Justifying Premarital Sex
by Ted Slater on 11/17/2008 at 1:36 PM
We received the e-mail on Saturday. Her boyfriend was pushing her for more sexual intimacy, but she didn't feel quite right about giving in:
My boyfriend and I have been dating for a year. We both are ready to marry each other. He hasn’t proposed yet, but I think it is coming soon. We have discussed the topic generally and want to be married next spring.
There is just one thing we don’t agree on. He thinks it is okay to pursue physical intimacy up to but not including intercourse prior to marriage. I, however, think that playing that close to the line is not safe nor biblical. He says it borders on legalism to be okay doing some things such as holding hands and kissing but hindering yourself from others. His interpretation of ‘do not arouse or awake love until it so desires’ strickly means intercourse.
We’ve had many discussions over this and though I know what I think and feel is true, I am struggling convincing him and struggling to find biblical text to back up my beliefs. Can you please help me or am I in the wrong? What are the boundaries when you are almost engaged? I do want to show physical affection but as soon as I do, this huge stream of gray lines pops up and where do you stop? He is willing to respect my beliefs but wants me to back up my thoughts. I then get tongue tied as I try to explain and end up feeling like maybe I am being legalistic if I can’t find the specific scriptures to prove why I think and feel how I do.
Providentially, perhaps, today's Q&A on Boundless Webzine addresses a very similar issue. Here's an excerpt from the Q part of the Q&A:
I recently met a Christian guy at my church and we've been out many times. We seem to agree on many issues except the issue of sexual intimacy before marriage. I believe that God wants us to enjoy sex with the person we are married to; however, he believes that God created sex to be enjoyed as a part of the dating relationship because we have such a basic need for it.
I have this vision of predatory men wanting to use and discard naive women for their own selfish purposes. Men who call themselves Christians, but unChristianly twist Scripture to satisfy their desires for sexual intimacy. Sickening.
Well, it's a good thing John Thomas provided the response in today's Boundless Answers column. He's much more gracious than I would have been.
1. IMO said the following at 2:15 PM on Nov 17
Even before I was a Christian, this passage from Jane Eyre (chp 27) reminded me to stay true to my beliefs:
"Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour, stringent are they; inviolate they shall be...with my veins running fire, and my heart beating faster than I can count its throbs. Preconceived opinions, foregone determinations, are all I have at this hour to stand by: there I plant my foot!"
And as a side note, don't let your emotions get in the way of the truth. Any guy that will cause you or want you to sin with him does not have your best interest in heart, which is first and foremost a sold-out for, growing relationship with Jesus Christ.
2. Tigger said the following at 2:21 PM on Nov 17
This young lady sounds like she has her head on straight, but take it from me, it's hard for many anyone to keep it all straight when there are emotions and hormones and thoughts and hopes and expectations and opinions flying about.
This young man sounds like he hasn't grown up yet and has no idea of the concept of putting another's needs and best interests ahead of his own. That is a clear sign he isn't ready for marriage, children, or even a deeper relationship where he will have to make compromises and sacrifices.
I'm a little confused about where the writer says they 'have had many discussions' and later 'but he wants me to back up my thoughts.' Sounds like she has. What more does she need to do? He has a one-track mind, and it either goes to the usual or toward being right. Red flags being tripped everywhere I look...
She should also ask him - if "love not being aroused" only means no intercourse, then does he not get aroused from other ways of getting intimate? If he does, then he's pushing the line - arousing love before it should be. If messing around doesn't do anything for him, then he's lying, or not attracted to her. Simple.
Final answer: I would grieve deeply to ask someone to do something they would or could regret, especially if we weren't married, and even more if it weren't necessary. Even more importantly, probably most importantly, shouldn't he be giving her love, respect, and honor, before she gives him her body?
Boundless writers - you answered beautifully, exactly as I would hope my father would answer if I asked him. I hope she believes and has faith that she is worth being waited for.
3. Matt from DC said the following at 2:24 PM on Nov 17
Way to go Ted with your additional advice. I hope that she informs her SG leader and pastor.
The thing about these guys that makes me mad is how she says: "We’ve had many discussions over this..." So they've talked and she said "no" and then he brings it up again and again. What kind of care is this? What kind of love is he feigning?
Mark 9:42 "And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck."
And this harshness from the God-man who rebuked his disciples in Luke 9:56 saying "...for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." when they asked to call fire down on a city for not accepting his message.
I do not bring this second verse to call the meaning of the first verse in to question or as if it is some kind of contradiction - it is not. I cite the second verse to show that Jesus wanted to save lives and that the issue in the first verse bothers him so much that he threatens something worse than drowning.
I think it would be a good thing to stop and pray for these men, the women they are in relationship with, and those that they have left in their wakes. May God show himself mighty through the prayers of his saints for the protection of his flock.
4. Matt from DC said the following at 2:27 PM on Nov 17
IMO,
What a wonderful quote. I'm going to commit that one to memory and teach it to my sons. Thanks for sharing!
5. Tigger said the following at 2:30 PM on Nov 17
I stand by my initial impression, that this guy sounds manipulative. In the full article, the writer mentions that he will look for sexual fulfillment in other areas if she persists in refusal. Sounds like an ultimatum - an appeal to fear to get his own way.
If a guy told me that, I'd tell him to cool his heels and we could see how things were in six months. ... I mean, I've had non-Christian guys tell me they would wait as long as I wanted, no conditions at all.
I hope that the advice here gives her heart and strength to stand by her convictions.
6. BDB said the following at 2:46 PM on Nov 17
It seems so strange to be agreeing with a Winnie-the-Pooh character on a subject like this...
7. mary kate said the following at 2:53 PM on Nov 17
great responses, in both places (here and in the Q&A column).
i agree with some of the previous commenters... this guys sounds a bit manipulative and immature. esp when i read this: he doesn't know how to handle his sexual feelings and He told me that he will have to get those needs met apart from me in some other way which doesn't necessarily mean another woman
ouch! an ultimatum!? 'give me what i want or i'll get it elsewhere!' that is not healthy or mature. sounds like he's gotten his way for far too long, and now that someone is pushing back against him, he's resorting to manipulation and bullying. LAME!
please, please... do NOT give in. you will regret it forever.
