Christian Religion vs. Romance
by Ted Slater on 05/06/2009 at 10:14 AM
Jeffrey Whiting, a regular commenter here on The Line, sent us a fascinating e-mail earlier this morning. He's given me permission to publish it here.
* * *
...
Also, at the outset of this message I would like to mention I am in complete agreement with the very practical, sensible and Christian ethic that [Candice], Suzanne, and Dr. Mohler articulate about reserving all sexual intimacy for marriage. I am happy to proclaim my solidarity with this conviction as the most authentically Christian understanding of intimacy and its hallowed place within the confines of marriage.
That being said I have had difficulty with applying this ethic in my "relationships" (for lack of a better word) with women, but perhaps not in the way you would expect.
Let me explain: It seems that in the area of sexual morality the teachings of the Christian religion and romance are often contrary to each other, because they derive from rival moral traditions.
Christianity places great importance on commitment ("the man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife"), fidelity ("thou shalt not commit adultery"), and permanence ("what God has joined together let no man put asunder") as the organizing principles between men and women that are decreed by God to perpetuate the species and glorify Him.
Conversely, romance has an often contrary list of principles: repeated separation and reunion (Tristan and Isolde, Romeo and Juliet), infidelity (Anna Korenina) and passability (for a more contemporary example: the TV show Friends) as means to generate passionate connection, "chemistry" and feelings of "being in love" that are the necessary conditions for a man and woman to be together.
On one hand the Christian ethic teaches one thing about how men and women are to relate to each other and the romantic tradition often teaches something completely contrary! Yet, both traditions have coexisted for the better part of a thousand years in Western civilization and neither seems poised to overtake the other as the dominant ethic in governing relations between men and women. It seems the two traditions will continue their uneasy co-existence during my lifetime and for many years to come.
Indeed, some would argue that the two outlooks can be harmonized, but I am not so sure, and that is what brings me to my dilemma:
It is all well and good to advocate the teachings of the Christian religion on these matters and I have done everything possible to follow them in my overtures to women. I have never had sex or even kissed a woman. However, in the "relationships" I have had my experience has been that by following Christian moral prescriptions the women eventually loses interest because she is not feeling "chemistry" or the level of passion she has been conditioned to expect.
To further clarify: I'm not talking about initiating foreplay or sex, I'm talking about what the authors above advocate such as not kissing or being physically intimate. You see, the romantic ethic has taught us that some level of physical escalation seems to expected by women from men and I can't help but wonder about — and feel discouraged by — the idea that following the Christian ethic has resulted and will result in being single even longer than I desire.
What is your reaction to my thoughts on this subject? Do you have any guidance you would be willing to share?
Pax,
Jeffrey Whiting
* * *
I can't introduce this concept any better than Jeffrey has. And I, too, would love to hear your thoughts on this subject.
1. Tami said the following at 10:52 AM on May 6:
1
Given a choice between:
* A guy that swept me off my feet with romantic gestures, but was a pretty aimless guy otherwise, or
* A relationship led by a man with courage and confidence, with most physical stuff (save hugs and holding hands) waiting until later,
I would choose the latter.
I know I am not necessarily looking for grand romantic gestures (though thoughtful actions that show care are great!). But I would *love* to see more men passionate about Christ, life in general, and their particular field of interest and skills. A lot of guys I come in contact with show very *little* passion about much of *anything*.
I think, sometimes, it's easy to define "passion" as physical romantic actions, as that's what we're used to seeing, and -- honestly -- it does stir our emotions. So maybe if a guy isn't passionate about *something*, and on top of that he's not showing any particular interest in the girl (I mean, yes... we do want a guy to act like he really does *want* to be with us), which we've culturally come to expect to manifest itself through physical interactions, then I can see how it would be likely that a girl could lose interest and not feel that the possibility for a lifelong relationship is budding. (I hate the word "chemistry".)
I personally want to come alongside a guy and help him in his mission. If a guy has no mission… it’s really difficult to see how I can come alongside him! I think where we might come into error is if we start equating “passionate about me” with “passionate about his mission”.
2. Eric said the following at 10:54 AM on May 6:
2
You bet the Christian ethic will result in being single longer than you intended, but not in the way you suggest. The problem lies in the (mostly) protestant materialism that has become so pervasive among the churched, the idea that you must wait until you are ready financially to marry and start making babies. Most human beings are ready physically - and with the proper biblical upbringing, emotionally - to marry, become sexually active, and start a family in their late teens. The church in her materialism tells these young people they must wait another decade or more before doing what God has designed them to do right now. That's too much pressure. Those who don't give in to sexual temptation will slowly succumb to bitterness as they age alone. I don't think it was ever God's plan for you to be 25 or 30 years old and have never been kissed.
3. Denisha said the following at 10:56 AM on May 6:
3
I would take take the Christian value on love than the worldview on romance.
Secular romance seems like such a waste of time because it doesn't go anywhere,in movies the romance between the couple is the catcher but there is nothing about the ending result.
As a woman I want romance but I want it in the right place and time.
4. Saidahwk said the following at 10:57 AM on May 6:
4
Wow. Deep and true. I suppose my first response would be to start looking for girls elsewhere. If you're trying to initiate relationships from a strictly biblical perspective, you are going to have a hard time "connecting" with girls who are looking for "romance." I suppose the best bet would be to focus on women who have been brought up in more conservative homes and who have grown up expecting chaste courtship and not a passionate dating experience.
