I must admit that some of the recent threads have brought sadness for the morality of our friends. There have been threads of “Friends with Benefits”, having sex while the divorce is being processed, and even having sex with other’s while there is no separation or divorce being processed. With the exception of one, I’ve steered clear from these and have not interjected my opinions and Christian beliefs.

From the Religious peeps out there, I’d love to hear your views on dating, sex, and the whole FWB proposition. If you are Religious and living and choosing one of these lifestyles, I’d also love to hear what your views are on that. I fully realize and appreciate that we all fall short in the glory of God, so with that understanding, let’s not make this a thread of persecution but rather one of fellowship, each learning from the other.

God Bless

"I must admit that some of the recent threads have brought sadness for the morality of our friends."

Well, you are sure interjecting your religious beliefs now, LH and in a very disrespectful and highly judgemental way. How dare you question MY morality based on YOUR religious values? I do not happen to hold YOUR interpretation on the morality of sex outside of marriage (premarital sex), but I can assure you that you will never meet a more moral person than me.

You believe in God in your way and I will in mine. We will let God be the judge of who is and is not moral. Whatever makes you think that everyone who comes to this site is a Christian?

Bad form, LH. I'm very disappointed in you. Frankly, I don't care to know what the religious peeps think about these issues. That is their business, not mine. Such matters are between them and God and should not be for public consumption.

Gee, CheckUrHeart, I don't remember LH ever specifically pointing you out, as you are not the only one who has been talking about these subjects lately. Hmmm...someone a little defensive???<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
Guess what, LH has just as much right to post about his beliefs and ideas as you do.

Did you happen to notice he respectfully did NOT post this on your thread? He was simply wishing to start a conversation about it with people who DO share similar beliefs to him. Why? Because he wasn't trying to start a board war, just a thread on an issue of interest to him

Maybe you ought to Check Ur Heart.... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

(((Check)))

First off, let me say that asking for Christians or other religious people to come to a thread and post their beliefs is not Judging you, interjecting my beliefs on you, or IMVHO disrespectful in any way.

“””How dare you question MY morality based on YOUR religious values?”””

Check, I didn’t question your morality. I did try to pose this thread in a non-threatening manner to get some Christian perspectives on these real world issues. Morals are defined as “principles of right and wrong in behavior”. So the question becomes, where do draw your rights and wrongs from. As Christians we are called to form those from the divinely written Word of God. Furthermore, we are called to read and follow the Word, not just the parts we like or don’t like. Again, that’s why in this thread I was asking for the perspective of Christians or other religious people. If you are religious, I would love to hear why these things are “moral” or in-line with “religious” values?

I will say one other thing and that’s about questioning or judgment as other may call it. Again, I say this without knowing your religious perspective, be as a Christian I am called to make a difference in this world. I am called to prophecy the Word of God and if someone were claiming to be in the word but living and recruiting people from the word then again I am called to question, judge, or whatever you wish to call it.

“””I do not happen to hold YOUR interpretation on the morality of sex outside of marriage (premarital sex), but I can assure you that you will never meet a more moral person than me.”””

The interpretation that I hold is based on scripture and my understanding there of. Have I fallen short of the word in my life? Many times…. If you are a Christian and have a different interpretation of the scripture, I’d love to discuss it and frankly I’d love to hear under which scripture FWB and Pre-Marital sex would be justified as something to glorify God, rather than man exercising self-will to glorify himself.

”””You believe in God in your way and I will in mine.”””

Again, if you are a Christian and claim beliefs that go against the word then it’s my obligation to point that out especially if that is being preached to other believers. You sound like a very learned man, have you ever read Screwtape Letters? Me or somebody else not addressing things that go against the Word would be like letting the Nephew in the book run wild.

“””We will let God be the judge of who is and is not moral.”””

And he shall as it says in Galatians 6:7-9: " Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. 9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not."

But again, that does not stop me from promoting, teaching, and sharing in God’s word nor should it stop anyone for pointing out what is against His word with other Christians.

“””Whatever makes you think that everyone who comes to this site is a Christian?”””

I don’t and again that is why I specially addressed this thread to Christians as a place to discuss these issue’s. If a sinner is weak in temptation maybe I or someone else can help them.

Read your first sentence again. You write: "recent threads have brought sadness for the morality of our friends"

That is a prima facie judgement by direct implication. It is the exact same thing as saying "some of our friends are immoral and that makes me sad." So in reality, you didn't question my morals, you flat our judged me to be immoral. Perhaps that was not your intent, but that is the way it happened. And I have to say, after having read so many of your other posts, I was shocked that you would post this.

I do not question your interpretation of scripture or your Christian values. They are yours and I must respect them. You must also respect mine. The Harleys have gone to great lengths to keep this site wholly secular and I believe that we should honor that as well. To my thinking, your questionhas no place in this forum. There are religious sections of this forum for the discussion of religious topics. If you wish to discuss what you consider the shortcomings of other with other Christians, take it to a Christian forum or a Bible study group. I'm calling you down. Where you in a group therapy situation, the group moderator would call you down too. A place like this is not one where you should ever consider pitting your religious beliefs against another's. It is counter-productive to the purpose of support forum, since all it can ever do is alienate and divide.

No, I do not discuss religion with people on the internet. I have tried this in the past and found it to be a waste of time. You do not know who you are dealing with and there is no way that someone who was brought up being taught that the Bible is not meant to be interpreted literally will ever be able to see eye-to-eye with a Funamentalist who was taught the opposite. And the Bible was only the start of my spiritual quest.

Yes, faithhopelove04, LH has been reading the FWB thread, wherein I describe my FWB relationship. So he most assuredly is judging me. I do not believe LH was trying to start a board war, but this kind of post most assuredly will. That's why I deliberately responded somewhat harshly.

“””That is a prima facie judgment by direct implication.”””

HUH?...... I’m a simple Kansas boy and ain’t into all those big words.

“””So in reality, you didn't question my morals, you flat our judged me to be immoral. Perhaps that was not your intent, but that is the way it happened.”””

Again, my intent was to start a discussion among a portion of this board that profess faith. By my, and what I believe to be the majority of Christians, some of these actions of recent discussion are immoral. Further, in your thread I saw someone who professed faith teetering between right and wrong. In Christianity there are absolutes. While being respectful and tolerant of your views, I started my own thread rather than crash yours, I can see that you don’t extend the same respect and tolerance.

“””You must also respect mine.”””

As a member of these boards I feel I did by not crashing your thread. As a Christian it’s my obligation to point out things that go against the word of God PERIOD.

“””To my thinking, your question has no place in this forum.”””

And to my thinking, a thread about non-committal sex has no place on a “marriage BUILDERS” forum.

“””If you wish to discuss what you consider the shortcomings of other with other Christians, take it to a Christian forum or a Bible study group.”””

Because my views are different from yours, I should go somewhere else to express them? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

“””It is counter-productive to the purpose of support forum”””

IMVHO what is counter productive to this forum is pushing views that go against the principles in which this forum is based upon and the Harley’s teachings like Radical Honesty, which if memory serves me correct you oppose.

Again ((Check)), this is a thread for like minds to come together like many other threads started on these boards for support, validation, and comfort. And again, I truly wish that you would have exercised the restraint, respect, and tolerance for my thread that I did for the one you posted to.

I'm not responding to the subject at this point--lack of time for me to post my normal length post. But I will say that while this board may be a secular board, I have posted many times with questions or things to bounce off of people who share my Christian beliefs. Those people who don't share my beliefs or feel comfortable responding don't have to. I feel the same about others' posts on here. If I disagree with a particular thread's subject matter, I don't have to respond. However, I see nothing wrong with starting a separate thread of my own related to that other thread. I just don't think my thread should be used to specifically identify someone to tear them down, but more should be used to gather other points of view which I thought was what LH was doing.

LL

LH: I for one see no problem in anything you wrote. This might be due to the fact that I also believe in God - or it might not. This is a public forum and I appreciate your questions and comments as much as anyones. I am the one who started the FWB thread in connection with a personal situation and simply desired input from all who cared to respond. I didn't feel that you called me out nor do I feel that you think bad of me for starting it. And even if you did/do have a problem with the fact that I started that thread - I would be fine with it because I know my position on the subject.

Perhaps Check is having a bad day - heck we all have them! He is a valuable contributor to this forum and I always look forward to reading his thoughts. The one thing we can always count on about religion - is that it's sparks passion in people. And passion is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

As to your questions:



I guess since I believe in God - that means I fall into the "religious peep" category and can tell you that my particular view on having sex outside marriage is that I should not. However, I will also tell you that I am not 100% sure that my belief is Biblically correct only due to the fact that I have been married before. (Here come the 2x4's!!!) I will tell you that I rejected the FWB sitch and also that I am researching the sex-after-divorce notion as to how it applies to me in the Biblical sense. Like you, I do not wish to get into a "religious debate" about this - at least not on your thread.

I hope this answered your question(s).

FR

I understand your intent, LH, but you went about it all wrong. That's what I called you on. You took God's right - judgement of morality - onto yourself. A Christian is never supposed to do that. If you feel it is a sin, then you do not do it. If someone asks you your opinion about something so personal, they yes, tell them what you feel. Yet you should never do this unsolicited, because many people will find it offensive. And you should never forget that Jesus told the crowd "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Undersand what I am saying?

"By my, and what I believe to be the majority of Christians, some of these actions of recent discussion are immoral."

You did it again. By whose standard? Yours and no doubt many others. Yet, there are just as many others who subscribe to a completely different standard. We would ask: How can a discussion be immoral?

BTW, thanks for the hug!

LL, I don't have a problem with someone coming in here and asking questions other Christians. Even on a secular board, there's nothing wrong with this, though I have participated moderated boards that prohibit and will not approve such posts for publication because they require the discussions to remain purely secular. Normally, I do not participate in strictly religious discussions, but leave them to those who enjoy them.