8. Adam said the following at 3:39 PM on Nov 17
Hey Everyone!
I believe that there is a real scriptural problem with this guy's argument. Sexual immorality is often spoken of in the context of other sins that are related to marriage. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 6:9 we have all kinds of sexual sins listed together, including things like adultery. If you speak of something in the context of adultery, how can it be related to when a person is married if it is in the same context as a person who is married?
Not only that, but we have an entire insertion into the text that is not there. Where in the world is anything having to do with when one marries? Where is that even close to being mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6 or any other passage? It doesn't exist. This guy has simply made a bogus eisegetical comment.
However, the idea of "love desiring" referring to "physical intimacy" I would take just as being just as eisegetical. It is "love" that is not to be aroused until that very same love desires. If you take love here as "physcial intimacy," then how does one make sense out of physical intimacy desiring?
Indeed, there is no text that says that "physical intimacy" is wrong. I would also question what is meant by "up to but not including intercourse." Does that mean the things that are specifically condemned in Ezekiel 23? Obviously, that text talks about more than just intercourse.
I think simply sticking with the text solves many of these problems. While the Bible absolutely condemns many things as being wrong [Ezekiel 23, 1 Corinthians 6], beyond that, I don't think the issue in this regard is so much what you do, but how you behave when you do it. Can you do this, and honestly say that you can be self-controlled, loving, patient, kind, and good [Galatians 5:22], or, when you do these things, do you end up thinking impure thoughts, loosing control, etc. [Galatians 5:20-21]? Yes, there is nothing wrong with kissing, but you had better make sure that, if you do it, you are consistent with the other behaviors God lays out for his people. Of course, that could also be said for simply looking at someone of the opposite sex. If you do it, you had better make sure that you keep your thoughts pure.
This is why it is that I believe that simply following the text solves many of these problems. Yes, there are always going to be people who twist the text of scripture, and there are always going to be well-intentioned people who try to find things in the Bible that are not there in order to solve legitimate problems. However, I think both can be remedied by simply looking at the text, and allowing it to speak for itself.
God Bless,
Adam
9. khalil said the following at 3:39 PM on Nov 17
A couple of people have already hit on it, but I will as well. The ultimatum thing really gets me upset, I can't say that I would be as composed or restrained in my response had someone I know been given such a demand. While we only have the young lady's perspective of this it does appear (rather clearly) that this guy is a manipulative jerk.
His suggestion that he might have to seek "relief" from other means...I assume he means porn and masturbation (none of us have perfect lives, but choosing to entertain sin is a different matter) makes me think that porn and sexual misconduct are a regular part of this guy's life. She needs to think twice about wanting to remain in a relationship with him. The only thing I think that I would add to the advice would be confronting him first: basically telling him that he is out of line and he can either come clean to the church leadership (if he needs her to be present I see nothing wrong with that) as a man and with intentions of growth and healing or she will report him. If he can give an ultimatum so can she. I believe his response to this will confirm much, but if she feels that the relationship can continue it should only continue once he has come clean to the church leadership about his struggles and dealt with it in an adult and appropriate manner.
He does indeed sound like a predator and he needs to be dealt with.
10. DEH said the following at 3:40 PM on Nov 17
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm just wondering what other people think. This is in response to the first couple addressed in the post, the almost-engaged couple. The line from the letter that stuck out to me was this:
"He says it borders on legalism to be okay doing some things such as holding hands and kissing but hindering yourself from others."
The thought that this produced in my mind was that if it's not okay to, say, make out for an hour on the couch (which I would definitely argue is not wise), why is it okay to kiss at all? Didn't God create sexual arousal as a process that starts small and builds? Where do we draw the line? Is there a point of no return? And if the point is to avoid arousal at all ("Do not arouse or awaken love..."), shouldn't we draw the line at the very beginning of the process, with holding hands or giving hugs? Or is that being legalistic? Truth be told, my husband told me after we were married that he used to get aroused by just sitting next to me when we were first dating. Sometimes it doesn't take much to start the arousal process. If that's the case, how do we interpret the Song of Songs verse? It seems like it would be impossible to completely avoid the arousal process.
I'm wondering if we all are misinterpreting that verse from Song of Songs and trying to make it fit situations is was not meant to fit. At least one person has proposed the idea that the book was written by Solomon's wife (likely his first, the Egyptian princess), and that this was a book of love poetry portraying the intense battle going on within her heart as she deeply desired her husband but as she was also forced to stand by and watch as he gave himself to many other women (his hundreds of wives and concubines). If this was a correct interpretation (I'm not saying that it is or isn't), might that change the way we interpret the "Do not arouse" verse?
I'm wondering if the arousal really is bad; perhaps it's the entertaining of lust and acting out on such desires outside of marriage that is sinful, not the physical response created by hormones as a response to another attractive person.
That said, God designed sexual arousal to culminate in intercourse. It's hard to stop a moving train.
I don't know the answers about drawing lines or any of that. I was just wondering what other people thought. I do agree that these guys need to back off and respect the boundaries their respective girlfriends. That's the least they can do to show their love.
11. DEH said the following at 3:41 PM on Nov 17
Oh, and I really appreciate that quote, IMO. Thanks for sharing it!
12. DannieA said the following at 3:49 PM on Nov 17
I was in a dating relationship earlier this year where the guy discussed "how he was waiting until we could get physical". I too had many discussions with him, alas my no did not mean no and he always pushed as far and whined and sulked when I said No yet again. I let him go and he is still trying to manipulate me into pursuing a relationship with me. I'm sorry for this reader, but if this guy doesn't get help from a Pastor or someone that will help him grow in the area of unselfishness and respecting boundaries...it's better for her to let him go.
13. Matthew said the following at 3:54 PM on Nov 17
If I had a friend like this, he would hear no end of grief from me until he repented.
If I had a sister in this situation, something would probably be dislocated.
Making excuses for sin and bullying his girlfriend for sex is unacceptable, and I hope and pray that there is an accountability structure in place to call this guy out and a good community to surround and support this young woman.
P.S. This loser isn't terribly creative; I think "most creative" goes to a guy I heard about who quoted a verse in the Bible about how some men are "unable to control their own vessel" and he figured that he was clearly in that category or something like that...
