But he didn't cave. So don't cave! LOL Also, being tempted isn't some special man-affliction. Every human is tempted...we all have our particular weaknesses.

In contrast to Christ, in the Christian home there exists a new concept. The concept has nothing to do with grace or faithfulness. It has nothing to do with commitment or a realization of our sin nature. It doesn't acknowledge God's provision for sin, the blood of Jesus Christ. Instead it wants to expose, judge, condemn, and separate. It says that you had better never even let on that you are struggling or you are on the fast track to a divorce. You had better lie, obfuscate, hide and pretend like you are perfect and the sin that you may struggle with daily will never furl your brow. If you let on.

BOOOM!

Hmm... I personally disagree. I think that exposure of sin is a good and necessary and Biblical thing. Therefore, lying, hiding and pretending, all forms of dishonesty, are not "musts" or even good options...ever. They allow sin to flourish and cripple intimacy. Admitting to being tempted or struggling...nothing wrong with that IMO...as long as you're fighting...fleeing from temptation, being honest, and not caving!

Divorce. Women have their finger on the detonator. It's a twitchy finger. Do they feel sufficiently loved themselves today? Where you checking that woman out (the one with the nice legs and short skirt)? Are you secretly viewing porn on the computer? All things that strike at the HEART of her security as a wife. Is my husband committed to me? Given what goes on all around us, how can she be sure? Will he leave when she gets older, fatter, saggier? Isn't being tempted prima facia evidence that he will leave? So they cling to that detonator. I have to be able to hurt him if he hurts me.

Mutually assured condemnation.

Why do you specify women? Anyone who wants a divorce can get one. Anyone whose spouse has been unfaithful, IMO, has the Biblical right to get one without condemnation. It's not about hurting someone back...it's about not allowing someone to sin repeatedly without consequences, to repeatedly hurt me and expect to continue. Like it or not...fearful as it might make you because you doubt your own ability to control yourself....divorce is a logical and Biblical consequence of adultery for the protection of the faithful spouse. Don't feel threatened by that...feel motivated! I firmly believe that you don't need to feel you're living life with an explosive collar around your neck. Jesus can set you free from any addiction, walk you out of any temptation and restore any relationship!

So let's take stock again. The man generally feels like he'd better keep his mouth shut and his eyes on the ceiling. He's not sure how well grace works because he is walking a tight-rope with the person who is closest to him. She's watching him for any sign of a slip because he might commit the "unpardonable sin" which will make the "Good News" null and void. Both of them are literally in bondage. He's hiding while she is waiting in the wings with condemnation and forgiveness.

You mean the man feels he'd better be faithful? Guess what: I feel like I'd better be faithful to my h too...I feel like I'd better flee from temptation too. This is not a one-way deal. It's mutual! And hiding will do nothing but make everything WORSE! I know that firsthand.

The question is, is she committed or isn't she? Does the blood of Christ apply or doesn't it?

This is where I get confused. You question "her" commitment and ability to forgive, even "her" love in another post...then admit that if God leads you out of a marriage where infidelity/abuse is present, you will do so. You allow yourself the same "out" but then judge women for having it.

To me, it feels like a very slippery highly insecure slope. Without commitment how can there be security? What value is limited commitment?

IMO unconditional commitment is naive and not even entirely Biblical. I don't judge anyone for choosing to stay no matter what but I don't think anyone has the right to judge someone who doesn't, or admits that they wouldn't. Even you acknowledge the possibility that you'd leave in case of infidelity or abuse. So how can you then judge others like me who admit they might do the same? Also, IME, unconditional commitment can enable sin because it eliminates some serious, life-changing and Biblical consequences....ones which enabled my h to finally be willing to do whatever it took to change. Even God doesn't cling to someone who turns their back on Him. Even He is a jealous God who, if we choose "other gods" before Him, will turn His face from us! He allows relationships to end if the other so chooses. If my h chooses others and not me, the relationship may end. If I choose others and not him, the relationship may end. This does NOT make my marriage worthless or degrade my love for him or hope that we will last for the rest of our lives. I'm sorry you THINK that, but it's not my reality.

 

[technofox]

That someone was me.

As a believer I know that there is Biblical allowance in cases of adultery. I stated quite plainly that the only reason I don't commit to "till death no matter what" is because would love if the infidelity started up again, nor do I expect him to stay if I do the same (cheat on him). Either of us CAN if we feel led to (so far I have), but it's not a MUST as a believer. That doesn't make me an unbeliever. *rolls eyes* And where did I say anything about wanting "serial monogamy"? That was a leap of logic inserted by yourself, not me.

