Spin off: Why I don't believe in deciding for my later teens whether to "date"......

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't agree with dating for dating's sake. Just going from one realtionship to another isn't guarding our hearts or the hearts of others. We need to treat others the way we would want to be treated. We are responsible for how we act towards others.

 

I'm not sure I equate "dating" with necessarily "having relationships." When I turned 16 my aunt wrote me a long letter. In it (among other things) she said-go out, date, get taken to dinner and movies but don't form romantic relationships with guys that you wouldn't marry. Her reasoning was that you will fall in love with someone and you want to decide if that person is marriage-worthy before your heart is really involved. I think this was great advice. I went on a LOT of dates. LOTS. But a lot of the guys I only went out with one time. It helped me know what I did and did *not* want in a mate. It also gave me some experience dealing with men without the entanglements of a relationship.

 

 

I'm just not sure I agree that "multiple breakups don't do anything to strengthen future marriages." Sure, it adds "emotional baggage", but it also adds experience, maturity, and perspective. I learned a lot from the relationships I had before dh, and that wisdom has helped carry me through some of the hard times we've had. It's also given me perpective into our relationship, truly realizing the grass isn't greener and all that, when times are tough. I've been through enough to know that truly, for me, it doesn't get any better than this.

 

I do have to agree with this to some extent. I have a friend who had married her husband quite young, he was one of the first guys she ever dated and she came from a tiny town in Wyoming. Several years ago she lost 80 pounds and suddenly found she was attractive. She started going through things with men that I went through in my late teens/early twenties in college. She wound up divorcing her husband and having a sort of teenaged fling with a married man. It didn't last, of course, because he wasn't really interested in *her*. I know she now realizes that the grass isn't greener and men who are in the courtship phase are very different from how they are in a relationship but she didn't have the experience to know that. She thought it was just her husband.

 

I hope our dc date quite a bit before settling on something serious, and I hope they have a few serious relationships before deciding to marry. Of course if they choose another path, that's fine - my preference, however, would be for them to go into marriage armed with a little more experience in relationships, and yes, sex.

 

My husband is the only man I had a serious relationship with. However, I *do* think my dating-a-ton-of-guys-only-once gave me a lot of perspective. My mom definitely would have preferred for me to wait, would have preferred for me to have more relationships. But, we found each other relatively early. It wasn't my plan but I'm happy with how my life is going.

[NCMom]

I asked my just turned 19yo for his input, just to get one older teen's view. He has chosen not to "date" until he is ready for marriage, as was our wish for all of our children. I am a Christian but he is not, so there will be no "courtship" type activities here, lol.

 

His main reactions was to this quote.

I think this is an unfair juxtaposition. The choices aren't limited to promiscuity or no dating.

 

He feels that for the majority of other teens he knows, this is not true, at least from their point of view. The pressures are huge - dating for most of the kids he knows is about s@x or s@xual activity/fulfillment of some sort, with a kind of social standing being secondary. He knows VERY few people who "date" to meet people who are potential mates or even just to have companionship and fun with another person. He does know some "non dating" teens, too, although for being in the Bible Belt, surprisingly few.

 

Mind you, this is all anecdotal and no doubt there are plenty of teens out there who are not approaching the whole dating scene from this angle at all, but after two states and multiple activities with kids from a variety of backgrounds, parenting styles and educational choices, he just apparently hasn't met very many of them... :001_unsure:

 

Maybe he's just a pessimist, lol? Has this been anyone else's experience? I mean it pretty much was mine in high school, but I always kinda thought/hoped that was because I had absolutely zero parental involvement as did most of my friends.

 

It just seems so sad. I don't know the answer but so far we have all been on the same page in this area, albeit for different reasons.

 

Georgia

[Jugglin'5]

 

 

He feels that for the majority of other teens he knows, this is not true, at least from their point of view. The pressures are huge - dating for most of the kids he knows is about s@x or s@xual activity/fulfillment of some sort, with a kind of social standing being secondary. He knows VERY few people who "date" to meet people who are potential mates or even just to have companionship and fun with another person. He does know some "non dating" teens, too, although for being in the Bible Belt, surprisingly few.

 

 

Maybe he's just a pessimist, lol? Has this been anyone else's experience? I mean it pretty much was mine in high school, but I always kinda thought/hoped that was because I had absolutely zero parental involvement as did most of my friends.