14. CC said the following at 3:56 PM on Nov 17
Don't marry him.
I really hate to be negative; however, you have TALKED about marriage and there is no ring on your finger. As a woman I have learned that we commit with our hearts long before a man does (usually). I have also learned that a man commits once his $$$ has been committed.
Going further, lets say that you DO get married. What if there are other issues that come up that you are uncomfortable with? Now you are married...
I'm actually speaking from experience. I didn't want to listen to the still small voice of the Holy Spirit telling me this person was not who God had for me. And when I married him...there were more compromising situations that he put me in that I HAD NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT.
Someone who loves you can wait and will do (or not do) anything for you. And remember - this is to be the spiritual leader of your home...hope you can respect him.
15. Mrs. Spit said the following at 4:17 PM on Nov 17
Perhaps most distressing to me was his attitude that if his girlfriend wasn't meeting his needs, he would move elsewhere. Simply put, his gratification matters more than the relationship.
I wonder, there are periods in every marriage where sex can be less than the first priority. While this isn't as it should be, small babies, high risk pregnancies and travelling spouses can limit sexual contact between couples.
I wonder, if he's not able in a situation that does not yet require his absolute commitment to give any level of commitment, what will happen if they do marry?
Ted, your advice is sage, by all means the Pastor needs to be aware of this situation. But more than that, this young woman really should be cutting off contact with this not-so young man. If he won't treat her with the respect she deserves now, he's not likely to suddenly acquire the skills and mindset to do this after a marriage.
16. BDB said the following at 4:19 PM on Nov 17
QUESTION!
Does anyone have examples of how their boyfriend/husband did a GOOD job of bringing up the physical boundaries discussion? An example of someone doing the right thing you'd like to share?
17. khalil said the following at 4:29 PM on Nov 17
CC, #14...
I don't see in the article where this couple had discussed marriage as a possibility, the young lady posing the question mentioned sex and its relationship prior to and during marriage.
I do agree with you that marriage is not an option for this couple and the young lady needs to be very cautious of this guy. This guy has issues that screams "DO NOT MARRY", at least for now. Maybe he will be quality marriage material later down the road, once these issues are addressed, but for the time being he is best left alone and should remain single.
18. Nate said the following at 4:45 PM on Nov 17
I think that this article is one of the most sickening things I have read in a long time. Why is such blatant sin being tolerated in the church? All the wise, old people in my church would beat me (lovingly) with their canes if I tried anything even remotely similar. If I was that young lady, I would have told that guy off and left immediately. (I certainly plan to teach this strategy to any future daughters that the Lord may bless me with.)
To the young lady who wrote the letter: My advice is to drop that guy like a sack of lead. It is not your responsibility to set this guy straight. That responsibility belongs to one of the male leaders in your church. There are plenty of guys out there that will honor you for the woman who God created you to be and who will provide godly leadership for your future family. Consider this, if this is how that guy treats you now, what do you think he is going to teach his sons to be? I shiver at the thought.
I think Satan is probably trying to frustrate God's plan for your life by trying to get you mixed up with the wrong person. My advice is to go for God's best. You will never be sorry you did.
19. anonymous for now said the following at 4:52 PM on Nov 17
re: BDB #16
When I was in college, I very slowly and carefully began moving towards a relationship with a young man there. After we confessed attraction, but before we officially established a relationship, I asked him how our physical boundaries would change after we were in a relationship. (until then, we hadn't touched any more than any other guy friends I had) He said it wouldn't change a bit. He expressed a healthy fear of "innocent" physical touching turning towards sin, and said he would be fine not touching me at all while we were in a relationship - which is to say, while we were trying to discern whether or not we should be together. In the end, we didn't pursue marriage, but I have always felt esteemed, loved, and respected by this young man because of his choice.
20. Ted Slater said the following at 5:21 PM on Nov 17
Adam (comment #8) -- You seem to be misunderstanding Song of Solomon 2:7, 3:5 and 8:4, which implore the "daughters of Jerusalem" not to "stir up or awaken love until it pleases."
Check out the context. In each instance, the scene is getting pretty steamy. In the first, this warning comes just as the woman confesses to be "sick with love," just as her lover's hand is under her head and his other hand embraces her and ...
... then there's this warning ...
... and then it continues with the voice of her beloved and how excited she is to hear it.
In the second instance, she finds her lover and holds him, not letting him go, bringing him into "the chamber of her who conceived me" and ...
... then there's this warning ...
... and then the narrative continues with the way her lover smells.
The third instance is very similar to the first -- the embrace, etc....
When I read these passages, I imagine a "Greek chorus" interrupting the narrative before it moves from PG to R. :-)
The word "love" that you are concerned about, Adam, seems to convey a sense of "affection" in this context more perhaps than "loving commitment." Strong's indicates that this "affection" can be of the sexual kind. In another lexicon, this Hebrew term can refer to "sexual desire."
So this warning that interrupts the sensual narrative seems to be cautioning listeners/readers not to let their affections get the best of them.
Finally, you say that "there is nothing wrong with kissing." Of course there can be something wrong with kissing, Adam. Would there be nothing wrong with my kissing a woman I'm not married to? Of course there would be something wrong with that. If I were still single, would there be anything wrong with pressing lips with two different women? Most likely. Again, if I were single, would there be anything wrong with prolonged kissing in an isolated place with my girlfriend? Probably.
I agree with you that a sin is not primarily in the action but in the heart behind it. At the same time, some behaviors are by nature sinful, regardless of the heart behind it.
21. Kelly said the following at 5:44 PM on Nov 17
I read the article on Boundless and it made me sick to my stomach.
It was the EXACT SAME THING my ex-boyfriend, a 'Christian', used to say to me.
I felt so inadequete and immature when I argued with him because his arguments seemed so sound and logical. He kept telling me to grow up and stop clinging to naive innocence, after all, I didn't even know what sex was like so how could I say it was wrong?
Worse than that, the man in the relationship is generally the dominant one, the decision-maker. That's how God made it. So if you're a woman, planning to marry this man, and he's deciding for the two of you that sex will make you stronger as a couple, it is such an awful, awful debate to keep having.
It destroys relationships: either you cave or you don't. There's no compromise.