5. DannieA said the following at 11:07 AM on May 6:
5
IMHO I think that there can be both in appropriate ways.
Tami hit it right....if a man isn't passionate about anything or doesn't seem to try to rein in his deepening attraction to a woman, it's hard to think that this man will become the passionate person after marriage.
My parents courted because my mom was the youngest by 7 years and by the time she and my dad started "dating/courting" there was nobody left to chaperone...so they had to sit on the stairs in front of the house unless they got "away" by going on a church outing for the youth. They have always said, that there has to be some spark/passion that you have to hold onto when hard times come and things need to be worked out because it's no longer "fun". Yes Christian ethic comes into play during these times, however, since my parents have been together for a seriously long time and have seen HARD times and still have a passion to the point where my dad when in a playful mood takes out song of solomon and starts reading out in a passionate voice following my mother around (yeah I have weird parents)....well I have to think that there has to be an appropriate mix of the ethics and romance.
6. Cairna said the following at 11:14 AM on May 6:
6
Oh the delicate balance between romance and Christianity!
Passion can exist without physical touch and physical touch can exist without passion. I know it for a fact.
Jeffrey, if the women you were dating equated the sorts of touches that you are convinced are ungodly with romance, don’t worry. They weren’t the women for you.
However, we as women do need attraction. I’m sorry; I’ve tried to get around it, but there it is. But I, for one, can be attracted to all kinds of things. I certainly don’t need touch (in fact, touch without attraction is a major turnoff). You have to think of ways to be passionate while not compromising your Christian values. Confidence is very romantic to me. So is good listening, putting my needs above his own, letter-writing, a well-turned phrase, athleticism...
So, first step: Read all the Boundless articles on Christian wusses. Makes sure they don’t apply to you. Women are looking for leaders and leadership can be manifested in about a million different ways. But lacking passion is not one of them.
I also think that you need to pray very very hard about God’s specific physical boundaries for your pre-marriage relationships. Avoid being too Pharisee-esque about your rules. I think that some meaningful touch (like a hand on the shoulder or a touch on the arm) is natural and necessary especially for those girls who’s love language is physical touch. No girl wants to be treated like she has the plague.
And, we as girls (or at least this girl), will try to be more cognizant of the delicate balance implicit in being a male navigating the dating (or courting or whatever) scene. We’ll try to look harder for that passion, but it better be there somewhere
7. Denisha said the following at 11:15 AM on May 6:
7
Eric:
I was thinking the exact same idea, but more towards our society than say the church.
Why are we encouraged to be well off before we can start families? My urges are saying NOW I WANT IT NOW!
I wanted to be married to a loving husband and have a few children, but I can't because I have to attend college to get a career to take care of myself.
Our society is the cause of my sexual repression. It asks for us to do too much.
I don't want empty sex with short term relationships. I want passion sex fulled with love and romantic gestures.
I want to be loved. :D
8. Phoebe said the following at 11:16 AM on May 6:
8
Without knowing Jeffrey's past experiences, so far I agree with Tami. Passion is greater than overt romance, romance is greater than touch. I agree with Jeffrey so strongly that the Biblical framework for getting married contradicts much of the western Romantic tradition.
Think back to the Bible. Jacob may not have been able to touch Rachel during the seven years he worked for her father, but his gifts and loyalty were romantic. Rachel quickly covered her face before Isaac, and her mystery and modesty were alluring to him. Solomon may not have touched the Shunnamite, his "sacred garden," but he romanced her with his words. I would be drawn to a man who exposed to me some of the longings of his heart for me, while keeping some of them a secret kept for later. What is romance in this context? It is a kind of cultivation of curiosity, a hint of the bond that is possible in the future, given by exposing some of your own longings in an appropriate way. It is good to cultivate this curiosity in the other person, I think, when it is built on the foundation of commitment and bounded by care for one another's purity. That to me is romance.
9. EJ said the following at 11:18 AM on May 6:
9
Very interesting topic. Thank you for your email Jeffery!
Tami (1#) hit the nail on the head. Thinking personally, I think that even if I was not romantically attracted to a man to start with, if he had a passion for God and His kingdom and wanted me to partner with him, the attraction could develop. I have a couple of friends where the men had to really pursue their wives...but now they are quite happily married.
DannieA--Your parents made me laugh--I think that's a blast:)
10. obewan said the following at 11:22 AM on May 6:
10
Gee, the majority of the women from my heyday as a Christian single would have been repelled by the "physical romance" type of pursuit.
It was the number one complaint of my roommate. By the 5th or 6th date, he would try to hold hands only to have his hand firmly placed back in his own lap. He was suprised and frustrated by how many "prudes" he encountered.
11. Julie said the following at 11:41 AM on May 6:
11
Cairna, I love your whole post. I'm right there with you. I'd specifically like to agree that deliberate kind touch that is non-sexual is very heartwarming and melts me in gratitude and appreciation. For example, in the middle of a conflict or when I'm sharing something rather vulnerable, just a touch on the hand is amazingly reassuring. And I'm a Quality Time girl, so just double that for a Meaningful Touch girl.
And Jeffrey, thank you for bringing up a topic I had subconsciously been aware of but that I had never articulated before!