Dreamer,

Forgive me if I an misinterpretating what you are saying, but I think I agree with you. I divorced due to an abusive wife who basically broken the relationship to the point where indeed I could still love her, but not remain married to her due to her attitude and behavior (i.e. she was unloving). I do still pray for her from time to time, because I believe her heart is in a dark place and in need of healing. Either way I will not ever marry her again, because of the abuse; I can forgive her for it, but I still struggle with the anger and sometimes hatred of how she treated me.

I personally believe divorce should only be a last resort, when all else (e.g. counseling, romantic getaways, etc) fails. Saving a marriage, including ones like mine, are worth it, but only if the spouse is willing to make it work. My ex-wife was not interested in saving the marriage, but only receiving the benefits of marriage without the relationship (e.g. money, insurance, etc).

 

[hijklmnop]

Dreamer,

Forgive me if I an misinterpretating what you are saying, but I think I agree with you. I divorced due to an abusive wife who basically broken the relationship to the point where indeed I could still love her, but not remain married to her due to her attitude and behavior (i.e. she was unloving). I do still pray for her from time to time, because I believe her heart is in a dark place and in need of healing. Either way I will not ever marry her again, because of the abuse; I can forgive her for it, but I still struggle with the anger and sometimes hatred of how she treated me.

I personally believe divorce should only be a last resort, when all else (e.g. counseling, romantic getaways, etc) fails. Saving a marriage, including ones like mine, are worth it, but only if the spouse is willing to make it work. My ex-wife was not interested in saving the marriage, but only receiving the benefits of marriage without the relationship (e.g. money, insurance, etc).

Exactly. And I'm sorry for what you have gone through. I hope your pain will ease more with time and that both of you will find healing even if you never reconcile.

 

[Psalm63]

Nah I don't like to get nasty with people just because they are wrong.

This is actually a very important point!

Because as long as your wife does not buy into the deadly marriage theology where she is allowed no will of her own, there WILL be times of disagreement and conflict. And if she does buy into that theology, someday your children will be teenagers and there WILL be times of disagreement.

I have seen people who used to be able to be respectful about disagreement changed by hanging around this forum. Now they are dismissive, mocking, character assassinate, put down others, outrageously twist someone else's comment.... They've been "discipled" in bullying and I'd hate to see that happen to you.

If you have a disagreement with your wife and you think she is WRONG, I am going to take your word for it that you don't "get nasty".

How about showing us how that is done by your role model on here?

 

[Romanseight2005]

It doesn't "go off" unless you give in to the temptation and actually sin. Being tempted isn't a sin. Jesus was tempted. But he didn't cave. So don't cave! LOL Also, being tempted isn't some special man-affliction. Every human is tempted...we all have our particular weaknesses.



Hmm... I personally disagree. I think that exposure of sin is a good and necessary and Biblical thing. Therefore, lying, hiding and pretending, all forms of dishonesty, are not "musts" or even good options...ever. They allow sin to flourish and cripple intimacy. Admitting to being tempted or struggling...nothing wrong with that IMO...as long as you're fighting...fleeing from temptation, being honest, and not caving!



Why do you specify women? Anyone who wants a divorce can get one. Anyone whose spouse has been unfaithful, IMO, has the Biblical right to get one without condemnation. It's not about hurting someone back...it's about not allowing someone to sin repeatedly without consequences, to repeatedly hurt me and expect to continue. Like it or not...fearful as it might make you because you doubt your own ability to control yourself....divorce is a logical and Biblical consequence of adultery for the protection of the faithful spouse. Don't feel threatened by that...feel motivated! I firmly believe that you don't need to feel you're living life with an explosive collar around your neck. Jesus can set you free from any addiction, walk you out of any temptation and restore any relationship!



You mean the man feels he'd better be faithful? Guess what: I feel like I'd better be faithful to my h too...I feel like I'd better flee from temptation too. This is not a one-way deal. It's mutual! And hiding will do nothing but make everything WORSE! I know that firsthand.



This is where I get confused. You question "her" commitment and ability to forgive, even "her" love in another post...then admit that if God leads you out of a marriage where infidelity/abuse is present, you will do so. You allow yourself the same "out" but then judge women for having it.



IMO unconditional commitment is naive and not even entirely Biblical. I don't judge anyone for choosing to stay no matter what but I don't think anyone has the right to judge someone who doesn't, or admits that they wouldn't. Even you acknowledge the possibility that you'd leave in case of infidelity or abuse. So how can you then judge others like me who admit they might do the same? Also, IME, unconditional commitment can enable sin because it eliminates some serious, life-changing and Biblical consequences....ones which enabled my h to finally be willing to do whatever it took to change. Even God doesn't cling to someone who turns their back on Him. Even He is a jealous God who, if we choose "other gods" before Him, will turn His face from us! He allows relationships to end if the other so chooses. If my h chooses others and not me, the relationship may end. If I choose others and not him, the relationship may end. This does NOT make my marriage worthless or degrade my love for him or hope that we will last for the rest of our lives. I'm sorry you THINK that, but it's not my reality.