 

Georgia

 

No, I think he's got a very realistic view. It was certainly my experience. I think some people have it in them to be more detached about it, but it wasn't that way for me or most kids I knew. My mom was like Mrs. Mungo, and dated a lot of different guys without forming a lot of attachment, but she is totally opposite me personality wise. She also manages not to take it personally when my dad would get caught looking at other women. She doesn't have a jealous bone in her body. She wanted me to date a lot and I did, but not with felicitous results. My dad set up on a blind date with future hubby, which did have felicitous results, but I think he knew what kind of guy I needed better than I did.

[runningirl71]

These are interesting points! I have always believed that for courtship to be truly successful it must come from the kid and not the parents. Otherwise, they are just no dating rules and doesn't get to the heart of what I believe courting is attempting to do. And, for the record, I hate the term "courtship". But, purity is important to us. I think there are many ways that purity can be attained. Courting is one of them. But, I know one thing for sure. It isn't the way I went about it. Getting as close to the line as "legally" possible is not purity. So, my dd is only 11 and we are not in that stage yet, but I can see it on the horizen. We are praying about how to help shepherd our kids through the mines of dating.

 

I'll be looking forward to reading the other responses because this is a topic I have become interested in. I will say that when you read Josh Harris's books (I Kissed Dating Goodbye) you don't get the idea that he is cultish. He is a great spokesman for someone who wanted to do things differently than the culture of the day. I think it is how it is played out that becomes a bit legalistic.

 

Courtship has always intrigued me as well and I like the points you made, WTMindy. I agree that it must come from the child's desire and heart in order for it to work. I also like Joanne's points, too, and agree. I think this topic CAN be blown way out of proportion. DH tends to be more balanced in his views about dating than I, so I will be depending on his insight/leadership when the time comes to go through this with my kids. My problem is, I never had a desire to date until college and I really don't know what the big deal is with it all. But, I've learned from dh that much of it is about socializing and I guess I didn't have much desire to do that with the opposite sex when I was younger!:)

[DB in NJ]

Joanne, with all due respect, your oldest is only 13 years old. You haven't btdt yet. What works with one kid may not work with another. My 17 yo tends to be overly cautious and stubborn (in a good way). He is not easily persuaded and is quite capable of standing his ground and not giving in to pressures placed on him by others. My 13 yo is the complete opposite. She's too easily persuaded (which she herself has readily acknowledged). My rules for the 2 of them are completely different because they HAVE to be.

[Greta]

Joanne, I want to thank you for your comments here (and everyone else too!). I have read this thread with interest because while I know I do NOT want to handle dating the way my parents did, I don't have a clear vision of how I DO want to handle it. Luckily I have a little time to figure it out since dd is only 8. ;)

 

I do know this: I have no intention of imposing a no-dating rule on her when she is an *older* teen. From what I can see, the only thing that would accomplish is that her first dating experiences, when she is most vulnerable and inexperienced, would be taking place after she has moved out and gone off to college. I would much rather her first dates take place while she is still living at home and we are still under the same roof so that we can offer her immediate and on-the-spot guidance, support, and advice should she need it.

 

Beyond that, I have no real clue how to go about handling this issue. Though I am not Christian, my religion does of course have some guidance for us on issues of sexual morality and intimacy. But these tend to be guiding ideals, and not clearly laid out "rules" -- and I think that's a good thing! But I did not have these ideals role modeled for me when I was growing up, because I was raised in a Christian home that was excessively (and I believe even destructively) restrictive. So I feel as if I am in unexplored territory with a compass but no map. I know I do not want to be as controlling as my parents were, but I also know I don't want to go too far in other extreme either.

 

Can you point me to any resources which offer guidance for parents on these issues?

 

Thanks for any help!

[Joanne]

Joanne, with all due respect, your oldest is only 13 years old. You haven't btdt yet. What works with one kid may not work with another. My 17 yo tends to be overly cautious and stubborn (in a good way). He is not easily persuaded and is quite capable of standing his ground and not giving in to pressures placed on him by others. My 13 yo is the complete opposite. She's too easily persuaded (which she herself has readily acknowledged). My rules for the 2 of them are completely different because they HAVE to be.

 

??

 

I've always supported custom, intuitive discipline and parenting decisions for the personalities within a family. :confused:

 

Are you suggesting that I can't have an opinion on how to parent an older teen, or post to articulate my feelings on an issue presented on the boards?

[LisaNY]

Joanne: I bolded part of my quote from your post. This, to me, speaks to part of my stand against parental imposed "no dating". By the time a child is ready for marriage, parental decisions for the child should have long ceased.