12. brx said the following at 11:45 AM on May 6:
12
Love is simple. It's just not easy. It battles to drive out our fears - ones that we tend to hold on to. Most people fear not being accepted and really liked by another person.
In practice, working the whole thing out in faith requires lots of communication, humility, trust in God's love for you, and courage in confronting the totally awkward.
Part of the totally awkward is actaully having the conversations with the question 'is this really caring?', communicating why or why not, and listening to understand the other.
Grace, trust, peace & adventure!
PS: security must be in Christ, not in what the other thinks of you; else, you'll never be free to be yourself.
13. brx said the following at 11:53 AM on May 6:
13
BTW, I very much empathize with Jeffery Whiting.
I recently had a female friend whom I've taken an interest in, indicate to me that she's frustrated that we haven't had a "romantic" date. And here I was working so hard to create safe and fun settings for us to get to know each other!
Resolving this in a good way has now become an exercise in confronting the awkward.
Grace & adventure!
14. Keith said the following at 12:00 PM on May 6:
14
The real problem today is that almost no one seems to want romance, Christians or non-Christians alike. Non Christians have sex outside of marriage. And even Christians, if they are remaining faithful, all they talk about is how great it will be to be married because then they can start having sex. There is therefore no difference - Sex inside marriage, sex outside marriage....meanwhile romance has taken a backseat in both Christian and non Christian circles to sex.
15. farmer Tom said the following at 12:02 PM on May 6:
15
First, Mr. Jeffrey Whiting did an excellent job of presenting the conundrum. He should take up writing as a profession.
Second, I believe that his question is the core of the problem with (and this is not meant to be inflammatory) so many of the unmarried Christian singles in our culture today. Adults in their late twenties and early thirties or later who claim that they have never had opportunity for marriage, when in reality they have rejected those opportunities because they were waiting to "fall in love" with "the right person".
True biblical Love is a conscious act of the will!
Consequently, many of today's Christian singles are single because they did not understand that "falling in love" is contrary to the very concept of Biblical Love.
Third, combine this ignorance of true Biblical love with the rampant secularism and materialism that #2 Eric is talking about in another excellent comment, and we can quickly begin to understand why marriage is so hard to achieve for many Christians today. They don't know what Biblical Love is, and they are also consumed with education, career and financial security as priorities over marriage and family.
16. Pedro said the following at 12:10 PM on May 6:
16
People who don't kiss until married remind me of those who don't enjoy a glass of wine or a beer lest they become a drunkard.
17. brx said the following at 12:11 PM on May 6:
17
Of course Christian Religion and Romance are at odds.
Christian Relationship and Romance are NOT at odds.
Too often I see us trying to summarize with rules and tending to forget that following Jesus is about a living, breathing, two-way relationship; it's not completely predictable.
Let's not forget that God is passionate about us.
Let's not forget God's design for the marriage relationship is analogous to Jesus' relationship to His Church.
Let's not forget to be asking the question "what will my relationship with this person be like in Heaven?" - the right answer to that I think will go a long way toward guiding us rightly in dating/courting and marriage.
Grace, peace & adventure!
18. Jeffrey Whiting said the following at 12:24 PM on May 6:
18
Perhaps I should add I'm not "just" concerned with physical touch.
Cairna in comment #6 most closely captures the essence of the ethic I'm concerned with here: "However, we as women do need attraction. I’m sorry; I’ve tried to get around it, but there it is. But I, for one, can be attracted to all kinds of things. I certainly don’t need touch (in fact, touch without attraction is a major turnoff). You have to think of ways to be passionate while not compromising your Christian values."
The argument implicit in Cairna's statement is that some kind of passion needs to be present for a relationship. That seems to be at heart of the matter here and the question is whether this kind of passion (be it physical or emotional) is compatible with Christian teaching and conducive to marrying well.
With that in mind my observation is that even if passion isn't necessarily the sole determiner of whether a woman will have a relationship with a man it is certainly of huge importance. My question is whether or not the importance given to this influence is really wise and beneficial for preparing oneself for marriage.
19. BDB said the following at 12:33 PM on May 6:
19
I'm totally not surprised to see Tami as the first commenter. This is the precise conflict between Elisabeth Elliot's approach to marriage and the Eldridge Wild at Heart approach, which I think tries to accomodate non-Christian elements of the culture.
I've come to the conclusion that the most sincere Christian men are trying to put 1 Timothy 5:1-2 into practice:
1 Do not rebuke an older man, but exhort him as a father, younger men as brothers, 2 older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, with all purity.
What is the appropriate level of romance a guy should show to his sister? I'm thinking NONE.
But to an outside observer, it looks like these men are being passive.
I know lots of people who, shall we say, weren't very sincere Christians when they were dating. Their dating model was drawn from the world. Marriage of course revealed their own selfishness, and was the crucible that forced them to seek God in a more diligent way. But following their path to marriage would require becoming a less sincere Christian.
I see this among women, too. I know a few who've had bad experiences before they became sincere Christians. In becoming more sincere about their faith, they now rule out anything that looks like dating, believing that men and women sholdn't be alone together. Even for lunch. They draw the line at seeing men at church in groups.
Unfortunately, this is not a particularly effective approach to marriage, because hanging out in groups usually leads to shallow conversations that don't get any deeper than the shallowest person present. You may experience this with the person who turns every serious question into a joke - you never really get to know what someone thinks about a serious issue.