Right. we are not expecting one thing from ourselves, and another from our spouses. It's the same rules for both. The way that some people are trying to get around that is by making up different standards for each gender, and that's what gets my goat. The reasoning seems to say that women don't care about sex, or can't be tempted sexually, which is a flat out lie. Then men aren't tempted emotionally, which is another lie. No one gets to make apples apples for one person, but then make apples into oranges, for another person.

 

[I Art Laughing]

dreamer1982

We are talking at cross purposes. I don't look at the Bible as a rule book, I'm not a strict legalist and I'm gathering that you aren't either. I don't believe the Bible is an optional guidebook, and after reading your posts, it doesn't seem like you think that either. Where I stand is that everything comes down to my relationship with Christ and abiding in him. If I am His sheep I hear His voice and He fills me with His Spirit and leads me into all truth (which won't contradict the Bible). When the Bible gives "me" an exception what it is really doing is giving the Holy Spirit an "out" so that He can lead me into a direction that would not normally be acceptable. In this case divorce. I don't hold within me the ability to decide to leave my wife (for any reason) AND maintain my abiding relationship within Him unless God tells me to leave. (If He tells me to leave and I don't I am similarly disappointing Him).

The reason I specifically point to the man wearing the collar and the woman holding the detonator is because that what was clearly demonstrated in "Fireproof". In "Fireproof" she pushed the button over his pornography while he didn't over her affair. I'm not remotely suggesting that women never struggle with lust or adultery. What I am suggesting is that there is a long established paradigm of the cheating husband and the woman "Standing by Her Man". There is also the way (that I know first hand) that the enemy parlays my failures in my thought life into convincing me that I've failed my wife as a husband (I know he does it with women too, but I ain't one). He takes a stray thought (just temptation) and he convinces the husband that he is an oathbreaker and that his wife will be crushed and start looking for the exit. He takes a stray thought that isn't immediately taken captive (which is sin) and he condemn the husband as an adulterer (for all I know he does this with the wife too). From what I've seen (and what was demonstrated in "Fireproof") the husband isn't crushed by the wife's infidelity the way the wife is. They actually show him COMPETING WITH IT! (The doctor and the wedding bands.) Caleb said "She's my wife, I have a head start." *gag*

What woman here would COMPETE with their husbands adulterous thoughts and CALL THAT GODLY? Katherine even said in the film that she wouldn't compete with pornography *yay*

Finally, dreamer1982, I don't think we disagree in substance or principle. I'm thinking that it is gender perceptive. I don't think that wife's are second class citizens in a marriage and I don't see you thinking the reverse. We do disagree on how the culture perceives, reflects and exploits those gender perceptions/differences, but in the end that is really a relatively small thing. I am very disappointed in the movie "Fireproof" and I do think that it was "aimed" at men, making me question the motive of a women who is arguing with men in its support.

I am sorry that I was rude in our disagreement. I am sorry that I was pushy and goading. Please accept my apologies, I will try to do better in the future.


BTW, I would like to know what the women here did think about the scene between Caleb and the Doctor where it seemed that Caleb was competing with the object of his wife's adultery? Should a spouse compete with the adulterous thoughts, actions or relationships? Is this something YOU would do? Can you envision God having you compete in this manner? I would appreciate any insights.

 

[Romanseight2005]

I guess that the way that I pecieved Fireproof, was that the woman had already given up on the marriage. That's why she wasn't apologizing for it. She didn't have her heart softened until the very end of the movie, so we can only assume that an apology came after that. That's the difference between Caleb and Katherine. Caleb had parents who had done the Love Dare, katherine didn't. So, Caleb had a father who took steps with his son, and prayed for the marriage.

Perhaps we could all write to Sherwood Church and ask them if they would be interested in doing a prequil. You know, show us what it looked like when Caleb's mother did the Love Dare?

 

[JaneFW]

What I am suggesting is that there is a long established paradigm of the cheating husband and the woman "Standing by Her Man". There is also the way (that I know first hand) that the enemy parlays my failures in my thought life into convincing me that I've failed my wife as a husband (I know he does it with women too, but I ain't one). He takes a stray thought (just temptation) and he convinces the husband that he is an oathbreaker and that his wife will be crushed and start looking for the exit. He takes a stray thought that isn't immediately taken captive (which is sin) and he condemn the husband as an adulterer (for all I know he does this with the wife too). From what I've seen (and what was demonstrated in "Fireproof") the husband isn't crushed by the wife's infidelity the way the wife is. They actually show him COMPETING WITH IT!