I can understand that LH feels that any sexual contact outside the confines of marriage is immoral. He flatly stated that he feels the poeple who do such things are immoral. Had he not included this judgental statement, he would have recieved no response form me at all. His would simply have been a thread in which I would not have participated.

I've read the materials on this site and I can find nowhere where it speak out against extra-marital sex except for adultry. Nor have I once read anything about morality in any of Harley's materials. This site is about helping people build strong marriages, not to impose any particular religious belief or morality. If it did, as all therapist understand, it would fail utterly. Therapists never question a client's belief system because it is unethical for them to do so.

(((FR)))

“””I didn't feel that you called me out nor do I feel that you think bad of me for starting it.”””

Good, cause no I didn’t call anyone out. And to be honest with you FR, that you started such a thread or actively questioned your belief and heart is a wonderful thing.

“””Perhaps Check is having a bad day - heck we all have them!”””

Perhaps…. Or perhaps is something deeper. I dunno. I will say he does have a history with the theological arguments.

“””However, I will also tell you that I am not 100% sure that my belief is Biblically correct only due to the fact that I have been married before. (Here come the 2x4's!!!) I will tell you that I rejected the FWB sitch and also that I am researching the sex-after-divorce notion as to how it applies to me in the Biblical sense. “””

FR, I don’t recall your situation or the events surrounding your divorce. I will say that for me a wonderful resource in not only processing my divorce but defining my views about S E X was 1st Corinthians, specifically chapters 6 and 7.

Ok... I'm going to be a pain in the butt here.

If I believe cows are sacred, does that meet the definition of "religious", and my viewpoint is welcomed in this thread?

This is a world wide community anymore. To be honest, I don't mind the thread. I don't mind if someone wants to solicit a particular viewpoint. I do mind sloppy thinking, particularly from someone as well spoken and well thought out as LH.

If you want North American Evangelical Christian viewpoints on FWB, then just say it. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> But then, really you're just asking for a cultural point of view, aren't ya, and morality or lack thereof is just deviation from culture? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Ok... I'm going to shut up now...

"I will say he does have a history with the theological arguments."

What? LH, I almost never make theological arguments on this site. I avoid religious discussions like the plague unless I know who I am talking to and what they will bring to the discussion. I generally limit them to ministers and learned theologians. So I am not sure where this comes from. There have a few people here who I've notice attempt to turn every discussion into a religious discussion and I've made a few comments. I do remember one case where some guy took somehting I said and tried his best to make it seem as if I was trying to discuss the theory of evolution and all I did was tell him (repeatedly) that he was way OT.

Now, since I really have nothing to add to this discussion in its real intent, I will bow out and leave it to those who wish to discuss the issue from a religious perspective.

“””I understand your intent, LH, but you went about it all wrong.”””

Thank goodness you are here to set me straight….lol…

“””You took God's right - judgment of morality - onto yourself….And you should never forget that Jesus told the crowd "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."””

Let’s look at the act of judging for a moment and since you’ve thrown up a scripture, maybe I can round one up to.

Was Hitler right or wrong to attempt the extermination of Jews and should he be held responsible for the death of so many? Only three possible answers can be given: 1) "yes or no, he was wrong or not wrong" (in which case that is a judgment); and, 2) "I can not give an answer, because that is for a higher authority to judge". Or,

If a lady friend of yours is raped, would the rapist be wrong?
The same answers apply. Or,

Your car was stolen and when the police found it, it was stripped of all usable parts; would the thief be wrong? Same answers. Or,

A child tells you something you know, and you know that he or she knows, to be untrue; is lying wrong? The same answers apply here too. Or,

A mother abuses her child by leaving the child unattended for hours while she goes out clubbing. Right or wrong? Still, the same answers are applicable.

Sure there are different levels of judgment but as a matter of fact we all make judgments every day and we are charged to do so.

"So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinquish between right and wrong..." I Kings 3:9. [King Solomon's prayer to Jehovah.]

"...judge your neighbor fairly...rebuke your neighbor frankly so that you will not share in his quilt." Leviticus 19:15-17.

"By Myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear [from God], and my judgement is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." St. John 5:30

"The spiritual man makes judgements about all things [examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and weighs all things]..." I Corinthians 2:15.

I don’t know who said it, but I have this quote saved on my computer ”It is necessary, at times, to explain our understanding of Scripture, and even to elaborate on sin, what God thinks of it, and of the destiny of sinful actions and people -- especially if we have a deep love and concern for those God has placed in our world. But, we must NEVER condemn people or write them off; for as long as they breath, God's Spirit of Love will work on the callousness of their hearts. As Christians, our goal, our love must be the same as our heavenly Father's -- to show people that He cares for them and wants them to have victory in their lives.”

I, ((Check)), have that love for mankind.

“””By whose standard? Yours and no doubt many others. Yet, there are just as many others who subscribe to a completely different standard.”””

And again, Check, that’s fine and again that’s why I qualified this thread for Christians.

”””BTW, thanks for the hug!”””

Ur welcome and BTW I do love you, brother, even if our views are different.

”””What? LH, I almost never make theological arguments on this site. I avoid religious discussions”””

Well, LOL, if I remember correctly the discussion with evolution vs creation with High Flight. And again, if I remember correctly, you avoided the discussion much like this one in post after post after post…..

Bottom line, Check. There is an issue and we are on polar ends. You’ve stated, advised, warned, and promoted your view point on a thread. I respected that and formed another thread to state, advise, warn, and promote my view point and for some reason you have chosen to not respect that. I didn’t call you out, I called out the issues. You chose to engage with me whether it be from pride or whatever.

If you’d like me to expand this topic to be just about you I’d be more than happy to do so. If you’d like me to say that I believe a FWB relationship is immoral, again I’d be happy to do so and quote plenty of scripture in doing so. But I don’t think that would help anyone because it’s obvious that the basis for our morals on this issue comes from different places.

(((The Bid Guy)))

First off, if posting your Match.com addy down there is to try and solicit me for a date, it ain’t gonna work….. I’m married buddy.

“””Ok... I'm going to be a pain in the butt here.”””

I’d expect nothing less from you….lol….I’m just kidding…..

”””I do mind sloppy thinking, particularly from someone as well spoken and well thought out as LH.”””

Interesting thought. I don’t quite grasp what you’re saying but it is thought provoking.

”””If you want North American Evangelical Christian viewpoints on FWB, then just say it.”””

Actually, I thought I did say that….. But seriously, I was wanting a discussion with people of faith who may be confused by these issues. People who have been through he!! on earth, had there lives thrown into pieces, and are now trying to find where they fit in and where their views on these issues is.

That's it! I'm cancelling my subscription! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />


The sloppy thinking is assuming that either 1) when you asked for "religious" viewpoints that only North American Evangelical Christians qualified and/or 2) FWB, etc. are considered immoral for all religions.

I knew you were looking for the Christian viewpoint, but the thing is, even among Christians, what is considered moral and immoral varies.

Ok, enough nitpicking.... and yes, nits are pretty small.

By many standards I am considered a religious person and even a person of faith. I don't personally take care of widows and orphans and I'm certainly not unstained by the world, so maybe not so much. But here is where I stand.

Since Christ came to the world to render the Law useless, then as Paul says, all things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial. Is it immoral to eat pork? Is it immoral to remain uncircumcised? If I were bound by the Law, then the answer is yes. But, I am no longer bound by the law. So, I can do these things and not consider myself an immoral person.

Ok, so then is it ok to commit murder since I am no longer bound by the law? No, of course not. Paul asks since all things are permissible do I continue to do whatever I want? I think he says "God Forbid".

So, if some things that were immoral under the law (pork, circumcision) are no longer considered immoral and yet some things that were immoral under the law are still considered immoral (murder), then where is the line? How do I determine what is immoral or conversely moral (God like) under the new "law" which is the blood of Christ?

Herein lies my fundamental core value system which I adopted as a child.

Every decision I make or action I take has either a constructive value, destructive value, or it is neutral. Constructive is that which promotes order, harmony, happiness and love (OHHL). Destructive are those things that take away from OHHL. Neutral does neither. Constructive decisions/actions are moral (God like), Destructive decisions/actions are immoral, and Neutral is neither.

Ok, if you've made it this far, congratulations, cause I probably wouldn't have.

So, lets apply this value system to eating pork. Does my eating pork promote or detract from OHHL? Personally I think it does neither, so it is a neutral decision and thus neither moral or immoral. Now if I find out that eating pork causes cancer, then to eat it is immoral. Same with circumcision. Murder is very destructive, and therefore an immoral act.

So, lets apply this to FWB. Is FWB a destructive or constructive decision? In and of itself, two consenting adults agreeing to meet various ENs without being fully committed BUYERS is only potentially destructive (immoral).

Rental situations are not inherently destructive (immoral), but I believe they are potentially destructive (immoral). How many "marriages" are Rental situations? Does that mean that half of the marriages are immoral situations?

So... do I recommend FWB? No, I don't because of the potential destruction. But, I put it on par with gossiping. Do I recommend that someone gossip? No, I don't. But I'm not going to have a conniption fit if they do.

Hi LH

I haven't read all the responses on here, but I'm sure this is a hot topic of debate

I am a Christian, and I do, with all good intention, hope to continue to abstain from sex until I marry again. I have many reasons for this decision, one being my faith and another being my daughter (there are more, but you get the gist). Is it easy... ummmm, not a chance! Is it possible...yes, but it has to be a desire as well as a conviction

However, I do realize that once I met Mr. The Rest of My Life, and we fall in love, the draw to want to be together is all aspects is a very strong pull. It will take a great deal of prayer and will to wait.....passion can and does carry away, even with the best of intentions.