And, to be brutally honest, the Christians I know who've had the most successful marriages showed little, if any, public physical affection before they got married. I know lots of people who were all over each other who go from breakup to breakup. So, my own observations tell me that Elisabeth Elliot's boundary of "hands off and clothes on," while conservative, is indeed a much better place to begin.
This is probably no help to someone whose love language is "touch." Sorry.
20. Last One Home's Not Really Home said the following at 12:52 PM on May 6:
20
As my friend Amanda once exclaimed "My boyfriend keeps saying how smart I am... I DON'T WANT TO BE SMART, I WANT TO BE HOT!"
And I understand--- I want my guy to follow Christ and respect everyone by abstaining from physical contact and refraining from pouring on aesthetic compliments, BUT it is soooo difficult not to have a bad attitude when he does exactly that!
I have been wrestling with it for weeks now-- I want to be shown physical affection and be complimented because it really does speak to my heart-- but for some reason I have this idea that him being willing to touch me tells me that he considers me "worthy" of being loved-- ie, I'm desirable to him, beautiful, not freakishly disgusting... etc.
So when he does the right thing, and leads me spiritually by setting and keeping boundaries, he is honoring God AND ends up digging into my selfishness and worldly conditioning BIG TIME.
21. a sassy sister said the following at 2:03 PM on May 6:
21
Mr. Whiting, you wrote:
My question is whether or not the importance given to this influence is really wise and beneficial for preparing oneself for marriage.
So, are you really asking the following questions:
Should attraction/chemistry matter as much in preparing for marriage? Should it matter at all? If not, then how are you advocating managing the emotions involved in relating to the opposite sex?
22. Stephanie said the following at 2:06 PM on May 6:
22
I know that this is not a popular view, but I am currently somewhere between the belief - that there must be a chemistry/attraction and common interests - and the belief that chemistry and spark have nothing to do with finding a good mate. It seems that Scripturally, love is a choice and marriage is a commitment and that it will be work regardless of the person you are married to.
I have been so confused about this!! Are romance, spark, passion, etc. the necessary ingredients for a good relationship?
My boyfriend of over a year recently broke up with me...one of his reasons (among several) was that he found it difficult to believe that we could ever be true soul-mates, and that he didn't think we had the 'spark' that makes genuine communication work.
Am I missing something? I feel like Christian relationships should be based on more than 'spark' or even the poplular 'soulmate' idea.
I personally do not feel that looking for the spark or chemistry or passion in a relationship is what is Biblically encouraged in seeking a mate.
Just my views...
23. BDB said the following at 2:08 PM on May 6:
23
Hmmm...I've written a comment on this subject twice in the past, and both times it was deleted. I'm going to try a 3rd time since it's precisely relevant to the topic.
Many of us have been in groups of young adults where things like shoulder rubs are pretty normal - in a group, fully clothed. In college, I got very good at giving them, particularly stretching out athletes who had sore muscles.
But in my senior year, I felt like God was telling me to knock it off, because people might get the wrong idea. So I stopped.
Last year I mentioned this a couple of times, Boundless deleted the comment, that kind of confirmed that maybe this isn't something Christians ought to be advocating.
Well, guess what happened on a missions trip? One guy giving shoulder rubs. And the woman on the receiving end says, "Wow, you're good at this. Is this why you're married?"
Arrrgh!
(That's Pirate English for Talk about Mixed Messages!)
So, I draw fire from one group of Christians who think I'm too reserved and careful, and get praise from a different group of Christians who think I'm 'safe.'
My conclusion is that there is little agreement on where boundaries ought to be set. One woman's "he's safe" is another woman's "he's not into me."
24. Jonathan said the following at 2:31 PM on May 6:
24
"This is probably no help to someone whose love language is "touch." Sorry." (BDB #19)
Ah, an interesting conundrum. We are 'allowed' as Christians to speak love to someone else, or act love to that person, but not to touch! Physical touch, for whatever reason, has become the current 'en vogue' taboo for conservative Christians. Is there a boundary? By all means! But like Suzanne pointed out in her article this is an issue of whether your heart is aligned with God's or not...it is not a 'how close to the boundary (and where is that boundary?)' question. There are absolutes put forth in the Bible: no sex outside of marriage, no impure thoughts, flee sexual immorality, etc. But when it comes to holding hands, a quick goodnight kiss, a hand on the back as a guide...these are all gray areas. Now I know there are a lot of conservatives who would love to tie me to a pole and beat me senseless for stating that, but there it is. We have freedom in Christ, same as in whether to drink alcohol or go dancing or go to a church with 'rock worship' or whatever the case may be.
So if you have decided in your heart absolutely no physical contact outside of marriage, great! If you have decided holding hands is ok, great! But as BRX has stated, you HAVE to communicate this to your girl/boyfriend. If you both respect and love each other above yourself you will both do the necessary compromising to make sure God is glorified in your relationship...at least that's how it worked for me (married with a newborn now), and that's how I have seen it work best for most of my friends and mentors.
25. Kate said the following at 2:48 PM on May 6:
25
To answer your question, Jeffrey, I think that "passion" as an important factor in attraction and consideration of someone as a candidate for marriage is completely legitimate and Biblical; however, I think people have different ideas when they think of "passion" (and that they should think through their idea - I think it's pretty clear that not every idea of "passion" is Biblical). I would define passion as deep and joyous exaltation in something - an extravangant fondness or desire.