I had six months of this argument and even though it was a few years ago now, it still makes me feel so awful. My prayers are with any woman going through this right now.
22. Adam said the following at 7:01 PM on Nov 17
Ted,
Adam (comment #8) -- You seem to be misunderstanding Song of Solomon 2:7, 3:5 and 8:4, which implore the "daughters of Jerusalem" not to "stir up or awaken love until it pleases."
Check out the context. In each instance, the scene is getting pretty steamy. In the first, this warning comes just as the woman confesses to be "sick with love," just as her lover's hand is under her head and his other hand embraces her and ...
... then there's this warning ...
... and then it continues with the voice of her beloved and how excited she is to hear it.
In the second instance, she finds her lover and holds him, not letting him go, bringing him into "the chamber of her who conceived me" and ...
... then there's this warning ...
... and then the narrative continues with the way her lover smells.
The third instance is very similar to the first -- the embrace, etc....
When I read these passages, I imagine a "Greek chorus" interrupting the narrative before it moves from PG to R. :-)
Actually, if you look at each of those contexts, you will find that there is something that leads up to that "steamy" section that is not necessarily sexual. "Love" in the Song of Songs is much more all encompassing, referring to all aspects of a romantic relationship, not just the sexual aspect, although that certainly is prominent in the Song of Songs.
The word "love" that you are concerned about, Adam, seems to convey a sense of "affection" in this context more perhaps than "loving commitment." Strong's indicates that this "affection" can be of the sexual kind. In another lexicon, this Hebrew term can refer to "sexual desire."
So this warning that interrupts the sensual narrative seems to be cautioning listeners/readers not to let their affections get the best of them
Actually, the meaning of the term "love" here is not the issue. The issue is the meaning of the *personification* of love in the temporal clause:
Song of Songs 8:4 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem do not arouse or awaken love until it desires.
The issue is, if you view love here as sexual desire, then what does it mean that sexual desire desires? It would appear to mean that when ever your sexual desires desire to be aroused, it is ok to arouse them!!!!!!!! That doesn't make any sense. Whatever you take love to mean here, whenever it desires, it is permissable to arouse it. That has strange implications if this is purely physical affections as it seems to prove something with which all of us are uncomfortable!
As I said before, it seems to me that this is referring to romantic love en toto, which is, naturally, supposed to end up in marriage. Hence, taking that definition of "love," it is speaking of a romantic relationship which naturally ends on the wedding day at the very point where it "switches from PG to R :-)." What this means is that romantic love is not something that can be forced. This kind of love must be something that develops on its own.
Finally, you say that "there is nothing wrong with kissing." Of course there can be something wrong with kissing, Adam. Would there be nothing wrong with my kissing a woman I'm not married to? Of course there would be something wrong with that. If I were still single, would there be anything wrong with pressing lips with two different women? Most likely. Again, if I were single, would there be anything wrong with prolonged kissing in an isolated place with my girlfriend? Probably.
Ted, you are taking me out of context. I was referring to the person who wrote to you. She, obviously, is not married, and hence, the context is not parallel to you.
In the other two cases, again, we have to look at the reason behind this. Obviously, we all believe in monogamy, and hence, when you kiss someone, you are telling them that they are the ones with whom you would like to pursue marriage. Hence, when you two-time like that, you are lying to each girl.
In the final case, we just have to ask why it is that the kissing has been so prolonged? Again, it gets back to the issue of self-control as the book of Galatians talks about, and living as Christians in a manner consistent with our calling.
I agree with you that a sin is not primarily in the action but in the heart behind it. At the same time, some behaviors are by nature sinful, regardless of the heart behind it.
Of course, I admitted such in my post. No one is denying that murder, for example, is always wrong. However, the Bible very clearly defines these things. I would argue [and, indeed, have argued], that there is no place in scripture that says that kissing is wrong, and therefore, it all depends upon the things I said before.
God Bless,
Adam
23. Hannah said the following at 7:17 PM on Nov 17
re: #16
My boyfriend, now my fiance, did the same thing at #19. We started off holding hands, but that would quickly turn into a side hug and he would apoligize and start over back and holding hands. After a few months of that he decided the best thing for both of us was not to touch each other. I agree with 19, I felt so loved and respected when he spent time with me and didn't touch me.
24. Julie said the following at 9:20 PM on Nov 17
BDB #16:
My wonderful boyfriend and I had known each other for a year as plain ole friends before we started dating, and it was a bit new and strange and, well, beautifully heightened, to start doing boyfriend/girlfriend things like sitting close and bumping shoulders and such. We're both in our mid-20's. On our second date I was cold so he asked if it was ok to put his arm around me, and after doing so he said something like, "Hey, we should probably talk about some physical boundaries." I liked that he brought it up in a relevant way as soon as touching came into our relationship.
From knowing him I already knew we agreed on the basic common points like no sex before marriage, and from two years of reading Boundless plus my own experiences, I already had a clear idea in my head of what I believe is appropriate and acceptable in physical boundaries for dating. To honor God and each other, it's not about where is the line and how close can we get to it, so let's ask instead how we can cherish each other, and that means keeping things way back on the physical scale. A wise mutual friend had pointed out to both of us that it's all waiting at some point along the line of physical intimacy till you're married anyway! I said I wanted us to both be physically comfortable around each other and to both have the freedom to say anytime, "Hey, that's a little much for me right now," even if it was just hand holding and that had been fine yesterday.
He was nodding in agreement through this but went on to ask a couple specific questions about kissing and touching, which I replied to frankly. You can be direct about what turns you on without being explicit - for example, Don't kiss my ears, don't play with my hands, don't lets do french or extended kissing.
Again, I really appreciated the detail level of the conversation - thought it was cool/he was cool and didn't mind at all that he was a little embarrassed to be so blunt. I will say it helped vastly to have a trust background of knowing each other and being easy with each other.
His allowing me to choose the limits for our physical relationship actually made me feel protected, like couples of old sitting out on her family's front porch swing within reach of the watchful eye of the parents.
25. EN said the following at 9:45 PM on Nov 17
BDB #16
I can give an excellent reference of how a boyfriend dealt with this situation. And some kind words he said in it.