 

Again, I must rely on what Scripture says in regard to this. "...a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife." This does not indicate that parental involvement has long ceased by the time they marry. An involved parent isn't necessarily a controlling/domineering one. It is still a custom for a young man to ask a father for his daughter's hand in marriage, no? :001_smile:

 

My perspective is this: Our daughters know that we love them, and desire the best for them. We have a loving, open relationship with them, and we enjoy each other's company very much. We place great value on our family relationships. Our girls trust us, and come to us with their questions and issues because they value our opinion. They want and seek:001_smile: our input. Do we always agree? No, but we do strive to come to an understanding with one another because we love each other. Their dad plays a HUGE role in their lives. He loves them and affirms them constantly. He adores his girls. Right now, they are away this week at an Irish music camp. They have been doing this every year for the past four years. This is his chance to spend "dad time" with them, and they love it. All of these things are part of our nurturing and raising them up, and equipping them to make right choices. I am not so unrealistic to think that this assures us of perfection. We are simply attempting to the best of our ability with the help of the L-rd, to be good stewards of the lives that have been entrusted to our care on this earth.

[Kelli in TN]

??

 

 

Are you suggesting that I can't have an opinion on how to parent an older teen, or post to articulate my feelings on an issue presented on the boards?

 

 

I think you might be taking it wrong. I think she is saying that there is no substitute for personal experience. I don't think she meant it as a putdown at all.

[DB in NJ]

??

 

Are you suggesting that I can't have an opinion on how to parent an older teen, or post to articulate my feelings on an issue presented on the boards?

 

No, I'm not suggesting that you can't have an opinion. I'm saying you don't have anymore firsthand experience in handling this with your children than do those who commit to courtship when their children are six.

[Sandy in Indy]

Here's what we've done....I gave my dd and ds the Harris book as well as Dating vs Courtship by Paul Jehle (which outlines Biblical reasons not to date). I let them read and decide how they wanted to handle their lives. Both have chosen not to date at this point. (dd is 20; ds is 17) I have full confidence that when it's time both of them will find a spouse and have a wonderful relationship.

 

My nephew used to tell girls (who pursued him relentlessly) that he wanted to stand at the altar and see his bride with all of his heart intact...not a parade of girls with pieces of his heart. (And he just celebrated his 2nd anniversary with one very blessed woman.)

[Sharon in SC]

Again, I must rely on what Scripture says in regard to this. "...a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife." This does not indicate that parental involvement has long ceased by the time they marry. An involved parent isn't necessarily a controlling/domineering one. It is still a custom for a young man to ask a father for his daughter's hand in marriage, no? :001_smile:

 

My perspective is this: Our daughters know that we love them, and desire the best for them. We have a loving, open relationship with them, and we enjoy each other's company very much. We place great value on our family relationships. Our girls trust us, and come to us with their questions and issues because they value our opinion. They want and seek:001_smile: our input. Do we always agree? No, but we do strive to come to an understanding with one another because we love each other. Their dad plays a HUGE role in their lives. He loves them and affirms them constantly. He adores his girls. Right now, they are away this week at an Irish music camp. They have been doing this every year for the past four years. This is his chance to spend "dad time" with them, and they love it. All of these things are part of our nurturing and raising them up, and equipping them to make right choices. I am not so unrealistic to think that this assures us of perfection. We are simply attempting to the best of our ability with the help of the L-rd, to be good stewards of the lives that have been entrusted to our care on this earth.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[Mrs Mungo]

Again, I must rely on what Scripture says in regard to this. "...a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife." This does not indicate that parental involvement has long ceased by the time they marry.

 

I think this is a pretty extreme use of scripture considering the society and culture of the Israelites compared to Western society and culture.

 

An involved parent isn't necessarily a controlling/domineering one. It is still a custom for a young man to ask a father for his daughter's hand in marriage, no? :001_smile:

 

Not really, I don't know *anyone* my age (even the Fundamentalists) whose husbands asked permission first.

[DB in NJ]

Here's what we've done....I gave my dd and ds the Harris book as well as Dating vs Courtship by Paul Jehle (which outlines Biblical reasons not to date). I let them read and decide how they wanted to handle their lives. Both have chosen not to date at this point. (dd is 20; ds is 17) I have full confidence that when it's time both of them will find a spouse and have a wonderful relationship.

 

My nephew used to tell girls (who pursued him relentlessly) that he wanted to stand at the altar and see his bride with all of his heart intact...not a parade of girls with pieces of his heart. (And he just celebrated his 2nd anniversary with one very blessed woman.)

 

 

AMEN! That's what it's about -- giving your future spouse your WHOLE heart, not just whatever's left of it by the time you get to the altar.