I've been married for almost two years now, and my husband is not always the most emotional person. But the fact is, he deeply loves God and is awake to the beauty and reality of the spiritual as well as the physical world (although he doesn't always express it the way I would). So even when sometimes I lightly wish he was more adept in the arts of romance (although he is pretty good - I think I'm just insatiable), the energy and joy that inhabit and quicken his Christian convictions and committments express the true "passion" in him that I love.
It seems to me that a lot of good Christian guys can focus on the committment, fidelity and permanence parts while somehow missing the deep energy and romance and joy that can so be found in those things (look at all the energy and desire and joy found in the psalms' descriptions of the committment, fidelity, and permanence of God's relationship with His people!).
26. Ronda said the following at 2:51 PM on May 6:
26
I know of many christians who are not aware of this type of romance. I never knew how christians where supposed to date w/the exception of no sex before marriage. I say all of this to say how can this way of romance be incorporated when hardly anyone knows about it. I too am waiting for marriage and am growing faint because even the so called christian men I meet want to touch and rub. Then their are those who would be attracted to me if I wasn't so conservative (obedient).
In this society if you are not giving it up to the guy by the third date, then you are perceived as a prude or really not into the guy. Also, men are saying they want to be approaced by the woman. They want women to initate the relationship. The script has totally been flipped and not to mention contrary to the word of God, which says "He who finds a good woman finds a good thing and obtains favor from God."
Great post by all I have learned a lot.
27. Vanessa said the following at 6:37 PM on May 6:
27
I've had two boyfriends (dated one for a little over a year and the other for almost three years) and have never been kissed. One of them I was even talking about marriage with, still never kissing them.
I think the ambiguity comes from men and women becoming "best friends" so much more lately than in the past thousand years. It is very common now for men and women to have close, intimate friendships without becoming romantically linked. However, this also usually results in a "crush" on one side or the other...and nobody wants to "lose" the friendship by stepping up and calling it what it is, a relationship.
It is my opinion that if a man is intentional about the relationship once he realizes that he is interested in pursuing a certain girl, and keeps making his romantic intentions known as opposed to being just an overly-chivalrous friend; the woman should be able to appreciate that fact and allow the romance to blossom without cutting it off.
In our defense, men, a lot of times you are really "nice" and attentive and make us think you are interested...and then if we get so confused we ask you about it, you deny it and claim we're just good friends. Therefore, I can see how lots of women think that if you aren't making out with them, you have no chemistry.
28. Elizabeth said the following at 7:34 PM on May 6:
28
I thought I would add my 2 cents...
Romance doesn't have to mean touch...romance is showing thoughtfulness in a way that shows you care and are paying attention. It is romantic if the person you are dating realizes you enjoy live music and makes arrangements to see some. It is romantic if you are stressed out studying and the person you are dating brings you dinner or helps you study. I think the problem is that romance is miss-defined as some feeling that occurs when staring into another person's eyes or physical touch, when romance is about showing you care (which can occur in many ways).
In terms of showing physical touch to someone with that love language...
There are appropriate ways of doing this; patting someone on the shoulder, shaking their hand, side hugs...It is easy to get caught up in one train of thought and forget that a bit of creativity can lead to showing care & love to others without overstepping appropriate boundaries.
Though the majority of women MAY be looking for "chemistry" brought on by physical intimacy while dating, not all women are looking for that type of pre-marriage "chemistry". I encourage you to stay with the way you have been approaching relationships. Women deep down want a man who is honorable and self-controlled.
29. Keb said the following at 8:15 PM on May 6:
29
I absolutely feel like this is part of why I'm still single at 29. How many men in this age are going to ask out a non-gorgeous girl who is willing to say at the outset, No Sex until marriage?
Not many. Plus, a lot of men are beginning to believe that a lack of sexual experience is actually a -bad- thing.
If I had the body of a supermodel, and lived in a medium-sized Christian community instead of a multi-cultural city, I might have a chance. Right now, I feel like a snowball on a stove.
30. Rachael said the following at 9:56 PM on May 6:
30
Maybe, to help the chemistry, even if the couple decides not to kiss, the looks and character could be complimented, there could be a little playfulness, and thoughtful romance could still be shared.
It does feel good to be clearly desired and considered to be attractive. I think at least some level of 'sparks'ness is good and can help the woman return the feelings.
And, for people who don't feel 'attractive'...attraction can grow. 'Okay' looking people can become desirable to the other person. And what is attractive to one person is not necessarily to another; attraction can vary.
And for someone (at least a guy) who might want to change the appearance a little...on a practical level...at times just a little changing/tweaking of the looks just might make a difference. Try a new hairstyle, untuck your shirt....(I don't know if the last one would help anyone, but when my husband and I were with a bunch of people the other day, I think he was the one who pointed out a funny age gap fashion thing - the young men were wearing their shirts tucked out, and the older ones (30s+ I guess) were wearing them tucked in...[my husband was probably in the latter category that night]).
Anyway, little things can be done to slightly freshen the look.
Don't worry about it - surface things aren't the most important, but, perhaps at times a hair or slight fashion change might help one step up the attractiveness scale a little bit.
(And I write this as someone who often doesn't put tons of effort into my looks - my husband doesn't really like make-up or much make-up anyway, so that's a blessing.)