He and I do kiss and hold hands. One night we had a somewhat prolonged kissing time (longer than a peck goodnight) and both decided when he left that it was a bad idea. The next day when we had dinner he apoligized for it, that it was wrong to be that intimate (to address the above comment even though we were/are planning on getting married) at this time, that it gets into dangerous territory. I responded along the lines that it was also my fault and I was sorry as well (I mean I was certainly involved there). Then he told me something that meant a lot to me and is probably one of the sweeter things I've heard. He said, I know, but it's my responsibility to guard and protect you because you're a precious gift to me. Sounds slightly sappy writing it, but it definitely meant a lot and definitely heightened my respect for this man. Especially since in the past I had been in a slightly predatory situation as the second one above.
One thing I would like to say to that girl. He kept saying okay when I told him we weren't going there (though he also disagreed with the biblical argument), then he would push my boundaries a little more and a little more and I kept giving a little -- I didn't want him going to the porn or another girl (he never threatened this but I knew it was there). Eventually one night I asked him to stop what he was trying and tried to fight him and he didn't stop. So get away from this guy. Maybe he's not like that, but speaking from experience you're better off without him. It took me a long time to move beyond what happened in that relationship I didn't trust men for over a year and needed counseling. I learned to trust them and now I have an amazing fiance, but I just wanted to tell you that story so you will realize where guys with this kind of sin problem CAN lead. Trust me -- there are some really great guys out there and you will find one. You just might need to be patient for three or four years. I did.
26. nikki said the following at 9:51 PM on Nov 17
BDB, comment #16: I felt compelled to share about my relationship with my boyfriend while reading this thread. I just want women to know there ARE good men out there, not just immature little boys who push people around and whine to get their way - but real men who know what it means to deny the self for the greater purpose of glorifying God.
My wonderful boyfriend of two years is one such treasure. The physical discussion was one we brought up near the beginning of our relationship, but it wasn't an issue for a very long time because we moved so slowly in that area. It is more difficult now as we approach engagement and marriage next year. But whenever he happens to push the boundaries a bit (not often, but it does happen), he is quick to apologize, and often we pray together asking for God's help in this area. We're down to almost no kissing (just goodbye kisses while one of us is already in the car) and it is helping immensely in the struggle. Yeah, it is really hard sometimes. But my boyfriend holds my purity as a high treasure and honor (as I do his), and wouldn't dream of pressuring me for sex before we were married. He and I are excited and anxious for that day - but we are denying pleasure temporarily because we know it is the best plan. We love each other enough to go against natural instinct, and wait. So I just wanted everyone to know that it can be done...it probably won't be easy, but few valuable things really are.
And please, ladies...you must hold out for a man who cherishes and keeps your purity.
27. Leah said the following at 10:00 PM on Nov 17
I would say that if two people had such different ideas of what is "biblical", they probably shouldn't be getting married.
Secondly, even if he did happen to be right, he still shouldn't be pressuring her to change her boundaries to something she's uncomfortable with. Loving? I think not.
Having said that, she should ditch the guy like a sack of lead. He obviously doesn't care what her standards are and is only interested in his own fulfillment. NOT what you want in a husband.
28. Mike Theemling said the following at 3:30 AM on Nov 18
One thing I would tell this young lady is to mention Paul's words in Ephesians 5:3
"But among you there must not be even a hint (emphasis mine) of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people."
In our society, we often know when someone crosses the boundry between a "casual" romantic interaction and "serious". Holding hands, even peck kisses might be considered "casual". But heavy petting, oral sex, etc. although technically not intercourse, would certainly not be considered "casual" by most. The former actions do not hint towards immorality, but the latter most certainly do.
I too would recommend an ultimatum with this guy if she still likes him and thinks there is hope with him. Either he needs to stop with the pressure and Scriptural perversion or he loses the relationship.
29. Marmy said the following at 6:10 AM on Nov 18
As a mother of three girls all I can say is RUN, do not walk, away from this guy - and DO tell someone in authority in your church what he is all about - you are in store for much heartache if you stay - God has something MUCH better for you - just wait - this makes me livid to think of what he is trying to do to you and HAS done to other young women in the past - he has NO intentions of marriage - so don't fool yourself /or let him fool you - OF COURSE he is charming now - he is working to get something he wants -- the charm will disappear quickly after he gets it
30. Laura said the following at 6:41 AM on Nov 18
Seriously, can I just add one more thing?
Ladies, it is NOT YOUR JOB to handle your boyfriend's sexual desires. When you're married, you'll have a responsibility in that area, but until the preacher says "man and wife" it's 100% HIS area to deal with his sexual urges in a holy way.
31. Lucie said the following at 6:54 AM on Nov 18
Tigger said in his/her original post pretty much everything I would have, but a couple of things stood out to me: first, that the couple is "almost engaged" (but not!), and second, man's endless ability to manipulate scripture to justify practically any act.
I echo the other posters who saw red flags and suspect the lady in question might do better with another man. If he can't respect her values now, he isn't likely to do so after they're married.
32. Craftin' Gal said the following at 7:44 AM on Nov 18
Thank you all for sharing your stories. You're really encouraging me!!!
For a short time (¡cortito!) I dated someone who couldn't understand why I wanted to wait to do things like cuddle (just hold/be held), hold hands, etc. I can't blame him entirely, since I didn't defend my boundaries strongly at first; but I did recognize that he wanted to push the envelope. Though he said he wanted to respect my virginity, he really wasn't going to help me protect my purity. If I was willing to give up my virginity, I think he would have gone along with it. That's really not the sort of man I'm looking for!! Blessedly, God helped me recognize this far sooner in a dating "relationship" than in previous instances. (We never kissed! Thank goodness!) Getting over him took a lot less time than previous boyfriends.
To many of the gentlemen who have replied -- thank you, thank you, thank you for loving us sisters in Christ so much that you want to protect us and cherish us. My admiration of true Christian men has risen today. May you be blessed for standing for Christ in this loving, practical way!!!
33. Chance said the following at 8:38 AM on Nov 18
"Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in you hearts, do not boast and be false to truth. This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, and demonic. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, and sincere." - James 3:13-17
These qualities are something we should be looking for as we search for a mate. Should we set our standards too high refusing anyone who doesn't perfectly match this standard? No, of course not. But there should at the very least be signs of these qualities in whomever I am observing in the person I hope to marry.