Color me confused. If there is a long established paradigm of a husband cheating and his wife standing by him, why would you think that "the wife will be crushed and start looking for the exit?" That's the exact opposite.

What woman here would COMPETE with their husbands adulterous thoughts and CALL THAT GODLY? Katherine even said in the film that she wouldn't compete with pornography *yay*

Some women have thought that they could, and I think it's quite a natural thing for a betrayed spouse (either gender) to want to know how they measure up to the person their spouse betrayed them with. They quite often wonder if the other person was richer/prettier/slimmer/taller/hunkier etc. than they are. Most people are looking for clues. Some wonder how they "failed". When it come to porn - it's impossible to compete.

I am very disappointed in the movie "Fireproof" and I do think that it was "aimed" at men, making me question the motive of a women who is arguing with men in its support.

I question the motives of men who call it pornography.

BTW, I would like to know what the women here did think about the scene between Caleb and the Doctor where it seemed that Caleb was competing with the object of his wife's adultery? Should a spouse compete with the adulterous thoughts, actions or relationships? Is this something YOU would do? Is it Godly to compete? I would appreciate any insights.

It's at least two years since I saw this movie. How did Caleb compete with the doctor?

Let me also just say that Caleb's wife was no more "adulterous" than Caleb was himself. Neither of them had sex with anybody, and I am aware of the scripture about "adultery of the heart" but nobody actually had sex with anyone else. I want to clarify that before it turns into that Caleb's wife had adulterous sex and Caleb was the poor innocent victim. They were both behaving sinfully, not just one.

I don't see how you can compete with adulterous thoughts.

The questions are hard because I have so much emotion tied up in this. I would have to really think about it.

 

[JaneFW]

One of the things that I think causes confusion with those whose spouses are using porn is when others - including other Christians - who don't understand the whole addiction process tend to think (and talk) in terms of blame. So, it is has been the case quite often on this forum that a person will place blame on, for instance, the wife and assume that she is not meeting the sexual needs of her spouse, or she is unattractive to her spouse because she is overweight or does not dress sexy or wear make-up or do her hair nice - and this is why her husband looks at porn. Truly, these things have been said right here on this forum. When a woman has uncovered her husband's porn use, she is vulnerable and can be easily persuaded that she has "failed" and that she hasn't tried hard enough, or doesn't look good enough/slim enough etc., and in that early phase, she may well knock herself out trying to be everything that her husband is pursuing in porn. However, this is never going to work. For one thing, no normal, regular person can be a character depicted in any kind of fantasy - whether it's porn, or a novel, or a movie. And that's pretty obvious to me now, and should have been right away because I know the difference between fantasy and reality but, duh, oh well. At that first shock, though, I can well understand any spouse wanting to fill the perceived gap by being their spouse's "fantasy". But .. it's not possible. And .. who wants to be a person in a porn movie? I mean, by definition, that is an immoral person who is having sex with multiple strangers. That's not love - it's prostitution. Why would any married, Christian woman want to be a prostitute? (Let's not get into the subject of why women become prostitutes please.) I sure don't. I don't want to have sex with multiple partners and otherwise debase myself so that my husband can get his jollies, and I absolutely wouldn't, so that's out of the question anyway.

I have heard of people who do go this route. Men and women. To keep a debased partner, they lower to that level. Ugh. If a spouse demanded that of me, I would leave, and in fact I left a marriage very like that. At that point, I don't believe that that is love. I think it's unhealthy obsession.

 

[Psalm63]

BTW, I would like to know what the women here did think about the scene between Caleb and the Doctor where it seemed that Caleb was competing with the object of his wife's adultery? Should a spouse compete with the adulterous thoughts, actions or relationships? Is this something YOU would do? Can you envision God having you compete in this manner? I would appreciate any insights.

I can't remember all the details of the movie. Must have been 2009 when I saw it. As I recall, Caleb lost his wife's heart through his porn use, anger, disrespect, selfishness (his boat was more important than her parents health needs). He had the big "come to know Jesus" experience, realized his dirtbag ways, took off the poop-colored glasses he'd been viewing his wife through, realized he didn't want to lose his marriage, and proceeded to try to win his wife's heart back, and succeeded.

Could you be looking at the movie through some hurtful experience of your own and perhaps projecting too much into it?

BTW, I appreciated reading your apology to dreamer. Good role model!

 

[Chaplain David]

It frustrated me. Too unrealistic. NO children, and the husband drops the porn and starts trying to be loving and godly the minute he "gets saved".

Pie in the sky.

Thanks. I believe in miracles but for most us mortals, things like this take a little time IMO. Appreciate the response.