31. Angela said the following at 10:02 PM on May 6:
31
Hi Jeffrey, thanks for the clarification:
"With that in mind my observation is that even if passion isn't necessarily the sole determiner of whether a woman will have a relationship with a man it is certainly of huge importance. My question is whether or not the importance given to this influence is really wise and beneficial for preparing oneself for marriage."
You are right, it is of huge importance, because we have largely made it so. And it probably is not fully beneficial. And it is frustrating. And your entire question is valid. But it is sadly what is right now in our culture. It is a testament to our sinful culture and how we have allowed that culture to infiltrate our christian lives, thoughts, hearts, minds. I get it, I understand your struggle to reconcile the two, because they don't reconcile well, if at all.
32. farmer Tom said the following at 10:08 PM on May 6:
32
29. Keb,
There are plenty of Godly Christian young men who are committed to the "no sex till marriage" standard.
The question is, are you looking for a Godly young man, or a christian Brad Pitt, Hugh Jackman, Matthew McConaghy?
How about the committed Christian farmer who lives 40 miles from any shopping center, who hasn't had a date since high school, because all of the "christian" girls left for the big city? Would you date him? In other words, here's a committed Christian guy who has very moral standards who can not get a date.
See the Biblical standard is that the woman leaves her home and family and cleaves to her husband. Too many of you want to stay near home, family and career, then whine because there are no available Christian guys.
So you're not a super model. Big deal, most of the rest of the population isn't either. Are you doing your best to control your weight, wear reasonably modest and fashionable attire, and demonstrating a cheerful, kind, caring and confident disposition?
Nothing will scare the guys away faster than a fat, angry and sloppy appearance.
33. Ted Slater said the following at 10:47 PM on May 6:
33
farmer Tom (#32) -- what you've written is *extremely* counter-cultural. But there is a great deal of wisdom in what you've said here, IMO.
34. Bethany D. said the following at 10:51 PM on May 6:
34
My love language is Physical touch, so it was definitely a balancing act when my husband and I were courting. We took the Song of Songs "do not arouse or awaken love" as our guideline. So while we enjoyed some affectionate forms of physical contact, like holding hands, wrapping an arm around the shoulders, or hugging, we did not kiss or do anything else that would get one/both of us feeling revved up.
One thing that helped us (especially me) was that we frequently went Swing Dancing with a group of friends. We could be close as we danced - but knowing that a roomful of people was watching helped keep things from *ahem* heating up. Plus, it was great exercise!
35. Caitlin said the following at 10:57 PM on May 6:
35
Jeffrey,
Have you ever read Song of Solomon? Love, sex, and romance are all intertwined and part of God's plan. To say that you can't have romance and Christianity is throwing out a very good gift. Women were created with the desire to be wooed. Men were created with the desire to pursue. It's just how God made us.
Does this mean that you have to throw out the Bible and embrace the theology of "Friends?" No. Not at all. It does mean that you have to start looking at romance from a different angle.
Here's a teaching series that changed my perspective and that of many of my friends. http://www.ajesuschurch.org/teachings_topic.php?tid=57&c=2
You don't have to listen to all of them. But I think they might help you sort things out. Blessings!
36. BDB said the following at 11:46 PM on May 6:
36
Rachael (#30) wrote:
>>the young men were wearing their shirts tucked out, and the older ones (30s+ I guess) were wearing them tucked in<<
Yeah, that's because those of us over 30 have always worked at places that required shirts to be tucked in - and we had bosses who were fighting against the business casual every day. So they compromised at giving up ties but still insisting on tucked-in shirts. And yes, the 20-somethings always fight against it. It's hemmed! They say.
And it is less flattering for people with certain body shapes who are forced to tuck in their polo shirt.
37. BDB said the following at 11:54 PM on May 6:
37
Bethany D (#34) wrote:
>>One thing that helped us (especially me) was that we frequently went Swing Dancing with a group of friends.<<
See, there are RULES to that type of dancing. There's a fair amount of physical contact in square dancing, too (which can be a lot of fun when there's 100 college students who have no idea what they are doing.) Basically, you're holding someone's hand for two hours, or their elbow, or something else. I'm absolutely convinced that those precise rules for that kind of dancing were designed to allow a certain level of physical contact without going too far.
38. Emily said the following at 7:12 AM on May 7:
38
Pedro (#16) - "People who don't kiss until married remind me of those who don't enjoy a glass of wine or a beer lest they become a drunkard."
Yep. Good analogy! (Heh, I have a feeling you were being sarcastic, but I'm turning it on you.) I'm not kissing until my future boyfriend is my husband. Why? "So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more." - Eph. 4:17-19
I don't want my heart to be hardened. Simple as that. I know I'm weak, I know I'm lust-filled (*gasp!* I admitted that?!), I know I have a sinful nature. I'm not letting the Devil get a foothold.
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving." - Eph. 5:3-4
39. Keb said the following at 7:43 AM on May 7:
39
Farmer Tom,
You perhaps make a few good points, but I'm not sure how you're proposing your hypothetical guy will even find me. I'm living with my family to save money and be near my job; it would be downright irresponsible of me to mindlessly pick a rural area and move there with no prospects for job or marriage. And if it turns out that I'm not destined to get married, I better be able to support myself.
As for what I'm looking for--I'm mostly looking for a responsible, loving Christian. There are a few absolutes on my list, like no smoking and liking kids, but I'm definitely not demanding that he be some movie star.