The situation that this young woman finds herself in is so sad and she should never have been subjected to it. All men (and women for that matter) make mistakes, we are all figuring out this whole process together, and I don't recommend condemnation for anyone who is confused or has been mislead or has wrong ideas about the process of courtship or dating. If I did then I would be counting myself out of the running as I have had plenty of my own misconceptions and probably still do. However, if the qualities listed by James are completely absent, "peaceable, gentle, open to reason" these are huge red flags, even bigger than wrong ideas about sexuality. These wrong ideas can be corrected if there is a spirit of humility and an openness to learn, but if this is militant and uncaring as he sounds, then there are much bigger issues here.
Why settle for a man who puts his own gratification before you? Isn't a marriage relationship about caring for each other? Listen to the good advice that everyone is giving. Don't give in to the pressure to do wrong, I'll repeat what others have said; if he is like this now, how much worse will his selfishness be if you get married and he no longer needs to worry about "keeping" you. If he is setting a pattern of manipulation and selfishness now it will not improve later on.
-Chance
34. Ted Slater said the following at 8:45 AM on Nov 18
Adam (comment #22) -- I appreciate the cordial discussion.
I did a search through the ESV for all instances of kissing, and did find a couple of instances where kissing was used in a fraudulent way, to deceive.
In Genesis 27, Jacob deceived his father with a kiss, pretending to be someone he wasn't. In 2 Samuel 20, Joab kisses Amasa and then kills him. And then, of course, there's Judas, who betrays Jesus with a kiss.
A principle we can draw from this is that kisses can be used to infer an intimacy or relationship that doesn't exist. These kinds of kisses can be manipulative, and are therefore wrong.
We see this more directly in Proverbs 7, where a prostitute defrauds foolish men with a kiss. That's a perfect example of Proverbs 27:6, which says that "profuse are the kisses of an enemy." Yes, the Lord loves those in the sex industry, and His heart breaks for them, but their behavior is an enemy of our souls.
Throughout all these examples, we see kisses used to manipulate, to defraud. We need to evaluate our motives when we give a kiss. Are we using them to *get* something, to move the relationship faster than it "desires"?
I don't think we're disagreeing that much, Adam. Just exploring together.
35. cn said the following at 9:30 AM on Nov 18
As someone who is engaged (but only for 26 more days!) I can tell you from experience that during an engagement period, there is a healthy shift in boundaries that needs to take place. This shift should never include any type of affection that could be considered true foreplay, but in preparing to become one flesh, a godly softening of hearts towards how you chose to express your love through affection is good.
Bethany Torode explains some of this in one of my favorite Boundless articles, Kiss Me Now. I think she does a great job to write about purity in a way that is not legalistic. She challenges our notion of over-sexualizing all types of affection and comments that our passions do not have to be stronger than our will.
In my opinion, it is a sad day when engaged christian couples refrain from hugging, holding hands, and sharing loving kisses in fear that they are being sexually impure. I understand the necessity of this prior to engagement and acted on in with my fiance as we chose to not kiss until we entered into this current season. Even now, we are cautious that hands do not wander to places saved for marriage.
I would never judge someone else's actions as legalistic though. Sexual purity is of high biblical priority and we should all set up appropriate boundaries to maintain Godly and holy standards.
The young woman mentioned in the blog doesn't seem to be in the same situation of shifting boundaries that my fiance and I went through, though. This situation seems to be one of true disrespect. What is sad about this to me is that she feels like she HAS to justify her convictions with deep biblical evidence that she seems to be running out of. If she feels uncomfortable sharing her body in certain ways prior to marriage, then her boyfriend needs to respect her desires and not force her to justify them. I question the true health of this relationship because the first evidence of biblical leadership from a man is doing all that he can to keep the relationship pure. This man is doing the opposite in trying to manipulate her to giving in. I hope she has a revelation of her worth and finds someone who will love her selflessly.
36. Craftin' Gal said the following at 9:55 AM on Nov 18
Ted:
We need to evaluate our motives when we give kisses. Are we using them to *get* something, to move the relationship faster than it "desires"?
Amen!
And other physical expressions of romantic affection can be used in the same vein: to enjoy for oneself what the other person really isn't ready to give or to experience what is more than the actual development of the overall relationship warrants.
As some of the other commenters have described, saving particular physical expressions of affection till later stages of the relationship AND till the time when one can really mean what that expression implies, is a very wise thing. Kudos to all who recognize this truth and walk in it.
Boundless has helped me shape, articulate, and solidify my stance on what and when in a dating/courting relationship I will make or allow various physical expressions of affection. And after my most recent dating experience, that stance was confirmed. Thank you for providing both the impetus for these discussions to develop and the forum in which they may take place.
37. Amir Larijani said the following at 10:27 AM on Nov 18
Ted (#20):
This reminds me of an exchange I had in a Sunday School class. I was giving a plug for the inductive Bible study class we were to start on Mondays.
Tango Sierra--one of the gals in the class, exclaimed, "Amir! You and your inductive Bible study! No wonder you are single! I can only imagine you being married! It's Friday...your wife is at home...you have two choices: (a) make long passionate love all night, or (b) do inductive Bible Study. You would do the INDUCTIVE BIBLE STUDY!"
I said, "Yep. On the Song of Solomon. With practical applications."
Amir Larijani: 1
Tango Sierra: 0
38. Mike Toreno said the following at 10:31 AM on Nov 18
Wow, what a smooth operator, and what a romantic approach. Trying to argue someone into sex is an act of profound disrespect, a violation of their autonomy. The various arguments and justifications are beside the point. The point is, this is what she chooses to do, this is how she chooses to live her life. The woman can tell the guy this:
"You'll ask me, why I rather choose to have
A weight of carrion flesh than to receive
Three thousand ducats: I'll not answer that:
But, say, it is my humour: is it answer'd?
What if my house be troubled with a rat
And I be pleased to give ten thousand ducats
To have it baned? What, are you answer'd yet?
Some men there are love not a gaping pig;
Some, that are mad if they behold a cat;
And others, when the bagpipe sings i' the nose,
Cannot contain their *****: for affection,
Mistress of passion, sways it to the mood
Of what it likes or loathes."