FWIW <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Bill, I'm glad you started this thread. I don't post much here anymore, but I read here pretty frequently - except that over the last week or so I have come very close to a decision to abandon these boards completely. One of the reasons is a growing sense that my perspectives are irrelevant to what people are willing to hear.

At the center of my life is my relationship with God, and the foundation of how I walk out my faith is the Bible. Some of what I read in the Bible is troubling. Some of it is ambiguous. But some of it is very clear.

My perspective on Biblical morality is that it is not an arbitrary system of rules which God imposes upon us in order to test us, nor is it a lofty ideal which God gave us to admire but which He couldn't possibly expect us to really try to follow. Rather, I believe that Biblical morality is a set of life principles which God laid out for us for our own good. This does not appear to be a popular viewpoint. Christianity - at least in North American culture - seems to be treated largely as a smorgasbord of ideas, some of which are helpful and some of which are outmoded. We pick out what matches our taste - what we think will make us feel good - and we leave the rest. Then we claim that we have experienced what God intended for us.

To me, "falling short" is not really the issue. It is sad when we do so, since there are consequences that we cannot fully escape, whether those consequences are to our own lives or to God's glory. But when we fall down, God offers a hand to help us up again, and there is once again opportunity for God's love and mercy to be manifested. What is really sad, in my opinion, is when we decide it's perfectly fine down here on the ground, and we reject God's plan for our lives in favor of our own blind improvisation.

There is a lot of room for interpretation and application when it comes to issues of divorce and dating and remarriage. But I believe the Bible is quite clear about the matter of sex outside of marriage, and it leaves no room for such behavior.

Judgemental? I'll grant you that, CheckUrHeart. One definition (from Merriam-Webster) for "judgement" is "the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing." That certainly applies, as LostHusband has a long track record here of demonstrating both opinions and discernment.

The "disrespectful" bit I'm having more of a problem with. What Bill said is that he felt "sadness." I'm really having to stretch to see this as disrespectful. To be sure, he wouldn't be sad unless he believed that his own religious perspective offered a better and healthier way of living, but it seems to me that an attitude of disrespect would lead to contempt rather than compassion.

I'm not clear on where you see the problem, CheckUrHeart. Do you have a problem with the fact that Bill dares to consider his opinion to be better-founded than someone else's? I hope not, because not only would that go beyond PC to the point of nonsensical, but it would also be hypocritical: some of your own recent posts have been pretty darned patronizingly judgemental.

CheckUrHeart, how dare you try to assert your moral position regarding what is suitable for public discourse, based on your arbitrary values?

You can't have it both ways.

Prima facie? To Whom? Not to me. You offer a false dichotomy, and one based on an unnatural interpretation. Bill specifically referred to "the morality of our friends" (emphasis mine). He did not say "the immorality of our friends." Morality is neither a binary condition nor a linear measure. Rather, there are many different moral systems, and to suggest that someone espouses or adheres to a different moral system does not imply that that person is completely unprincipled.

And by the way, I do know that Bill later referred to specific actions as immoral, which he did in an explicitly stated context of Christianity. If you want to blow that up into some sort of character assault, there's no way anyone can stop you. But you've got no right to expect to receive respect for it.

TBG posted:

To which LH replied:

Ummm... no... You said:

If I am a devout Buddhist or Hindu, I am Religious. That does not make me a "North American Evangelical Christian" by a longshot. The fact is I am none of the above, and therefore I should ?? be excluded from this thread?? Not normally the way we conduct business at MB...

Further, LH says:

I have a problem with this particular paragraph, because the implication is that people of faith are the only people who have been through he!! on earth, had their lives thrown into pieces, etc... Somehow, this particular paragraph minimizes MY journey: my pain, my shattered life, my struggle to get my feet back under me after a divorce that I didn't want, my subsequent recovery and entry back into the difficult world of dating for 40 somethings.

I'm hoping that is not how it was meant...

I'm not so much troubled by the Christianity thing. I deal regularly with "North American Evangelical Christian" sisters and parents. Most of the time we can agree to disagree. I'm always, here and at home, more troubled by the judging that seems to go on by people who should be living by the Word of God - which was pretty clear when He said "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and was then repeated by His Son in different words later on: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Perhaps you don't think you are casting stones or judging, but you are definitely drawing a line in the sand between what you deem as "people of faith" (as well as pretty narrowly defining who they are and what they are) and those you deem as people without.

CS

Bill & FHL04,

Since you are discussing the morality of your MB friends, would it be fair to assume that you two abstained from sex until you were married?

AGG

LH,

If you're speaking of Christianity, then there really isn't a lot of room for confusion, at least in my reading of Scripture.

As to any other non-Christ centered religion, really, ultimately, what difference does it make for you as a believer? 1 John 4, and 2nd Thess both talk about examining the source of a belief. If the source is based on a lie or deception, then you're to put it as far away from your as possible.

If you're asking how those who claim to be Christians justify (and I mean, truly justify, backed up with Scripture) the behavior, then that is something I would be interested to see as well.

Picking apart the "way" he asked the question is OK. We have done that to other posters. Communication is valuable. But it's a separate issue, and we can still focus on the discussion he's trying to have.

Although he used the broad term "religious" in his post, his subject line used the work "Christianity". (So LH thinks he was asking for Christian viewpoints.) This was a bit confusing, and opened the thread up for controversy. And TheBigGuy pointed out further that LH seemed to want to lead the opinions toward Evangelical Christian perspectives, which is usually prettttttty conservative.

Now... on to my opinions... I do struggle with this topic, and it does help me to see it discussed on this forum. Not argued, theorized, or preached... but to watch and read what others are experiencing.

Currently, I feel that sex outside of marriage is OK for me in my life, although I am cautious about it, I don't rush into bed with every date, and have to feel a certain amount of commitment or potential ... or safety... to do so. I can see myself WAITING until I'm married again - I think it would be best if I did - but I would have to find someone with the same commitment, and we would have to help each other.

As far as FWB, the only thing close to this I have experienced is 3 times:
1 - a long-distance friendship ... we met for 1 intimate weekend. Nothing grew romantically from it. And it didn't ruin our friendship. We are still friends 3 years later. Because of different things in our lives (schedules, locations, other R's), we haven't met again, but it's not out of the question.
2 - Another long-distance friendship... that developed into more... we met and it was a DISASTER. LOL ... it nearly ended our friendship, but we overcame it and respected each other despite.
3 - My 2 and 1/2 year BF... we tried to continue having SF after breaking up. I was just wanting FWB, he was still in love. So that wasnt working.

My mindset about sex: Of course I had hoped my husband would be my one and only sex-partner. We had sex before we got married, but it was when we were pretty sure we were going to get married. After my divorce, I was faced with the horror that if I ever wanted to have sex again, then I would have to have sex again with someone else. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> Learning and discovering about EN's, and other M's and R's taught me some things about myself, and about things I had been missing in SF, so I became curious. I was also getting into my 30's and became very <ahem> needy LOL... so I explored this need.

After my divorce, I was really hoping to NOT have many sex partners before getting married again. I know it's not right to negotiate with God about "how many" is acceptable. It's hard to imagine that number being "0". But that's where I am. As much faith and trust in God as I have, and I'm learning to have. I'm working on a lot in my life... or I should say... God's working on a lot in my life.

LH, someone else raised the question I was wondering. But I was going to ask in a different way. Negotiating with God on what's acceptable. I think you've mentioned that pre-marital sex is OK if you're going to marry each other. Have you said that? And why is that? It's OK if that's where you are... I'm negotiating a "number"... which I'm comfortable with right now....

hugs,
Faith1

I don't justify the behavior. I suppose I could do the mental gymnastics if I wanted, but why should I? Sin is sin is sin. How many of "those who claim to be Christians" justify the sin of gluttony at each and every Church Pot Luck? I don't see many 300 pound pastors being called to task because they took 4 meatballs instead of 2.

Ask any waiter or waitress who has had to serve the "Sunday Night Church Crowd" if dealing with them has made them want to be Christians. If they don't have to justify their behavior, then neither do I.

(edited to add:)

But for the record, I suppose I can't help but throw in a little scriptural backing...

Figuratively, I eat the meat that has been served to idols. It's not a problem for me. And, I don't do it in such a way that it causes my brother to sin.

The perennial question LH, and one people are often wont to go to war over rather than discuss. How dare "you" tell me (or imply) what to do...yada yada yada. Well of course is fine to do so, we all do, all the time in our lives, how can we not make "jugements" and talk about them, is silly to rail against it...methinks those who engage in pre-marital sex feel touchy about the subject cause they know somewhere deep down it is irresponsible....

I have no problem telling people who have poor eating habits, or poor exercise habits, or poor driving skills, or poor anything... what I have observed, they can agree/disagree/ignore/discuss whatever, but taking offense is a reflection on their behavior not mine. Provided easily discerned rules of civility, protocol, and respect for privacy are followed. What a dumb world it would be if none of us voiced our concerns for others conduct/choices... if we are not challenged by our peers, even (and especially) on moral/behavior issues, how can we possibly grow into healthy human beings?

Anyways re this topic. Since it is about behavior, it is a moral issue, and I certainly am concerned about the moral behavior of my fellow wo/man, why wouldn't I (or Lh, or anyone) be? ....puzzled look.... Clearly there are 2 schools of thought, one saying sex is just something you do, has no consequences other than pragmatic ones (std, pregnancy, being stalked, feelings hurt, addiction, etc.)...akin to eating has no problems unless you eat too much, the wrong food, or spoiled food...but eating itself is a good thing, and you should do so regularly. Those who view sex this way concoct all sorts of rationales to refute the other school of thought which says sex is not food, you don't "need" sex (in the sense of air, food, water etc.), but that it is a moral (aka a behavioral) issue...that there are principles which apply to healthy sexual activity, and that these principles have consequences when violated, undesireable consequences... and that how someone conducts their sexual life says something about their character, and thinking processes which is useful to discern. That is why promiscuous people prefer that not be known, or get angry when described as such and trot out other "Labels" such as friends with benefits to describe their promiscuous behaviour. I am not sure why they do this, if they have no problem with their sexual behavior why do they care how anyone else sees it? We often "hear" people say, hi my name is john, this is my wife marry the love of my life, who I have been loyal and faithful to these many years... vs hi my name is john/mary and I will sleep with anyone (including you) if I feel like it? hmmmmmm?