[Peek a Boo]

Again, I must rely on what Scripture says in regard to this. "...a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife." This does not indicate that parental involvement has long ceased by the time they marry. An involved parent isn't necessarily a controlling/domineering one.

I'm outta rep Lisa, but you're on The List ;)

 

This is where there will likely be a big gap our perspectives --scripture offers more about honoring mother and father, obeying your parents, and fellow believers to exhort and admonish each each other than does a typical secular outlook on life and child rearing and marriage. Like Lisa, i will rely on scripture vs people's testimony. It's when one's testimony is in line w/ scripture [like Kelli] that i can see how scripture properly applied = great results.

 

Greta Lynne --I agree about the Josh Harris Book --I Kissed Dating Goodbye. It has a heavy Christian message, but he does a pretty good job of explaining why it's necessary to avoid legalism and focus on the other people that will be affected. If anyone has a resource for secular "wait to date" materials that would be appreciated here too.

 

Something that i've heard older teen girls gush about w/ positive response is when their dads take them out on a "date": dad gets all gussied up, takes her out to dinner, is wonderfully courteous and gushing praise, treats her like a lady, and brings her home. nothing like setting the bar high ;)

 

good luck!

[Kelli in TN]

 

My nephew used to tell girls (who pursued him relentlessly) that he wanted to stand at the altar and see his bride with all of his heart intact...not a parade of girls with pieces of his heart. (And he just celebrated his 2nd anniversary with one very blessed woman.)

 

 

Yes, ma'am. There is more to purity than what your body did. What your heart did matters too.

 

I am so grateful that neither my son nor my daughter-in-law loved anyone other than each other.

 

Obviously God can heal those broken places if a person does have a past, but it is not easier to avoid the brokenness to begin with?

[Sharon in SC]

Obviously God can heal those broken places if a person does have a past, but it is not easier to avoid the brokenness to begin with?

 

Exactly.

[SusanG]

[/color][/color]

 

I think this is a pretty extreme use of scripture considering the society and culture of the Israelites compared to Western society and culture.

 

 

 

Not really, I don't know *anyone* my age (even the Fundamentalists) whose husbands asked permission first.

 

 

Neither do I. My husband certainly didn't. We were living together when we got engaged anyway, so I think my parents just gave a big sigh of relief when I told them we were getting married the following year.

[SusanG]

Obviously God can heal those broken places if a person does have a past, but it is not easier to avoid the brokenness to begin with?

 

 

Easier? Of course. Better? I'm not so sure of that part.

[Peek a Boo]

I think this is a pretty extreme use of scripture considering the society and culture of the Israelites compared to Western society and culture.

 

 

well, to some people ANY use of scripture is "extreme" ;)

But my own observations have been that there ARE families out there who are embracing --and thriving-- when they stick to that "extreme" aspect of scripture. They don't immediately move out. They don't dump their parent's wisdom. They really do what they believe scripture guides them to do, regardless of what society says.

So to YOU it might seem extreme. To others it makes a whole lotta sense.

[Peek a Boo]

Easier? Of course. Better? I'm not so sure of that part.

 

scripturally, it's ALWAYS better to follow God's ideals than try to muddle through on our own. :)

 

That song "God Blessed the broken road..." just drives me bonkers.

[Mrs Mungo]

well, to some people ANY use of scripture is "extreme" ;)

But my own observations have been that there ARE families out there who are embracing --and thriving-- when they stick to that "extreme" aspect of scripture. They don't immediately move out. They don't dump their parent's wisdom. They really do what they believe scripture guides them to do, regardless of what society says.

 

There are people from all walks of life who are thriving using their own philosophy. And just for the record, not all parents are wise or an example to follow. Let's not generalize and imply anyone is less Christian or worthy or thriving than those who choose the path you describe.

[Alenee]

well, to some people ANY use of scripture is "extreme" ;)

But my own observations have been that there ARE families out there who are embracing --and thriving-- when they stick to that "extreme" aspect of scripture. They don't immediately move out. They don't dump their parent's wisdom. They really do what they believe scripture guides them to do, regardless of what society says.

So to YOU it might seem extreme. To others it makes a whole lotta sense.

 

Peek, I've been trying to rep you for a few weeks but it seems I haven't spread it around enough. Here's a HEAR HEAR and an AMEN SISTAH!:D

[Alenee]

There are people from all walks of life who are thriving using their own philosophy. And just for the record, not all parents are wise or an example to follow. Let's not generalize and imply anyone is less Christian or worthy or thriving than those who choose the path you describe.

 

I don't believe she implied that at all. And "thriving" really is subjective...