I do my best to be kind, caring, cheerful, and confident, though the last one is the hardest for me. I think I dress nicely. I'm definitely overweight, but I've been that way since I was 7, and no amount of changing my lifestyle has really affected my weight. I didn't even have a car until last year. I suspect there is a health issue causing it, but I don't have health insurance. (Just going to the dentist nearly broke the bank last month.)
I'm sure that my weight is not helping me find a mate either, but I suspect that in a community that valued sexuality differently, it would matter less.
40. IMO said the following at 8:01 AM on May 7:
40
farmer Tom,
I think you got it backwards.
Ephesians 5:31
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh."
Oh and I didn't know 'fashionable attire was a biblical concept. ;-)
41. anon said the following at 10:50 AM on May 7:
41
Farmer Tom,
I think what you say makes much sense. I left the big city, moved back home, not a rural area, I'd describe it as a large small town. Joined a Christian singles service. I know if I'd stayed in my big city with what I considered to be my prestigious job, I'd still be single and childless today. It didn't happen overnight. I still waited some years, but I did find someone eventually. And, looking back on my life and the men I dated, there is absolutely no one else I would rather have than the husband I have now. So for me it was worth it.
42. Jeff said the following at 6:21 PM on May 7:
42
I really really like this girl. She has gorgeous eyes that kind of hypnotize me. We have a ton of things in common, and we click so well it's almost amazing. She loves Jesus. However, she has a body type that doesn't attract me at all. I just don't feel attracted to her. I'm attracted to other girls, but not her. Will physical attraction come, or should I break it off now?
43. BDB said the following at 10:55 PM on May 7:
43
Jeff (#42) - what was the answer when you prayed about that specific question?
44. Tami said the following at 9:56 AM on May 8:
44
LOL, *this* shouldn't have surprised me, but BDB beat me to the question I would've asked Jeff (42).
From the female perspective, may I add:
Jeff, if you value your friendship with this young lady, as it sounds like you do, DO NOT do anything to change the nature of your relationship UNTIL you have this settled with God.
Because it really, really, really, really, REALLY stinks to lose a good friendship when the relationship changes and one person decides, whoops, he or she wasn't "feeling it" after all.
I would recommend praying the following things:
* That God would reveal how *He* views this relationship and what He intends.
* That, if He intends for you to be serious with this young lady, that He would help you see her as completely beautiful, inside and out.
* If the "body type" issue is one of physical health, that God would inspire her to take better care of herself, for her health's sake.
* That if He wants you to move, that He would show you how and *when* to do so, and that you'd listen.
Again, PLEASE don't make this a matter of "Hmm, I wonder if..." and then "test the waters." If you are even slightly curious, pray A LOT first and wait until God shows you what to do. Because trust me, it really, really stinks to lose a friendship like that. (Trust me.)
45. dasiopa said the following at 11:53 AM on May 8:
45
Jeff (#42),
Will physical attraction come? None of us can tell you that, and special revelation from God is rare. May He give you the courage to act without knowing the future.
Should you break it off now? My first thought is, break what off? If you two have the kind of friendship that can exist outside of a group, it may be time to take the DTR Assessment. ;)
As Tami (#44) said, "it really, really stinks to lose a friendship like that." I remember and agree. But when I read about how much you like her, and about what her eyes do to you... do you think a close platonic friendship with her is realistic in the long run?
46. farmer Tom said the following at 12:14 PM on May 8:
46
#39 Keb,
So what you're saying is, that unlike Rebekah in Genesis 24, you would not leave family and financial security for a
Godly husband in a far away land? That's to bad because from my reading of Scripture, that particular marriage shows a very good pattern for how Christians ought to pursue marriage.
As for this,
That is a blatant false assumption. Again go to Genesis 24. What was the first noticeable thing about Rebekah? Her beauty. "And the damsel [was] very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her:"
Beauty is one of the ways God uses to attract mens attention with the fairer sex. Always has been, always will be. You can whine and complain about that fact all you want, that's the way it works.
It you know that you are carrying around too many pounds, quit blaming men for their attitudes about women and fix the problem you can control.
BTW, I am currently changing my eating habits, because I'm carrying too many lbs myself.
see Tami's comment in #44,
to IMO, I stand corrected,
The following is sarcasm. The Biblical pattern is for the man to drop his career, follow the woman wherever she leads, move in with the in-laws after they marry, let the wife earn the major part of their income, and have the guy play stay-at-home dad. In fact if men were really spiritual, all women would remain virgins because no man would touch them. I assume that's what you are suggesting? /sarcasm
Seems like the women in Proverbs 31 WAS NOT an unkempt, sweatpants wearing sort of woman!
Pro 31:22
#41 anon, my point exactly,
praying for God to bring you a spouse, while doing exactly the same things you have been doing for 10, 15 or 20 years, is silly. Time to try a new approach. If that means leaving family and financial security, for some po-dunk spot in the middle of nowhere, get moving.
However, in this day in age, it is possible to meet all kinds of potential marriage partners right at home thru your computer. I'd bet money though that most of you who have ever tried looking for a potential spouse on-line have limited your search to an area within 100 miles of your current address.
47. IMO said the following at 12:45 PM on May 8:
47
#46
Whoa chill out. Are you having a bad day or something?
48. BDB said the following at 12:57 PM on May 8:
48
#46 is unhappy that people keep talking about Swine Flu. His swine aren't sick.