This is a black and white issue, there are only two (well 3 if we include a decision to be celibate on purpose...as opposed to lack of opportunity) sexual "conditions"... one is either sexually mongamous, or sexually non-monogamous.... the lable for the latter is promiscuous, whether it is one person or 100 people, even no people if you are still open to the idea of sex whenever it suits you, is not about performance it is about intent, it is a moral issue...moral issues are always about intent....actions are simply the manifestation of intent.

Those who promote/defend/condone premarital sex are promoting a moral stance, and it is appropriate to discuss/refute it in moral terms. However, the more legalistic the argument the less effective it will be. For any behaviour (which requires us to act against instinctual urges) to have staying power, there must be good solid reasons behind the moral rules, and those reasons regularly talked about/promoted. The problem with sexual behavior and Christianity LH, is that it typically comes across as "rules" to follow cause you have faith. That isn't enuf even for Christians (obviously since we have as much trouble with pre-marital sex as everyone else), much less non-Christians, who will blow right past the behviour issues, and dismiss it as a relgious issue they don't believe in (and rightly so, the problem isn't the sex, the problem is their lack of discernment/reclacitrance re the nature of our existence). That is why I don't discuss this topic much in moral terms, there is no need too, non-monogamous sex is wrong (ie unhealthy psychologically) for so many reasons there is no need to invoke God (but then that is why we have these rules, cause in fact it is not good for us to look at sex as just a scratch needing itching, so find a buddy to scratch it).

Ok, preliminaries out of the way, won't go down the why non-monogamous sex is a poor behvioural choice path, since that isn't the thread, but felt a need to address the other issues which immediately arose. It is good you did this LH, there are many confused people (judgeing by the regular posts about this issue) seeking reason to not choose pre-marital sex in a world that promotes it everywhere you turn, including here of all places. Is good to say friends with benefits et al. is an ignorant, dangerous, unhealthy...and indeed immoral choice...one worthy of avoiding...especially if one considers themself a Christian.

LH...From the Religious peeps out there, I’d love to hear your views on dating, sex, and the whole FWB proposition. If you are Religious and living and choosing one of these lifestyles, I’d also love to hear what your views are on that. I fully realize and appreciate that we all fall short in the glory of God, so with that understanding, let’s not make this a thread of persecution but rather one of fellowship, each learning from the other.

Knight...I am one of those peeps (Christian), and being single for sometime now, in the dating pool, needed to figure this out too, and did so (not without a lot of effort though, complicated subject). Like most things, the initial struggle is to define the "labels", and issues, discern the principles, then mix all that together to hopefully arrive at the right guidlines for making everyday choices.

Dating... do we date to mate, or date for fun and games (does not mean sex necessarily) and learn about ourselves (in the romantic sense)?

Turns out that (IMO, and won't say IMO again, so don't anyone take me to task for speaking strongly, it is what I do), this is a 2 parter. I think those Christians who view each date as immediately exclusive until you marry or breakup, are too legalistic, and misunderstand God's intent re mating. However, dating with no intent to mate is also wrong, it celebrates using people to meet your needs, without any honorable intent on your part. So what to do? You certainly talk and make friends with many people, and "date" so to speak in group situations, volunteerism, work (obviously), sporting teams, hobby activities, whatever....until such time someone is interesting enuf to date one on one, in a clearly romantic interaction, not 2 buddies just going out for company...this is a discernment issue, cause obviously, such circumstances are allways (or quickly will become) pursuit/chase scenarios...That means you should consider every date a potential mate, and NOT date anyone you wouldn't marry, or date anyone if you have no intent to marry...find other things to do, this is a dead end street for growth, is deceptive, manipulative, selfish and of no value. However, I do think there is a season of multiple dating as you seek a mate (basically getting past that iniitial knowing/dumping period), but it becomes problematic if you are dating any one person for very long, you should have moved on from them, or be unilaterally reducing your options to just one, until that resolves itself...otherwise you are doublminded, and that condition prevents proper discernment. Some Christians (especially women) seem to subscribe to the FedEx model....oh, I will just wait around until God sends me the "one", well maybe, but more likely He will provide opportunity, and you have to work at it...we have freewill and can reject (by being dumb) God's choices for us...or pick the wrong choice...the key here is proaction...you need to be open, and have clear committment in these matters, as well as understanding of good dating behaviour...that, and praying for discernment should serve you well. There is Scripture about these matters which supports the notion of dating to mate...and it makes secular sense as well, for the reasons I stated...being a professional dater limits developimg deep friendship, which is how you find your mate. The Bible does not seem to promote dating as a recreational activity, it is a serious business relating to mating.

sex...

Well, need to define...clearly pre-marital intercourse is out, any Christian with a modicum of intelligence won't argue that point... and basically the reason is about lust (carnal desire to feel good using someone for yourself)....You cannot have honest sexual intercourse with someone you won't become one with...it is how (one of the ways) you become one, and why protecting ones (and your partner pre-maritally) virtue is so important. Lust destroys the ability to discern, and construct a healthy relationship, a Christian should steer well clear of anyone who is willing to violate that boundary, they are far to likely to make a poor mate (including you are a poor mate if seek intercourse as well). However, those Christians who try to legislate the rest of the physical panthenon pre-maritally run into an immediate problem...where the heck are the boundaries? That is a discussion for another day, but I think a strong case can be made for adding oral sex, direct gential contact, or being together naked to the marital boundary.....as to hugging, kissing, massageing, hand-holding, I think those areas are dependent on the people and where they are in the relationship....keeping in mind that they need to protect themselves from the slippery slope, the appearance of evil, and lustful thinking (hard to define)..but anyways, should not be much physical contact without strong intent pursue marriage, and can only kiss etc. on one prospect at a time (the whole when what is relationship exclusive thingy plays in here). Physical interactions are important, and IMO essential to the healthy development and discernment of someone as a mate.... I think the Bible is ok with this, God pretty much addresses intercourse and lust, so if we steer clear of those areas, I think we are free to be physical, as well as share other things, such as our deep thoughts, or make common cause, or pray togther etc. It is all about communication and knowing someone..the issues are intent, and manipulation...if we seek even to just hold hands with someone, but have no sense of their well being, our honorable intent, etc.. then we are wrong, we just want selfish gratification from them.

FWB...

Is just sameo sameo, new name, same game, oh we aren't really promiscous, we just need sex and are serviceing each other cause we are friends. There is a name for offering sexual services in return for something...is called prostitution, regardless of "currency", trading sex is no different than trading money, or friendship...you cannot be friends and have sex, humans are about pursuit and capture, and whole bunch of deeply hardwired psychological consequences. It is a moral issue, and I would never ever consider a woman for marriage who had that kind of history (unless she clearly saw the error of her ways, repented, and I percieved she was now one who would not choose such immoral behavior again). There are no sucha thing as no consequences, how you behave sexually is one of the defining issues re character, loose people will have to select from other loose people, they will be denied moral individuals....is not that one doesn't err, but that one chooses to continue to err. The notion one can have non-commited sex as some kind of therapy is breathtakingly ignorant....and any Christian who doesn't realize this is temptation in all it's evil is really....lost...and hopefully any Christians who happen to know this will intervene most vigorously with the fallen individual and try to get them out of harms way.

The other difficult area for everyone (including Christians) is the I am in love, this is the one I want to marry, so naturally I want to have sex with them...is the slippery slope, is the rationalization satan will visit on us to tempt into immoral behaviour...the boundary is absolute, you do not violate it, if you do, it is inappropriate behaviour for both, wrong thinking...the initiator and the acquieser, this is probably the most common "sin" of Christian relationships, and I think it is cause we have a dearth of good role models, or an understanding of the benefits of waiting (which are substabtial, and real). However, though this sin is a detriment to the eventual marriage, it can be overcome and dealt with...the point is to avoid it if at all possible.

Thems my thoughts LH... I lurk some (not posting anymore), is interesting to see what others think about dating, and lots of fodder for my "book" about these matters...but I felt convicted to post on a Christian thread to encourage my Bretheren to make good choices, and thereby increase the likelihood of their success. These are the principles I practice in my life, and they work well folks, very well, makes dating a lot less angst ridden when one knows who they are, what they seek, and the reasons why. Congrats on your marriage LH, may God bless you with many years of mutual nurturing. I have lots more of this kind of reasoning, if you are interested and have an email, let me know, will send it to you.

edited to clarify some comments in the fwb section

(((CeeCee)))

“””passion can and does carry away, even with the best of intentions.”””

I can relate to that. I too carried that desire but fell short of the glory. But have been washed clean through confession.


(((GnomeDePlume)))

“””One of the reasons is a growing sense that my perspectives are irrelevant to what people are willing to hear.”””

First off, Gnome, your perspectives are refreshing and carry a much needed message amidst the chaos. I can also relate to your frustration but encourage you to keep carrying your message.

”””Rather, I believe that Biblical morality is a set of life principles which God laid out for us for our own good. This does not appear to be a popular viewpoint. Christianity - at least in North American culture - seems to be treated largely as a smorgasbord of ideas, some of which are helpful and some of which are outmoded. We pick out what matches our taste - what we think will make us feel good - and we leave the rest. Then we claim that we have experienced what God intended for us.”””