[Peek a Boo]

There are people from all walks of life who are thriving using their own philosophy. And just for the record, not all parents are wise or an example to follow. Let's not generalize and imply anyone is less Christian or worthy or thriving than those who choose the path you describe.

 

 

 

I mentioned in my first post that i was focussing on the scriptural implication that Joanne mentioned in her OP.

The "path I'm describing" is one that God has made clear in scripture.

If you choose not to follow that path, that's fine. people can define "thrive" however they want. I was directly responding to your statement that it was "an extreme use" of scripture. My point was that it might seem "extreme" to you but there ARE people thriving utilizing it.

 

I absolutely agree that not all parents are wise or an example to follow --which is why i qualified it w/ "when their practices line up w/ scripture."

 

and nowhere am i saying anything about whether one is "less Christian or worthy or thriving" --I'm simply advocating what scripture says and what i intend to follow. You certainly don't have to agree with it. Many don't.

[Jugglin'5]

There are people from all walks of life who are thriving using their own philosophy. And just for the record, not all parents are wise or an example to follow. Let's not generalize and imply anyone is less Christian or worthy or thriving than those who choose the path you describe.

 

I thought Peek was very careful not to imply that. I don't see where you are getting that?

[Mrs Mungo]

scripturally, it's ALWAYS better to follow God's ideals than try to muddle through on our own. :)

 

That song "God Blessed the broken road..." just drives me bonkers.

 

I thought Peek was very careful not to imply that. I don't see where you are getting that?

 

Her quote that it's BETTER to ALWAYS follow scripture did imply that, to me. Other people may have a different read on it. And nearly *everyone* picks and chooses which scriptures to follow or we wouldn't be eating cheeseburgers or wearing a cotton/linen blend dress.

[Joanne]

Not really, I don't know *anyone* my age (even the Fundamentalists) whose husbands asked permission first.

 

__________________

 

My husband, right before I turned 41, asked not only my Dad but my children before he asked me.

 

Yes, it was symbolic and he knew the answers would be YES! But it was one of the most honoring actions to me and my family that anyone has ever done.

[Joanne]

My nephew used to tell girls (who pursued him relentlessly) that he wanted to stand at the altar and see his bride with all of his heart intact...not a parade of girls with pieces of his heart.

 

That's beautiful!

 

I think a couple of things are getting lost here, not the least of which is logic.

 

I'm not advocating for dating.

I'm not suggesting the current behavioral trend for dating is a good thing.

I'm not "for" premarital sex/physical intimacy.

I'm not against older teens deciding to court (in whatever form they decide).

I'm not supporting or suggesting promiscuity.

The fact that I do not support imposing a no dating rule on older teens does not suggest a lack of other boundaries with them.

[Peek a Boo]

I thought Peek was very careful not to imply that. I don't see where you are getting that?

 

 

i thought i was careful about that too' date=' but I will take a moment and clarify:

 

God has spelled out a lot of things in scripture. Obviously NONE of us can hold to those standards [including--as i mentioned earlier-- yourstruly ;) ']

 

I said SCRIPTURALLY, it's always better.

And it is... SCRIPTURALLY.

 

The problem is we don't always keep those scriptures. Yes, many of us "pick and choose" but some of us do so in the context of interpretations and doctrinal differences in how we see Christ as our High Priest. The whole "liberty in Christ" thing is a pretty heady topic and one that has numerous scriptural proof on both sides of the debate.

 

HOWEVER, the fact that we can't keep those standards perfectly does not give us license to change or stretch or add to or take away from those standards. It also does not give us scriptural license to suggest a course of action in direct opposition from scripture.

 

Christians screw up all the time. That's kinda the whole purpose of uh, needing Christ. I'd be "less Christian/worthy/whatever" on different days if we were to analyze it on different topics and character strengths. We're not talking about whether someONE is less anything --I'm only exploring and advocating what is put forth in scripture as God's Word. Not everyone is in agreement w/ that basis, and I understand that.

[ereks mom]

I don't know *anyone* my age (even the Fundamentalists) whose husbands asked permission first.

 

Neither do I. My husband certainly didn't.

 

...and I guess you don't really 'know' me -- not IRL, anyway -- but my dh DID ask my father for permission before he proposed to me. (BTW, we're not Fundamentalists, and definitely not legalists.)

[Jugglin'5]

Her quote that it's BETTER to ALWAYS follow scripture did imply that, to me. Other people may have a different read on it. And nearly *everyone* picks and chooses which scriptures to follow or we wouldn't be eating cheeseburgers or wearing a cotton/linen blend dress.