People don't say that enough; too often they feel they have to have an argument for every decision they make. Many, many times, the best, simplest answer is just, this is how I feel, this is what I want to do. Saying that demands respect for your own autonomy and asserts your right to have your feelings respected just because they're your feelings.
39. Tami said the following at 11:10 AM on Nov 18
Amir, that's funny. :)
Except... I know that many ladies would looooove to hear you were so into inductive Bible study!!
You should "accidentally" show up at your local evening women's BSF class* and ask a ring-less young woman where the men's group meets.
Kidding. Slightly. ;)
[*I know BSF is not everyone's cup of tea. But they do love verse-by-verse study!]
40. Amir Larijani said the following at 11:31 AM on Nov 18
Tami: I've done BSF. (They do have it for men, although the men's offerings are on a much smaller scale than the women's.) I love BSF.
Trouble is, they segregate the sexes. LOL
41. Louise, 43 said the following at 11:42 AM on Nov 18
Comment 38, you state a person should just be able to say "this is how I feel and this is what I want to do" and be respected for his/her feelings/actions.
I agree, but would the commentors on here extend the same courtesy to individuals with a secular worldview?
42. alex said the following at 11:49 AM on Nov 18
IMO, very good! (This is why women love Jane Austen, btw, Mr Darcy notwithstanding.)
Mr Slater, I hope you told those girls to get on their high horse and send those boys packing with a good lecture they won't forget. They THINK the Bibile excludes premarital sex?!?!!?! Where has Christian education gone to??? This is why we still need Sunday School.
43. Matt from DC said the following at 12:04 PM on Nov 18
Amir,
I'm at work, stop making me laugh out loud!
cn,
Well said. I think my physical intimacy boundaries would be like what you describe for your relationship.
44. Tami said the following at 12:54 PM on Nov 18
I'm sorta not surprised you've done BSF, Amir. :) I think BSF is great. Challenging (esp. if you're in leadership), but great. It's also a good opportunity to meet and mix with other believers in your area. And I agree, it's frustrating that most of the classes are separated by gender (except the rare Young Adults =20s-30s unmarrieds) groups. I would've loved meeting other male BSFers when I was involved.
So that's why I'm sayin', "accidentally" show up at the WOMEN'S group one evening and ask for information! You may be the answer to someone's prayer request. ;)
And with that said, I promise I won't derail this thread any longer. :)
45. BDB said the following at 1:19 PM on Nov 18
Is BSF a railroad? I guess that's BNSF...
(Burlington Northern Santa Fe)
I know BASF is a chemical company - we don't make the surf board, we make it stronger...
46. Tami said the following at 1:32 PM on Nov 18
BDB: BSF = Bible Study Fellowship :)
Now the real mystery is, what does BDB stand for? Are you a Badly Drawn Boy fan? Bible Discussing Boy? Brawny Disciplined Brazilian? Backin' 'Da Bears? :)
47. DannieA said the following at 2:14 PM on Nov 18
Louise 43,
would it surprise you if I told you that my scenario with the man I was dating a few months ago where he didn't respect my boundaries..came from a 'Christian' worldview...
And that one of my best relationships where I explained my boundaries and they were respected came from an Agnostic man???? (the only reason we ended up parting ways was due to that reason...)
I felt safe and adored with a person from a secular view and absolutely could not trust a man with a supposed christian world view.
A real man WILL respect the woman he is dating....hey may not like some things, but he will deal with it as best as he can.
48. BDB said the following at 2:19 PM on Nov 18
OK, I don't know enough Portuguese to say something funny about Brazilians...
Hey, I just realized we are always discussing men's initiative, but never men's initials...
49. BDB said the following at 2:43 PM on Nov 18
Ok, back on topic.
Aristotle's Doctrine of the Mean suggests that a virtue is the intermediate step between two vices.
The courageous person, for example, judges that some dangers are worth facing and others not, and experiences fear to a degree that is appropriate to his circumstances. He lies between the coward, who flees every danger and experiences excessive fear, and the rash person, who judges every danger worth facing and experiences little or no fear.
You see this doctrine playing out in Boundless articles. You have articles decrying male "passivity" (playing Halo 3), and other articles decrying male "aggressiveness," like this one. So, the virtue in between them is the man taking the initiative to set the physical boundaries...
(And people said my coursework in political philosophy would never be useful...ha!)
50. BDB said the following at 3:19 PM on Nov 18
Incidentally, if a man disciplines himself to never take initiative, women may deem him "safe." Given that secular media are constantly telling women to take initiative, this "safe" guy could actually get asked out a lot. Of course, if he keeps accepting the invitations, the woman might eventually get mad that he doesn't move to take the friendship into an actual relationship...
51. Mike Toreno said the following at 6:30 PM on Nov 18
Louise at 41, a fair point, but my focus is not so much on how people should react to an assertion such as I advocate, but on firming oneself up to make it without feeling a need for argument or self-justification.
I think that people, secular or religious, will tend to give others the courtesy they claim to deserve. ("Claim" maybe isn't the best possible word, I don't mean an explicit verbal claim, I mean a sort of apparent sense of entitlement, but as you can see, it's clumsy to put an expression like that into a sentence).
I think it's often harder to just assert yourself without apology or argument than to get other people to respect the assertion once you've made it.
52. Kelly said the following at 7:40 PM on Nov 18
CC said:
"And when I married him...there were more compromising situations that he put me in that I HAD NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT."
Is there any chance you could share with us on this? I want to know what kind of things to be wary of, because like you suggested, I have often thought that marrying the man would fix the problem of pressure.
(I realise however that this might be very personal and I don't intend any offence, and I'm sorry to hear you've gone through so much. :( )
Also... in terms of being pressured - my ex also used to tell me that within a marriage, it was a wife's duty to be there physically for her husband. And if she refused, then she really couldn't complain if he went off and found gratification elsewhere.
I guess that's one of those lifelong compromise things, and if you're pressured BEFORE marriage, you'll be pressured/threatened afterwards as well?
53. Andrea-Elena said the following at 8:34 PM on Nov 18
BDB:
BASF is a chemical company - we don't make the surf board, we make it stronger...