Can I have an Amen? Wonderful stuff there Gnome.

”””To me, "falling short" is not really the issue. It is sad when we do so, since there are consequences that we cannot fully escape, whether those consequences are to our own lives or to God's glory.”””

And by the way, for other’s reading, WE ALL FALL SHORT. We all sin.

“””What is really sad, in my opinion, is when we decide it's perfectly fine down here on the ground, and we reject God's plan for our lives in favor of our own blind improvisation.”””

Again, well said. I, myself, have done many things in my life that fell way short. I’ve been down. Heck, I’ve been darn near out. Yet, my Father was there patiently waiting for me to turn from my sins, anxious to provide His forgiveness and love. I further believe that the earthly sins we commit and life we choose affect us in heaven. I have no doubt that since I’ve accepted Christ and asked for forgiveness of my sins that I am forgiven and will have a seat in heaven. But I also don’t believe that’s good enough. Therefore, in many areas where I’ve fallen short I have strived to help others in those areas and thus store my treasures in heaven rather than on earth.

”””But I believe the Bible is quite clear about the matter of sex outside of marriage, and it leaves no room for such behavior.”””

I agree.

(((Crystal Singer)))

“””Ummm... no... You said:”””

Ummm… No… Actually, the very 1st word in the title of this post is CHRISTIANITY. I did that for a reason which I’ve expanded on greatly in this post.

”””If I am a devout Buddhist or Hindu, I am Religious. That does not make me a "North American Evangelical Christian" by a longshot.”””

This post reminds me of a couple of things. First that Jesus said we’d be persecuted for our views. I’m also reminded of the little girl in Columbine who if I remember correctly was asked “Do you believe in Jesus Christ” and when she exclaimed “Yes”, she was shot. What I truly don’t understand is why so many people rise up against Christianity or me. I haven’t tried to force my opinion on anyone. I believe I’ve been respectful of others. I tried to start a thread targeted at a certain audience and for some reason it threatened others. Why? Exclusionary threads are started on these boards every day. So why this one. If you are not a Christian, what in my words threatens you so greatly that you feel the need to stand in opposition?

“””The fact is I am none of the above, and therefore I should ?? be excluded from this thread?? Not normally the way we conduct business at MB...”””

Again, my threads have always been open to anyone. If you look through my long history you will see that. You will also see that I have a long history of posting from the Christian perspective. There was thread on these boards a while back about Witchcraft, does that oppose my points of view, YES, did I crash it, NO. It seems so many are so fast to demand tolerance for their issue and yet show absolute intolerance for Christianity.

”””I have a problem with this particular paragraph, because the implication is that people of faith are the only people who have been through he!! on earth, had their lives thrown into pieces, etc...”””

I don’t believe that minimizes anyone else’s struggles what so ever. I understand and have compassion for all people. But again, this thread was addressed to Christians to talk about a couple of serious issues facing them such as having sex with other partners while still married and engaging in FWB relationships. If I had addressed the post to people who have lived through the destruction of Pornography or Abuse or Addiction, would you take offense? I would hope not, but it still is limiting who my target audience was.

“””I'm always, here and at home, more troubled by the judging that seems to go on by people who should be living by the Word of God - which was pretty clear when He said "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and was then repeated by His Son in different words later on: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."””

I can almost relate to that, let me explain how. I do have a problem with some holier than thou dude or chic jumping on me for all my sins while at the same time pretending their crap doesn’t stink when in fact it reeks. I do not like that type of hypocrisy. BUT and that’s a big BUTT, I don’t feel that’s what I’m doing. In my first post I said “I fully realize and appreciate that we all fall short in the glory of God”, in this context I am part of we. I sin. I sin. I sin. I sin. I do hope you took a moment to read the scriptures I posted that call us Christians to have a voice.

(((AGG)))

“””Since you are discussing the morality of your MB friends, would it be fair to assume that you two abstained from sex until you were married?”””

First off, no it would not be fair to [censored]-U-ME anything of the sort. Again, I started this thread to talk about 3 particular scenario’s:

1. Having sex with someone while you are married and no divorce has been filed.
2. Having sex with someone during the divorce process.
3. FWB relationships.

Obviously, the morality has crept in there and overall views have expanded. Again, it seems that when a Christian wishes to discuss things, there entire life is brought into the equation. As I stated earlier, I am a repentant sinner. Did FHL04 and I have sex while we were committed to one another before we got married, HE!! YES. Is that a sin HE!! YES. Did I confess and repent, you can bet your bottom dollar I did. Do I continue to live in that sin, no I don’t. And quite frankly, had a person of faith called me to the matte on it, I would have been grateful. I struggled with the decision that I made to indulge in the pleasures of the flesh.

I don’t think I can say it much better than Gnome when he said “But when we fall down, God offers a hand to help us up again, and there is once again opportunity for God's love and mercy to be manifested. What is really sad, in my opinion, is when we decide it's perfectly fine down here on the ground, and we reject God's plan for our lives in favor of our own blind improvisation.”

Go through and look at my posts AGG. I’ve always stood for something since the day I registered here and I did fall down in that way and many more.

(((Jaye Mathisen)))

“””If you're asking how those who claim to be Christians justify (and I mean, truly justify, backed up with Scripture) the behavior, then that is something I would be interested to see as well.”””

Yes, it is interesting. Jaye, I’ve lived a life of sin. I’ve lived at times while professing faith while I was being anything but faithful. And from that experience I can tell you there is a huge difference between an unrepentant sinner and a repentant one.

(((Faith1)))

“””After my divorce, I was really hoping to NOT have many sex partners before getting married again. I know it's not right to negotiate with God about "how many" is acceptable. It's hard to imagine that number being "0". But that's where I am. As much faith and trust in God as I have, and I'm learning to have. I'm working on a lot in my life... or I should say... God's working on a lot in my life.”””

Very interesting and Good on ya, mate…..

”””LH, someone else raised the question I was wondering. But I was going to ask in a different way. Negotiating with God on what's acceptable. I think you've mentioned that pre-marital sex is OK if you're going to marry each other. Have you said that? And why is that? It's OK if that's where you are... I'm negotiating a "number"... which I'm comfortable with right now....”””

Faith, right here is where we get into a huge theological debate….lol… First off, I don’t think I’ve ever said that I believe pre-marital sex is not sin, because I do. I also believe is wise to Question God, maybe negotiate is to stern a term. Many of the greats in the bible did question God, even Job who was called by God as a Good man, questioned God.

Faith, this is a discussion that I’d love to continue with you but it’s probably best not done with the confines and distractions of this thread. If you choose to continue, the 1st question I’ll ask you is to define Heaven. Once you’ve defined that, I believe then you live your life accordingly.

PS.... Thank you for all who have shared your views.... I do hope that a discussion rather than qualification will result.

Ohhhh and A Big Guy, I see that I only copied the posts from the 2nd page before you posted but missed what you said on the 1st page.... I'll try to come back to it when I have some more time....

God Bless

Wow Knight, great post! That must have taken forever.
I could respond to so much, but I lack the time right now. The only thing I felt I wanted to voice a disagreement with is this:

"The other difficult area for everyone (including Christians) is the I am in love, this is the one I want to marry, so naturally I want to have sex with them...is the slippery slope, is the rationalization satan will visit on us to tempt into immoral behaviour...the boundary is absolute, you do not violate it, if you do, something is wrong with both of you...the initiator and the acquieser, this is probably the most common "sin" of Christian relationships, and I think it is cause we have a dearth of good role models, or an understanding of the benefits of waiting (which are substabtial, and real). However, thought this sin is a detriment to the eventual marriage, it can be overcome and dealth with...the point is to avoid it if at all possible."


My XWH and I were virgins when we got married. We were one of few couples out of our youth group/church friends who actually were able to "cross the finish-line intact" so to speak. We believed strongly in waiting till marirage and we did. But you know what? Something was wrong with HIM! He broke every promise and vow he ever made me and abandoned his family for my "friend" 6 years later.

Furthermore, I used to lay in bed at night at 20 years old and cry and pray, "God, is this a cruel joke? We waited when it was SO HARD and we desired it SO much and now that we are married, my desire plummeted and went to pretty much nothing after having a baby. WHY? This is what we waited for? What kind of reward or blessing is this?" And later, "This blessing of marriage, this gift that we worked so hard to save ourselves for is ruining our marriage."

Something else, I longed to experience PASSIONATE sex, not planned, not expected. I only ever thought this to myself, always rebuked myself for it and never came even close to acting on it. I didn't want it with anyone else, just wanted it in general, wanted to experience it, but figured I never would. In my experience, that was the negative to waiting. It was never that spontaneous, passionate sex.

So given what felt to me like a truly negative experience of waiting, I can't say I had the same motivation the second time around.

Do I feel that it means something is wrong with me or mu husband? NO! I think it means we are humans and less than perfect Christians. We all have weaknesses. That would be like something is "wrong" with a person who commits ant other sin "in" or "out" of a relationship.

I had a friend when I was a teenager who was caught having sex with her boyfriend. She was a Christian (not just a church-goer). She was put through such he11 by her parents and the church, I mean it was bad. One day, she said tearfully and ashamedly to me, "What is wrong with me? I would never steal anything or any other terrible sin like that, so why could I be so horrible as to do this?" I wanted to cry for her as I saw the shame and confusion in her eyes, and at that young age, I had no answer for her. But it was then that i realized in a REAL way that sex is no more a sin than any other sin, and that it is DEAD WRONG for the church to treat people the way it often does because the feel they can judge that person as being less of A Christian or less of a person because they can make them and everyone else believe that their sin is worse than their own.