I was going by the the passage that you quoted in your reply to her.

 

I don't think people really pick and choose, rather I think that we try to take the Scriptures as a whole, and it is not an exact science. Some things are less clear than others for sure. The Sabbath for instance - some people think it was part of the ceremonial laws that were abrogated, some think it is a law rooted in the Creation and Ten Commandments that still applies, and some think it is still Saturday. Are you saying that we can't really get any guidance from it at all?

[SusanG]

scripturally, it's ALWAYS better to follow God's ideals than try to muddle through on our own. :)

 

 

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize this thread was only for Christians. I was speaking of my OWN beliefs and opinions on the matter, and I stand by them.

[Jugglin'5]

Well, she prefaced it with "scripturally", which is shorthand for a Christian who takes the Bible as their guide,, so obviously you are free to ignore that viewpoint. I don't believe anyone was trying to exclude you - I sure wasn't.

 

Obviously there are going to be big diffs between those who believe that premarital s*x is wrong and those who don't. When I say "scripturally", I just mean, "this is the basis of my beliefs".

[Peek a Boo]

I think a couple of things are getting lost here, not the least of which is logic.

 

I'm not advocating for dating.

I'm not suggesting the current behavioral trend for dating is a good thing.

I'm not "for" premarital sex/physical intimacy.

I'm not against older teens deciding to court (in whatever form they decide).

I'm not supporting or suggesting promiscuity.

The fact that I do not support imposing a no dating rule on older teens does not suggest a lack of other boundaries with them.

 

i think the only thing "getting lost" is that you have said that parents simply should not impose a no dating rule. Not "we have decided for OUR family that we will not impose a no dating rule", but that no parent should be imposing such a rule/ boundary. That tends to go against respecting another family's rights to set specific boundaries w/ their own family.

 

We can explore what you think those "other boundaries" might be....

[SusanG]

There are people from all walks of life who are thriving using their own philosophy. And just for the record, not all parents are wise or an example to follow. Let's not generalize and imply anyone is less Christian or worthy or thriving than those who choose the path you describe.

 

 

ITA, obviously I have personally seen examples of VERY successful, happy marriages that began in many ways, including:

 

- High School sweethearts who never dated anyone else and got married after hs graduation, remaining chaste until their wedding night

- People who dated around a TON before settling on a marriage partner

- People who lived together before marriage

- One friend of mine got knocked up on the FIRST DATE, and they got married 6 months later. 8 years married and going strong :-)

 

Likewise, I know several people on their second marriage, or who are single after a failed marriage. I don't think any one way is "the right" way to do things, and I think young adults (17/18 and up, depending on maturity level) have to carve out their own path and find out what will be right for THEM. There's no guarantee of success (or failure) in any particular method of dating/courting/selecting a marriage partner.

[Peek a Boo]

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize this thread was only for Christians. I was speaking of my OWN beliefs and opinions on the matter, and I stand by them.

 

Of course it's not :)

 

But since the OP shared her reasons as having some scriptural implication, that's how I prefaced my entire POV for *this* discussion [back to my very first post in the thread]. i took her cue ;) And I thought i made it pretty clear that others have different things that "work" for them --I just can't accept those *for me.*

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't think people really pick and choose' date=' rather I think that we try to take the Scriptures as a whole, and it is not an exact science. Some things are less clear than others for sure. The Sabbath for instance - some people think it was part of the ceremonial laws that were abrogated, some think it is a law rooted in the Creation and Ten Commandments that still applies, and some think it is still Saturday. Are you saying that we can't really get any guidance from it at all?[/quote']

 

Nope, what I'm saying is that I think it's...insensitive (to put it mildly) to state or imply that one way of viewing or interpreting scripture is better than another. Everyone has to make those decisions for themselves.

 

I don't think Joanne saying "I do not support..." means that she thinks badly of people who do choose that path or that nobody can thrive in that environment.

[Jugglin'5]

Nope, what I'm saying is that I think it's...insensitive (to put it mildly) to state or imply that one way of viewing or interpreting scripture is better than another. Everyone has to make those decisions for themselves.

 

 

Okay, let me play the devil's advocate here...

 

Obviously each of us does think that one way is better than another, or else we could never make a decision! I don't just pick my opinions out of a hat (not usually at least:D), but I weigh the evidence and try to make the best choice possible. I think the whole "that's your opinion and it is just as good as mine" thing can be carried too far...gotta be careful or this will turn into an epistemological argument.