Do I detect another PBS fan? ;o) [Gotta love those BASF "commercials." Wait... they don't have commercials on PBS. Or...do they..... Heh, heh.]
And you've mentioned railroads and Aristotle in the same thread. You'd win points with my dad (railroads) and my best friend (political philosophy). *swoon*
Ah, yes... the Golden Mean (er... maybe that's the geometric version...)... Isn't there a Scripture that correlates to that?
the virtue ... is the man's taking the initiative to set the physical boundaries
Amen, pass the bucket, wave the hanky, sing another round of "Just as I Am," and beat that tambourine!
54. Kit said the following at 9:41 AM on Nov 19
Okay, I'm going to be really honest here, and say that in the relationship I am in with my fiance, we have struggled with purity. We have not had sex, but we had to push our boundaries WAY back.
We each have an accountability partner that we talk to and that helps alot, knowing that you will be grilled about what you did when you were together. :-)
Surprisingly, I have found that I struggle more with it than he does! There have been several times he's had to say, "We can't go there." Not that I pressure him, at all, but it's a struggle for both of us.
However, that's different than him or me constantly putting pressure and using threats. I think it suonds like this guy is a loser and is not yet marriage material.
55. L said the following at 11:09 AM on Nov 19
Hi there,
The answers are all very good! Good to know that there are so many Christians out there! I live in the UK and can alsmost say it 99% atheist. I recently broke up with a man due to this sex issue. He couldnt understand why, as he felt his desires were natural. He did say that he wasnt sure where our relationship was going(we'd only been dating 2 months) but wanted sex.
Anyway what I want to ask is this; are there any men out there who have waited for sex for thr girls they wanted to be with? How long did you wait? Months? Years? Till marriage? Are there any who have seen the benefit of waiting? I.e. those that waited, then are now married for a long time? Are they seeing the difference in their marriage?
I just really need encouragement right now, that I made the right decision, and that I am not doomed to be single all my life due to my 'high standards' :)
Thanks,L
56. Tami said the following at 12:33 PM on Nov 19
L: obviously I'm not a man, but I do know men -- in their 30's and beyond -- who have waited. And are waiting.
So don't lose hope. :)
57. Ronnica said the following at 1:16 PM on Nov 19
His answer was good as well as what you said about it. The only thing I would add is that he's admitted to being sexually active in past relationships, presumedly as a believer. Is that the kind of person she wants to marry? If he hasn't been faithful before marriage, there's a decent chance he won't be faithful during marriage.
58. BDB said the following at 1:30 PM on Nov 19
L (#55) wrote:
>>I just really need encouragement right now, that I made the right decision, and that I am not doomed to be single all my life due to my 'high standards' :)<<
I know lots and lots of people who didn't hold to high standards and ended up with years and years of struggle in their marriages as a result. Assuming their marriages last at all. I know several couples who didn't wait and their marriages fell apart after a few years.
I do not know anyone who waited and regretted it.
59. IMO said the following at 3:07 PM on Nov 19
I know plenty of guys that waited until marriage.
And sometimes they move up their wedding date because of it. Isn't a bad thing, IMO.
Also, what group of people do you hang out with or are in your circle? I mean, I never thought guys waited for marriage either...until I started hanging out with those that did! Maybe I just have a lot of strong Christians at my church and highschool and college ministry...
60. Kelly said the following at 3:50 PM on Nov 19
BDB said: "I do not know anyone who waited and regretted it."
...because they're still waiting? ;)
(Sorry, just had to tease!) I will find it VERY interesting in 10 years or so to see if we're all waiting or not.
61. BDB said the following at 11:10 PM on Nov 19
Kelly (#60) wrote:
>>...because they're still waiting? ;)<<
Ha ha - I should have specified people who are now married...
>>Also, what group of people do you hang out with or are in your circle? <<
Now that I think about it, this may be one of the reasons it is better for churches to mix the generations. Mixed groups seem to have more decorum...
62. Todd said the following at 2:21 PM on Nov 21
L (#55)
My wife and I waited - we dated a year, then were engaged for three months before getting hitched. Some people teased us for having "hot pants" due to the brief engagement, but it was true to an extent! :) It wasn't easy - we're in our 30s, and had been fighting to stay pure for over half of our lives at that point.
The good news is, neither of us regret waiting in the least. If anything, we have a more active sex life than any of our married friends. We have seen many others who didn't wait go on to get divorced or remain in manipulative, unloving relationships; while only "fights" we get into are over which one of us loves the other more :)
I don't mean to imply that it's all sunshine and roses - marriage is hard work. But at least we don't have the guilt hanging around our necks that comes with "knowing" your future spouse before God intends.
63. Christopher from Albuquerque said the following at 6:50 PM on Nov 22
As a 35-year-old single Christian man (who would really like to be married), I wish that I could sit down with these "Christian" men and have a long talk. Their selfish, self-justifying views of premarital sex are simply not worthy of the women with whom God has blessed them. These guys should be dumped-- immediately.
64. lemon said the following at 9:28 PM on Nov 23
#23 and #24....I am more than a bit confused by these, and I hope I'm not the only one. I can't believe it's considered a "boyfriend/girlfriend" thing to bump shoulders. And side-hugs? If someone can't control themselves after giving you a side-hug, they might have a few more problems to worry about. I know that it opens up doors for more to happen I guess, but I feel like those kinds of things are *very* minor and are not that big of a threat to purity. You could do more with your uncle. And I feel like, not even touching someone is very extreme. It feels almost obsessive, that you are so terrified of touching someone's side...I know that sex before marriage is wrong, but how can someone have a healthy attitude from sexuality after marriage, if not even touching someone is okay?
65. Ultraviolet said the following at 7:53 PM on Nov 24
#62
That is very admirable that you and your wife were able to wait. I just want to clarify though, I hope you're not implying that the fact that you waited is why things are going relatively smoothly. I know that it is maybe a factor, but I'm not sure if you can attribute the fact that your friends who didn't wait are now in manipulative marriages or divorced. It might not be the fact that they didn't wait itself, but rather that the fact they didn't wait was indicative of other unhealthy elements or inequalities in their relationship. I'm not sure if you were implying that strictly because they didn't wait that their marriages were doomed, but I don't think so, and so I just wanted to clarify. :)