I agree FHL, and planned to edit that part, I did not mean wrong as in hopelessly flawed, just wrong thinking it is ok. Re your first comment, the argument being virgins is somehow a gaurantee of success puzzles me when it is brought up. That of course is not the point at all....everyday people who never smoked, drank, exercise regularly, lead eminently healthy lives drop dead. Understanding why one chooses virginity is more important than actually being a virgin, that is why it is a character issue...making mistakes is human, not learning from them is troublesome. I am unfamiliar with your details, but clearly in your selection of a H you made some substantial errors... seems you choose better the 2nd time. The point being practicing good dating/mating behavior enhances the likelihood of success, it doesn't gaurantee it....further, those who are obsessive or legalistic about this matter are no more likely to be a good choice than someone who is less disciplined and predisposed to be promiscuous. Both have character/personality issues, which suggest greater difficulty in being a worthy marital partner. (worthniess meaning ability to enter, nurture, and maintain a healthy relationship that successful marriage requires). Being both celibate is not going to do anything to protect a marriage from other issues which may be "fatal"...it just means in that regard one has make a healthy premarital choice. Also FHL, in our youth, an adherence to a "standard" can be about expectations, peer pressure etc. and conceal (so to speak) other serious problems as we elevate virginity to sainthood (it isn't, lots of virgins around who make lousy marital partners). The bigger problem is youth and inexperience in the complexities of healthy mate selection. The failure rate fpor young (under 21 or some such) is over 80%, is almost a gaurantee they will fail, and or, experience serious problems.

I had already figured you and LH were not celibate, it was implied in his framing of the posted question, and I suspect it is one of the reasons he asked it. That does not negate (as he posted later) his (and your) position on this subject... I came very close to failure, and the experience prompted me to work out the exact underlying principles at work. I realized a legalistic adherence was not sufficient motivation, I needed to know why also, and how to set the boundaries in a realistic, behaviourally healthy way. I am so glad I did not fail (and have to add that to my blemished record as a sinner, enuf allready), but even more glad I figured out why, and how to set the boundaries...doing so has made me as safe as one can be on the slippery slope, and yet still able to benefit from the discernment one gains through the physical part of a relationship (which is different, and as valuable, as the other parts...communication, spiritual, recreational, hopes dreams goals etc.). There is absolutely no benefit to promiscuous sex, even if you marry the person.... so why do it? And there are enormous benefits to pre-marital abstinence, so why not choose that? Seems like a no-brainer to me... but those hormones are powerful, and so it is worth figuring out BEFORE those passions in the arms of your beloved overtake reason.

I agree with your statement about your young friend, what she needed is guidance in the why's, not told normal feelings and desires are wrong... and as a sin, routine sexual impropriety is no worse than many other sins, just another area to be tempted in, and fail...but the natural consequences are pretty bad themselves, and sufficient to motivate one to caution. When I am addressing this issue to young people, I do not do so (except incidentally) as a moral issue, but as to the reasons why it is a poor choice...that gives them the tools to choose wisely, and morally.

Bill,

I have read your posts here for years, and I know that you mean well <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. I always enjoy reading your posts, and typically agree with you, as we share similar outlooks on marriage and relationships.

And it is because of how much good you have brought to these boards that I want to take the time to give you my outlook on this controversy.

Perhaps your initial post was not well phrased by you, and perhaps you didn't really mean to say that you were saddened by the morality of your MB friends, because, let's face it, one can only be saddened by a perceived low morality of their friends, not a high one. Can you see how that can be very hurtful to anyone who perceives themselves to be on the receiving end of that comment?

You say that you addressed your thread primarily to the Christians on this site, but I am sure you know that there are many others on this board who have no interest in Christianity, and do not want to be judged for not subscribing to your beliefs. Like you said, this is a marriage building forum, not a religion discussion board. Starting a thread about religion, especially one where a certain religion is clearly promoted, is quite unpleasant for the rest of us.

Preaching about morality is a very slippery slope, especially when the person preaching has themselves shown morality inconsistent with their preachings:


So you chose to ignore the very morality that you preach when it came to your own choices, but then you come back here and tell others that their morality saddens you? Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical?


You know, I never understood how someone can choose to do something that they believed to be wrong, but then explain it away with a simple "we are all sinners, I have repented and have been forgiven" excuse. Seems a little too simple, doesn't it? I would be impressed with someone who at least practiced what they preached, but when they don't, their credibility goes way down in my eyes. At least Check behaves consistently with his stated morals, for which I respect him.

I think that this discussion started off on a very wrong foot the minute an entire group of us were incinuated to be lacking in morality by someone who probably should know better.

Sorry if this is harsh, Bill <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

AGG, you have the patience of Job and are very wise - and kind. I would do well to try to be more like you.

re the notion denigrateing the messenger negates the message is not only pointless (why bother having a discussion at all, if one is not going to discuss...ya know?), but intellectually dishonest...whatever bill, or any other Christians have done or not is not relevant to what they should do. If hypocrisy is going to be defined as human imperfection, then we might as well all zip our lips and take no moral positions whatsoever (since I know no perfect people, how about you agg, know any?), just let anarchy, do whatever feels good rule. The whole point agg is to aspire to being better than we are...and we can't do that without talking about it, making judgements about it, and confronting people about it. There was a time in america when wrestling with issues, and questions, and truth was considered not only laudable, but essential behaviour in an adult...wonder whatever happened to that...oh yeah, political correctness, my goodness careful lest someone feel bad. The very fact this thread makes people (apparently) uncomfortable is the very evidence such is necessary, and indeed it is... I can not think of a single thing more important to discern than how we should behave, our survival depends on how successfully we discern and act on that knowledge. This isn't a game agg, this is life, and if you don't get it right, you don't want to pay the price...having ones feathers ruffled a bit is hardly cause for distress...but then Christians are used to having our feathers ruffled, baiting and demeaning Christians is considered sport to many...however LH is baiting no one, he is taking a position on a issue which can be called "moral" so refute it...if you can...but refuting by diminishing the speaker is ignorant... proves nothing. Keep in mind no one is making law here, no one has the power to make anyone feel, or do anything...if you feel bad, it is your own responsibility to figure out why...maybe one's conscience is trying to get your attention.

btw agg if you have some questions/interest in sin, repentance, forgiveness etc, then pose a question. You will not find a Christian who will defend hypocrisy, and God has made it clear He does not "approve" either. I don't know if bill is a hypocrit or not, between him and God, but even hypocrits can know the truth, and speak it...but I agree, the less ones behaviour conforms to what they teach, the less effective they will be as a witness...however, that is another issue alltogether, and would involve confronting bill and fhl on their behaviour not on their message.

That is not how hypocrisy is defined, though. Hypocrisy is not about human imperfection, it's about not practicing what you preach:

1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion


That would have been my suggestion to Bill, yes.


Er, no, which is why I don't post saying that I am saddened by others' morals, political outlooks, or other things that are highly personal.


No problem there. The problem is when we claim to be better than others, especially when that is highly dubious.


I don't have a question. I said I find it hard to understand the concept of such an easy forgiveness, but to each their own. I prefer to have my own set of standards and live by them, not do what I want and then expect to be so easily forgiven. Anyway, I already agreed with Bill that this is a marriage builders forum, not a theological one.


Their message is totally undermined by their behavior, IMO.

AGG

agg.. Quote:
that is another issue alltogether, and would involve confronting bill and fhl on their behaviour not on their message.



Their message is totally undermined by their behavior, IMO.


knight...I am just a country boy, but Ima scratching my head on that one....so for example, I ride about the countryside in my jalopey at 90mph (or whatever) no seatbelt on...and I make mention you all should wear seatbelts, much better choice....you are what..not gonna listen to good advice cause I am not follering it...I am a little concerned agg, do you have difficulty seperateing information from the means it is disseminated? If so, you are an advertisers dream, or for that matter the dream of anyone with manipulative designs..true? Not a diss, just an observation from what you wrote, assuming you actually believe what you said. So let me ask you a straight out question.

Are you able to distinguish the message from the messenger? If not, I can understand your difficulty, and perhaps you should consider how you intake information does not serve you well.

If we have to be perfect to give advice, none of us should have bothered trying to raise our kids properly.

I would certainly be curious about why you are not following your own good advice, true.


No need to feel concerned for me (nor for Bill to feel saddened for me <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />), I am fine.


Personally, that is exactly how I view those who so blindly follow others' preachings, but you see where I am going with this, right?


Yeah. No problem. I never criticized the messenger, knight. Are you able to see that I never criticized Bill? Bill and I have been readings each others' postings here for many years, this is the first time I take issue with his post. I specifically took issue with his message, because in my view it was a flawed one.

If his message stopped at saying "I don't think people should have premarital sex, even though I did", that would have been similar to your jalopey example, and while I would have been puzzled at the inconsistency, I would have let it slide. His opinion, no harm no foul.

But Bill said "I am saddened by the morality of my friends at MB", which is condescent to many of us, and has a very judgemental and "holier than thou" tone. Given the fact that he does not follow his own professed morality, yes, I do see his message as being flawed. Not the messenger, just the message. See the difference?

AGG

I really see religious arguments on this forum as pointless.

I am copying this here from the FWB thread in reference to a very similar arguement AGG has posted on thisb thread.

"This is the fundamental issue I take with your and Bill's recent posting."

First of all, Bill and I are not one and the same, though I do support his intent and heart in this matter. I have only replies to things you guys have said.

"You two have stated that you engaged in behavior that you consider immoral. Check has not.

You may not agree with is choices, but at least he appears to act consistently with his (not your) beliefs. You don't."

OK, so let me get this straight. Just because someone does not think their behavior is immoral, thereby allowing them to live up to their own standards, they are automatically worthy of more respect than a person who has high standards of what he feels SHOULD be done, yet sometimes fails in trying to live up to those standards?