[Peek a Boo]

Nope, what I'm saying is that I think it's...insensitive (to put it mildly) to state or imply that one way of viewing or interpreting scripture is better than another. Everyone has to make those decisions for themselves.

 

I don't think Joanne saying "I do not support..." means that she thinks badly of people who do choose that path or that nobody can thrive in that environment.

 

 

I never said one interpretation of scripture over another was better --i just said scripture WAS the be all and end all.

What i DID say was always better [sCRIPTURALLY] was to FOLLOW scripture, period.

 

I haven't seen anyone else offer a scriptural reference in opposition to what I have stated. There's a difference between not agreeing w/ scripture, period and interpreting it differently. Susan obviously disagrees w/ the scripture part. That's fine. And lots of people think God Himself is a pretty insensitive guy ;).

 

If you are basing your life on scripture and want to pick and choose what you use, then fine --THAT is your decision. Why should it be insensitive then to describe what you believe?? To some of us, it would seem...insensitive (to put it mildly) to disregard what God has said on the subject.

 

If you aren't basing your life on scripture, then why get worked up over someone ELSE discussing scriptural implications of THEIR lives w/ another??

and if you've already "worked out for yourself" what you think scripture is, then feel free to disagree w/ my interpretation using scriptural grounds for doing so. You want to pick and choose in some particular parts, that's fine. Some don't want to pick and choose the way YOU do --is that insensitive?? Or are we no longer tolerating another's beliefs?

[Mrs Mungo]

...and I don't guess you really 'know' -- not IRL, anyway -- but my dh DID ask my father for permission before he proposed to me. (BTW, we're not Fundamentalists, and definitely not legalists.)

 

I'm 35 and I spoke too generally. I should have said that none of my good friends had the experience of their potential-husband asking their father for permission to marry them and I felt the original poster's implication that it was still extremely common was too broad.

 

I never said one interpretation of scripture over another was better --i just said scripture WAS the be all and end all.

What i DID say was always better [sCRIPTURALLY] was to FOLLOW scripture, period.

 

I haven't seen anyone else offer a scriptural reference in opposition to what I have stated. There's a difference between not agreeing w/ scripture, period and interpreting it differently. Susan obviously disagrees w/ the scripture part. That's fine. And lots of people think God Himself is a pretty insensitive guy ;).

 

If you are basing your life on scripture and want to pick and choose what you use, then fine --THAT is your decision. Why should it be insensitive then to describe what you believe?? To some of us, it would seem...insensitive (to put it mildly) to disregard what God has said on the subject.

 

The bolded is the sort of thing that is insensitive. YOU pick and choose scripture as well, everyone does. To imply that *I* am the only one doing so is (again, to say the least) insensitive and comes across as maniuplative to me. That's what I'm saying.

[Alenee]

:lurk5:

[Peek a Boo]

The bolded is the sort of thing that is insensitive. YOU pick and choose scripture as well, everyone does. To imply that *I* am the only one doing so is (again, to say the least) insensitive and comes across as maniuplative to me. That's what I'm saying.

 

I already SAID we all interpret scripture differently!

 

"Yes, many of us "pick and choose" but some of us do so in the context of interpretations and doctrinal differences in how we see Christ as our High Priest." --as opposed to arbitrarily picking and choosing. Would you like to share how you pick and choose, or just accept that we all do so differently?

 

My frustration at this point is that you are whining about my interpretation of scripture but not offering anything SCRIPTURAL yourself. It comes across as whining cuz you offer no real scriptural substance. If you have a problem w/ my interpretation, then lay out scriptural reasons WHY. If you feel that you having to resort to looking up scripture is manipulative then i have to ask...why? Is looking up scripture a BAD thing?

 

 

you have obviously ignored the parts in my posts where I have admitted that even I -MYSELF- am not following scripture the way it should be followed. i would encourage you to go back and re-read my posts and try to catch those times where I focus on those aspects. i already SAID there are different ways to pick and choose scripture --and i said that we could explore the different reasons we all pick and choose too. Did you catch my phrasing about how we ALL intepret scripture differently, and for different reasons?? Not everyone just arbitrarily picks and chooses. Your examples seem to suggest we just arbitrarily pick and choose what OT rules to follow --is that what you think most Christians do?

 

 

Do you maintain that your position in this discussion is based on scripture?

if it is, then nothing I've said should ring false unless it's the scripture you have chosen to dismiss. And you can simply say "thanks, but we choose not to follow that portion of scripture." Or just not reply at all. i took issue w/ you saying that the scripture itself is extreme in light of culture -- not all of us pick and choose based on culture. Your own phrasing seemed a bit manipulative too --"an extreme use" --not "for our family" but just in general? would you like to clarify that? .