I am not arguing on whether Check's standards are low or high. I think it's safe to say that trying to NOT have sex for a long period of time (esp if it's indefinite) takes quite a bit more self-discipline than a more relaxed standard towards sex, whatever that may be. It is only sheer probablility that the person who has the more difficult task at hand has a greater chance of failing at that task, right?

Furthermore, if someone thinks its ok to commit adultery and lives up to their own standards - committing adultery and never feeling bad about it - is that more worthy of respect than someone who thinks it's wrong to commit
adultery and yet sadly goes against those beliefs only to then feel terrible about what they did, and seek healing, restoration and forgiveness? *Please note, I am NOT comparing Check's non-committed-sexual-relationship to adultery, it is simply an analogy in terms of a line of thinking.*

I just don't see how this line of thinking makes any logical sense.

It is good to have high standards to reach for. If you only aim as low as you think you can reach, you'll never touch the stars......

And btw, I NEVER called Check a hypocrite. I did point out that his statements/attitudes were inconsistent (or at least seem so to me), but I never typed the word hypocrite in that post you were referring to. Please don't put words in my mouth.

If Bill was pretending to be what he was not, then he would never have admitted to his own failure to live up to the standards he professes. But he did admit to his failure, which means that he did not falsely assume an appearance of virtue.

Did he fail to practice what he preached? That's actually a more interesting question.

There's a difference between not doing what I say I do and not doing what I say I should do. In the former case I'm a liar, and in the latter case I'm a failure. Obviously, the former case constitutes hypocrisy; but does the latter? I'm inclined to think that it depends on my attitude.

If I point the finger at you and say that your behavior is immoral, while I refuse to consider or admit to the immorality of my own behavior, then yes, I believe I'd be a hypocrite. However, if I claim that we are both behaving immorally, then I do not believe that I'm being a hypocrite. My credibility is diminished, of course, but my words are nonetheless consistent with my actions.

In Bill's case, he "preaches" that there is a best way to behave. He also "preaches" forgiveness and compassion. He chose not to follow the way he believed was best, and he now admits that he chose badly. He also claims the forgiveness that he wishes for others, even as he wishes that they would not choose behavior which requires such forgiveness. From where I sit, it appears that he is practicing both sides of what he preaches.

If I preach "do as I say and not as I do" because I think it's OK for me to behave a certain way, but it's not OK for you to behave that way, then I'm being a hypocrite. However, if I preach "do as I say and not as I did" because I came to recognize the folly of my own behavior and do not want others to make the same mistake, then I am not being a hypocrite.

The bottom line is that I believe the charges of hypocrisy which have been leveled here are unfounded.

OK, first of all, I don't believe I've ever seen Bill claim to be better than others. But it's a little ironic to consider this statement in light of what might well have happened if Bill had lived up to the standard he holds up. In that case, he could have been raked over the coals for being holier-than-thou instead of for being a hypocrite.

It's really a no-win situation. The mere suggestion of an absolute system of morality is enough to get people up in arms; the only politically correct stance is one which allows everyone to define their own morality. Thus we see CheckUrHeart demanding that his moral system be respected.

The deep irony here is that so many people here have been deeply wounded by the behavior of their former (or soon-to-be-former) spouses, whose moral faults they have no problem pointing out. But, by modern-day existential standards, shouldn't the admittedly divergent moral standards of those wayward spouses be respected?

Sheesh. Talk about hypocrisy!

Heh. I guess I was pre-scient - except that I missed that he could be accused of being both hypocritical and holier-than-thou.

What in the world is the problem with Bill being saddened by seeing his friends behave in ways he believes are self-destructive? Would you rather that he be happy to see them hurting themselves? Heck, I imagine that he's none too happy about his own behavior, so there's nothing holier-than-thou about it.

I never said you were.


I never said that either. I said I respect Check's efforts to live up to his standards, just like I respect your and Bill's efforts to live up to yours.

What I take issue with is Bill passing judgement on others' morality, because as we all agree, no one is perfect or above reproach. To make comments on anyone's morality is a very strong attack on someone's entire persona - I think you'll agree.


You are not, but Bill was.


We can go in circles all night long here, FHL. The fact is that I never did compare people's moralities, because it is not up to me. I said I respect Check, and I respect you. We all know who started comparing moralities on this thread, and it wasn't me. As you said to me yourself, please don't put words in my mouth.



You never used the word, you are right. But the description you used is the classic definition of "hypocrite", so why split hairs?

AGG

"Perhaps your initial post was not well phrased by you, and perhaps you didn't really mean to say that you were saddened by the morality of your MB friends, because, let's face it, one can only be saddened by a perceived low morality of their friends, not a high one. Can you see how that can be very hurtful to anyone who perceives themselves to be on the receiving end of that comment?"

AGG, something that I, and many others who share similar beliefs, believe pretty strongly is that "the wounds of a friend are better than the kiss of an enemy" concept. In other words, sometimes you point out things that may seem to "wound" because you care about people. Sometimes to say nothing is NOT the most caring or loving thing you can do.

To understand this, it is necesssary to try and put yourself in another's position....just try to imagine this from LH's POV. Let's say you go to the dentist. The dentist sees that you have a gum condition and also need a root canal. He knows that this is probably due in large part to you not flossing regularly. But instead of pointing out the problem, he just says nothing. After all, it will cause you some distress to find out you have these problems. Plus, he himself doesn't floss regularly, so wouldn't it be hypocritical to tell you that it would be best for you to floss regularly?

Now I can hear the argument already - "But the dentist has a duty as a dr to tell you your problems whereas LH has no duty and should mind his own business." Here is where trying to understand and be tolerant of religious beliefs comes in. As a Christain, LH feels it IS his duty to point out what he deeply feels is damaging (or whatver word you want to use) behavior. Why? Because that IS the loving thing to do, in his view. Because Check or a couple others are not the only ones affected by the FWB thread or others like it. This is a public forum. Hundreds read threads that never post. LH sees behavior that he views (and has a right to view) as being destructive, and the feels he has a duty and a right to point out its destructiveness.

AGG, you yourself said that you've read LH's posts for a long time. You should know where his heart is. Is it to hurt people and cause drama, etc? If not - if that is not the behavior you've seen from him for the past 5 years, why are you so quick to condemn his thoughts, attitudes, and actions - even going so far as to outrightly call him a hypocrite because of ONE thread that you find offensive? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

You never used the word, you are right. But the description you used is the classic definition of "hypocrite", so why split hairs?

I'll tell you why, because I am not so quick to call people derogatory terms or throw around the label "hypocrite".

Hey, I'll draw heat for that one:

Check is a hypocrite.

I see no need to waffle on the matter or to try to soften it. Check has castigated others for doing exactly what he has done himself right here on this forum, and then he has proclaimed his own innocence. I'm sure he believes in his innocence, but I believe that still qualifies as hypocrisy.

"It's really a no-win situation. The mere suggestion of an absolute system of morality is enough to get people up in arms; the only politically correct stance is one which allows everyone to define their own morality. Thus we see CheckUrHeart demanding that his moral system be respected.

The deep irony here is that so many people here have been deeply wounded by the behavior of their former (or soon-to-be-former) spouses, whose moral faults they have no problem pointing out. But, by modern-day existential standards, shouldn't the admittedly divergent moral standards of those wayward spouses be respected?"

All my thoughts, just worded better.

I was just fixing to post something very similar.

You know, these arguements really boil down to one thing.

Those who have "relativism" system of belief DEMAND that everyone accepts their belief system and never challenge it. Why? Because it is conflicts with their belief that everyone gets to choose their own path and whatever that is is right for them and no one else should say anything about it.

Tolerance! Tolerance! Tolerance! is the cry....

Yet where is the tolerance for those who share conflictin beliefs?

It is not there.

But they will INSIST that it IS there, because they know that it would be inconsistent with their beliefs not to be tolerant.

Therefore they will defend their own tolerance of others to the death, all the while screaming about the travesty that a fundamental Christian would DARE to share his own beliefs.

Hmmmmm..........

(((AGoodGuy)))

“””I have read your posts here for years, and I know that you mean well . I always enjoy reading your posts, and typically agree with you, as we share similar outlooks on marriage and relationships.”””

I appreciate that AGG, I’ve enjoyed yours over the years as well and if I’m thinking correctly we’ve even e-mailed a time or two. That we disagree is fine with me, I will further say that being able to disagree respectfully should be noted on threads throughout these boards.

”””Perhaps your initial post was not well phrased by you, and perhaps you didn't really mean to say that you were saddened by the morality of your MB friends, because, let's face it, one can only be saddened by a perceived low morality of their friends, not a high one. Can you see how that can be very hurtful to anyone who perceives themselves to be on the receiving end of that comment?”””

First let me say that it’s obvious that I didn’t phrase things well, that much I totally agree with. But frankly, AGG I am saddened by the moral decline of America as evident for even having a need for a board such as this one. That saddens me. I have a feeling of sadness, that feeling is true and valid.

”””You say that you addressed your thread primarily to the Christians on this site, but I am sure you know that there are many others on this board who have no interest in Christianity, and do not want to be judged for not subscribing to your beliefs.”””

What I don’t understand is if you or someone else doesn’t like it, why not stay away from it. I have absolutely no interest in FWB and quite honestly find it offensive but I honor your right to speak about it. Why can’t that same respect be given me?


“””Like you said, this is a marriage building forum, not a religion discussion board.”””

Religious people get married too, so why can’t they safely share here?

“””is quite unpleasant for the rest of us.”””

So again, it’s ok for others to talk of thing unpleasant to me but not ok for me to talk of unpleasant things. AGG, that’s wrong. We all have a place here. That you and I can respectfully disagree is awesome, not everyone is that way.