 

If your position in this discussion is NOT scriptural, then it seems reasonable to let others who DO hold to those scriptural aspects to continue to discuss them in peace.

 

it seems at this point like you are taking an offense where one was never even implied. I said too many times that NOBODY can follow scripture properly. I've said too many times that people interpret scripture differently. You choose to ignore that, place me on some pedestal, and then say i put myself there.

[Mrs Mungo]

I already SAID we all interpret scripture differently!

 

"Yes, many of us "pick and choose" but some of us do so in the context of interpretations and doctrinal differences in how we see Christ as our High Priest." --as opposed to arbitrarily picking and choosing. Would you like to share how you pick and choose, or just accept that we all do so differently?

 

I'm not interested in converting anyone to my way of thinking on this board so the short answer is no.

 

My frustration at this point is that you are whining about my interpretation of scripture but not offering anything SCRIPTURAL yourself.

 

I haven't commented on anything SCRIPTURAL except to comment on the HISTORICAL context thereof. But anyone who is going to characterize my posts as whining is not someone I'm interested in continuing a debate with.

[Peek a Boo]

I'm not interested in converting anyone to my way of thinking on this board so the short answer is no..

 

i hope you don't assume that everyone who bothers to share their views of their faith isn't out to "convert" someone. That would be incorrect. The only reason faith came up at all is because it was IN THE OP.

 

 

 

I haven't commented on anything SCRIPTURAL except to comment on the HISTORICAL context thereof. But anyone who is going to characterize my posts as whining is not someone I'm interested in continuing a debate with.

 

Right --you originally commented that it was "an extreme use." Considering quite a few Christians still follow such an antiquated book even in the current culture your reason still doesn't hold much water, scripturally speaking. noting the historical nature of that one comment I responded w/ current cultural application of said extreme scripture.

 

you have commented quite a bit since then on being offended by another's use/interpretation of scripture. Your comments in that regard have been anything BUT "historical". I would LOVE to see your posts on this issue as something other than whining, but you're not giving us any substance TO debate with.

 

have a nice day-

[Kelli in TN]

And another interesting conversation goes down the toilet.:glare:

 

Wouldn't it be nice if we could do this without the thinly veiled insults? I was very interested in stating my opinion AND reading the opinions of both people who share my belief system and people who do not. I find it challenging and interesting and I always walk away more enlightened.

[LisaNY]

[/color][/color]

 

I think this is a pretty extreme use of scripture considering the society and culture of the Israelites compared to Western society and culture.

 

I think this verse is illustrating a principle, that parents do maintain involvement in the lives of their children, even up to the time of marriage. Again, not in a controlling and domineering way. But they still provide guidance and input. I am still of the belief, especially where daughters are concerned, that the father is the covering for the daughter until her husband assumes that role.

 

 

Not really, I don't know *anyone* my age (even the Fundamentalists) whose husbands asked permission first.

 

My point was that, rare as it may be, a father still plays a role in the life of his daughter, even up to marriage. It may not be a popular custom anymore, but it is still one that we have chosen to maintain, and one that I am sure some remote parts of our society still maintain. As I shared in another post, the young man who proposed to my niece got the father's blessing first. :001_smile: As a matter of fact, the same went for the other sister as well. It is a regular occurence in that family, and they are by no means a cloistered group.

 

The way today's parents choose to deal with dating is irrelevant to my dh and I. We know that we have chosen a different, less popular path for our children. We are firm in our resolve, and have not been convinced by what we have seen, heard, or experienced that dating is a valuable choice for our girls.

[Joanne]

i think the only thing "getting lost" is that you have said that parents simply should not impose a no dating rule. Not "we have decided for OUR family that we will not impose a no dating rule", but that no parent should be imposing such a rule/ boundary. That tends to go against respecting another family's rights to set specific boundaries w/ their own family.

 

We can explore what you think those "other boundaries" might be....

 

I pass, thank you.

[Peek a Boo]

I pass, thank you.

 

i guess the logic just left EVERYONE, eh? ;)

 

And another interesting conversation goes down the toilet.:glare:

 

that about sums it up.

[Kelli in TN]

 

 

 

that about sums it up.

 

 

 

Edited to add: Oops, someone sent me a PM to let me know that the small font offended them. So I made it a bigger.

 

 

 

Um.....before you go agreeing with me you might want to know that I was actually saying that about the way you were posting. I thought you were showing bad form. I just needed to clarify that, because I felt that point might have been missed.