”””Preaching about morality is a very slippery slope, especially when the person preaching has themselves shown morality inconsistent with their preaching:”””

AGG, because I sinned once or a million times doesn’t shed a light on me as a Christian or a moral person for that matter. And quite frankly after you having so much knowledge of me, my posts, and my beliefs over the years I’m offended by your comment but I also understand. We have different views.

”””So you chose to ignore the very morality that you preach when it came to your own choices, but then you come back here and tell others that their morality saddens you? Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical?”””

Though Knight did a great job expanding on things I have been waiting for the ‘H’ word to seep into this. Webster defines a hypocrite as “a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion”. AGG this is around my 3,144th post, I challenge anyone to read through a single one of them and show me where I’ve put up a false appearance of anything. I have been open and honest from the day I came here. I’ve confessed my short coming through many trials in my life. It’s all there for the reading. And yes, yes, God, yes, I have fallen short of the glory of God many times and any honest Christian will fall short every day. The bar is perfection and we can’t reach that no matter how hard we try. It’s what we learn from our experiences and teach others based upon our hard won knowledge that define us.

“””You know, I never understood how someone can choose to do something that they believed to be wrong, but then explain it away with a simple "we are all sinners, I have repented and have been forgiven" excuse.”””

You know AGG, you had me in the beginning of the sentence and showed some color with the last word. Because you don’t understand something does not invalidate it. If you are not a Christian, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. Just like I don’t understand how someone can surf porn, have an affair, or for that matter have a FWB relationship.

“””I would be impressed with someone who at least practiced what they preached, but when they don't, their credibility goes way down in my eyes.”””

Well, AGG, then you should never be impressed with a Christian or anyone pretty much from any mainstream religion because we all fall short. I have a belief in a book called the Bible and in the Holy Trinity.

“””Sorry if this is harsh, Bill”””

And again, AGG, I don’t find this harsh at all. You are not part of what I am a part of. We have different views and opinions. That we can disagree respectfully is fine with me. At the end of the day, I still love you and value you opinion and knowledge.

”””Check”””

“””AGG, you have the patience of Job and are very wise - and kind. I would do well to try to be more like you.”””

Yes, you should………

“””Knight”””

God love you, Brother…

(((CeeCee)))

“””What is the purpose of this thread?”””

For Christians to discuss their views of three issues……

”””I'm wondering, how are you intending to talk to your children about this issue? Are you open to them having pre-marital sex as long as they plan on marrying that person?”””

I’m going to teach my children the word of God and I will also teach them what happens, sadly through life examples, of what happens when mans-will is put in front of God’s will.

(((Gnome)))

I'm signing off for the night but wanted to say, I loved your posts and bless you....

Hugs, THoughts, & Prayers

But should it not have come out right upfront with his initial discussions of his MB friends' morality, instead of after questioning? I would have felt much better if Bill said "I am saddened by our failures" instead of "I am saddened by others' failures".



There is a third scenario, the one that happened here - "you did wrong, I did wrong, I am saddened by your morality"... I don't like the sounds of that, Gnome, sorry.


Do you refer to this question: "Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical?"

I think this is a far cry from "charge of hypocrisy".


No. But I wouldn't want to see a WS, even a FWS, make judgements about another WS's morality.


Yeah, I would agree.

AGG

I did not outrightly call him a hypocrite, FHL. If you can find a place where I called Bill a hypocrite, I will be the first to apologize, because I certainly do not consider Bill to be a hypocrite.

What I did do, if you reread my words, was make the suggestion to Bill that he might reconsider his words, because some of us find them hurtful. And in an effort to challenge his thinking, I asked if perhaps he might see a hypocritical element to his words, given his own actions. It was a question for discussion, not an accusation or a charge. He could have easily responded "no, I don't think so". Fine, no problem here. If I question my friend's action by saying "doesn't this seem a bit dishonest?", it would be absurd for him to say that I am charging him with being a liar. One challeneges a person's action or statement, the other attacks the person as a whole. I did the former, not the latter.

AGG

FHL,

I did not throw around the label "hypocrite". I was suggesting that you were close to calling Check a hypocrite, without perhaps using the actual word.

Can you point out where I used derogatory terms against anyone?

AGG

While Bill has already admitted that he worded his initial post poorly, I suspect that Bill's intention in that post was not to express his sadness over "others' failures" (although I have no doubt that that does cause him sadness), but rather to express his sadness over others' adoption of moral systems which are likely to end up hurting them. Adopting such moral systems does not constitute "failure" as such, since, as FHL pointed out, it is actually easier to successfully follow a less demanding code. Such success, however, is not necessarily the route to the greatest fulfillment or joy.

I can appreciate that, but I have found that whenever I find myself reacting badly to something I think I hear, it is always a good idea for me to take a step back and consider what the speaker is actually trying to say. Sometimes I discover that I was reacting to something that just wasn't really there.

A valid and significant distinction. My apologies.

This is, however, a good example of what can happen when I do not take a step back and consider what the speaker is actually trying to say. Misinterpretation.

For myself, I don't see an inherent problem with this. I believe there is a very big difference between an unrepentant WS and a repentant FWS. I also believe that there is a big difference between a deliberate "player" and someone who unwittingly got pulled into an affair at a vulnerable moment. Furthermore, I think that one's past experiences can actually be helpful in evaluating a moral system. Under a number of circumstances, a FWS can have a great deal more empathy for what another person is going through than someone who has never even been in a position to be tempted.

Good memory Bill <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />, and for that reason I hope this thread will die with you and me on peaceful terms <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.



I wish you had phrased your first post that way, that would have been a whole different discussion <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.


Bill, you know that these are two different things. Like you, I also usually ignore threads unpleasant to me, just like you chose to ignore the FWB thread. But if you start a thread where you question the morality of other MB posters, that is a whole different can of worms. No one questioned your morality on the FWB thread, did they?


I totally agree. Maybe that is why I found your initial post so surprising.


You know Bill, if you had started your first post with the words "I am saddened by our morality these days", I probably would have not given it a second thought. But saying that you are "saddened by the morality of your MB friends", without saying right there and then that you were no better than them, kinda creates a different slant on it. At least to me, it sounded a bit like a false front, which again was surprising to see from you.


I'll be happy to leave it at that, Bill. Like I said from my very first post here, I know you mean well, and I do not (despite others' statements to the contrary) consider you a hypocrite.

If I failed to get you to consider why some of us might feel hurt by your initial post, I can live with that. If I did make you think, then even better. That's what friends are for.

Peace,

AGG

Gnome, it's always a pleasure to read your thoughtful posts. I often feel envious (not in a bad way) of how well you state your points.


Perhaps this is the bottom line here. These forums are a poor method of communication to begin with, without giving us the ability to see all the nonverbal communication that goes along with the words. No doubt many of our words get misinterpreted.

I don't know Bill's intentions, but as I stated over and over I know Bill enough to know that he is not a hypocrite or any other bad things that others accused me of accusing him (still with me? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />).

AGG

Hi Bill & FHL04!!

I tend to agree that just because we don't always live up to the standards we set, that does not reflect on the standards.

FHL04- your story really touched me. My NPD wife could not keep her hands off me until about 3 months before the wedding, & I was told on the wedding night that my sex life would not be what I wanted. I constantly struggle with resentment towards God for my situation. Her disorder is getting worse by the day, so I have to be around to run interference for the girls.

To both- Your story really touches me, and kind of gives me hope that perhaps someday, I might be free and have a chance to be married to a loving woman.

CheckUR ~ My fellow MBer YOU are the one who has gone about this ALL wrong! Your personal biases & prejudices & lack of objective ethics has become rather renowned to me and many others here.

You set yourself up to be god. You are not! Moreover, from what I read from your hand, you do not follow the precepts of the living Creator God! Some of us here do. We are chosing to participate in LH's discussion. You really have no right or place here with your viewpoints. Often us Christians on this site choose to ignore your posts & positions in order to not stomp on your threads. I would respectfully request the same consideration from you to those of us who wish to have a Christian-morality based discussion.

I for one call for an apology from you to LH & the rest of us who wish to participate in a Christian civil discussion.

Whether or not you have any real sense of decency will be determined by response to this request.

Sincerely,
High Flight

Hi Everyone,

I'm going to say that I have not gone through and read all the posts - my apologies.

I believe as Christians we are called to become disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. Disciples do not "pick and choose" what they choose to believe and how they choose to behave. They accept the Truth as God speaks it in His Word and bring their minds, wills, and emotions subject to the Truth by the power of the Holy Spirit.

They live the Truth by the power of the Holy Spirit.

If they fall short - they don't change the Truth to fit their moral standards. They confess their sin.

As Christians - if "Christian" means disciples of Christ - we are called to live a pure, holy, and chaste life. That means we do not have sex outside marriage - and we do not consider a legal divorce within our states as a legitimate divorce before God.

Only when the Lord, not the state, says we are truly divorced are we truly divorced.

For example, the wayward spouse that marries his/her OW or OM - is not in a Christian marriage. The Bible says that the marriage - though the state says it's a marriage - is in the eyes of God ongoing adultery and not a marriage.

So I will not collapse to Christianity being defined as however Christians define their own morals. Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life... and His Word is the standard by which we must define Truth.

It isn't being judgmental to speak the truth in love. To collapse under the pressure of moral relativity is to adopt, and sometimes live, a lie.

So those who stand up for the Truth are disciples.

That we all fall short of living it is evidence we need a Savior - and thank God - Jesus lives!

If 10,000 Christians say it's "okay" to have sex outside marriage - it's not "okay". It's sin. The actions and attitudes of 10,000 Christians don't change the Word. And the one Christian who stands on the Word to call sin sin is telling the truth.

Without the Truth to lead and guide us - we're as blind people groping (no jokes LH!!! lol) in the dark.

SEE YA!!

Laura