I imagine they've also been taught to use snout sanitizer.
49. Keb said the following at 1:17 PM on May 8:
49
*sigh* Farmer Tom, Rebekah was -sent- for. If I had reason to believe that I could find a husband by moving to X town, or if a reasonable man asked me to follow him, I would.
I dream of being found the way Rebekah was, and it's an inspiration to me to always try and be at my best--to look nice, and to be nice. But my point is that she was found; she didn't wander aimlessly through small-town USA hoping to get hit upon.
My weight is a problem, but I believe it's only part of the problem. I'm doing what I can do address it, but sometimes it's not a simple matter to just drop the pounds to look nicer. I've seen men justify the idea that if they're going to wait for sex, they deserve a gorgeous, perfect girl right here on this blog, and I don't think you can imagine how heartbreaking that is for someone who knows that no matter how many hours she exercises, how little she eats, and how hard she tries, she's never going to look like a superstar.
50. Ashley Harris said the following at 1:37 PM on May 8:
50
Keb and Farmer Tom,
I agree that women (and men) should make an effort to be healthy and disciplined physically. We fool ourselves if we think our spirituality is somehow disconnected from our physical self. Carolyn Mahaney gave a great talk on the subject of self-control as it applies to all aspects of life including bodily appetites such as eating and sleep.
Keb,
Please know that while there are some Christian men out there who have unrealistic expectations of what a woman should look like, there are also Christian men who reject the world's false messages about beauty and appreciate real (flawed and blemished cause we all are) beauty. Our responsibility as women is to be self-controlled in our physical life and believe what is really true about our worth.
I'm engaged to one of those Christian men who reject the world's messages about beauty. But when I'm not believing truth about myself it doesn't matter a hill of beans what he believes. If we don't captivate our own thoughts and choose truth for ourselves no man can do that for us.
So all that to say don't let a few comments by men who have unrealistic expectations distort your beliefs or discourage you.
Blessings to you Sister.
51. Carrie (the original) said the following at 1:47 PM on May 8:
51
Keb (#49) . . . try Weight Watchers. It's a miracle. It really is. You can find a beginner's kit on e-bay or amazon for dirt cheap prices.
I have struggled with weight my whole life. I started a few weeks ago and I am witnessing a miracle in progress. I was stuck on a certain number since Christmas - and I was exercising 4-5 times a week. My problem wasn't that I was eating too much (contrary to popular belief), I was eating too little.
And guys aren't looking for "supermodels", they are looking for a woman who can take of herself. They want a help-meet. If they can't take care of herself, sufficiently, then she can't really "help" a husband. Harsh, but true.
52. Rachael said the following at 1:58 PM on May 8:
52
"Will physical attraction come, or should I break it off now?"
Whatever your decision, try not to pull her a long. If you don't want more than friends but are leaving that unsaid when she may think 'more' may come, tell her.
Maybe more attraction will come later, maybe not. But try not to string her along....
53. Tami said the following at 2:00 PM on May 8:
53
I second what Carrie said; Weight Watchers is great. I really liked attending my group meeting; I'm certain it was a large factor in reaching my goal weight so quickly. And the emphasis is on health, rather than looking hot in a bikini, so the approach is healthy as well.
54. farmer Tom said the following at 3:44 PM on May 8:
54
Didn't you hear, I'm the one who has to use the sanitizer, some dude in Canada gave the H1N1 to a whole herd of swine.
Now we have to make sure we don't have the flu before we go into the hog house.
55. BDB said the following at 3:49 PM on May 8:
55
I did like the Fox News segment, live from the pigpen, where they explained,
"Well, the way it's transmitted is that the pig sneezes, like on this rail here, then a person touches the rail."
Perhaps we should have a picture from farmer Tom, wearing a mask, in front of the pigs, saying, "I'm here - the hog house!"
56. Maybe I should try an anonymous one... said the following at 4:00 PM on May 8:
56
I actually witnessed the older-divorced-guy-hitting-on-younger-woman thing once at church.
It was interesting because in his approach, he was telling her, "Hey - why do you always leave church so fast - I never see you!"
And he kept furtively looking at me as I waited for her to finish the conversation.
In that instance, I suddenly realized that he wasn't able to find her after church because she was always talking to me. And all her answers to his questions were things I already knew.
Oh. Maybe I should pay more attention.
The thing is, I knew by then that the woman in question was not very open to being approached by anyone, and his more deliberate pursuit would put her off. Indeed, she quit volunteering in that ministry and I can't get her to come volunteer with me there anymore. Thanks a bunch!
Forces me to seek other ministry venues I suppose. But, depending on someone's theology, they may not be open to remarriage at all to someone who is divorced - especially if they didn't have a biblical grounds for divorce.
57. farmer Tom said the following at 4:04 PM on May 8:
57
I sometimes get very sarcastic and ornery here, please understand that I am being very serious now.
I'm ugly as a mud fence. I could not get a date till I was 19, I have no idea what my wife sees in me, I think I'm ugly, period.
But, focusing on that only made me depressed and angry. So at about twenty, I made up my mind to have fun, and live life to the fullest as the ugliest human being on the planet.
As soon as I changed my attitude about myself, I'm going to quit being angry, and have fun being who God created me to be, the girls started to pay more attention to me. I'm convinced my negative attitude was so evident that it made me very unattractive to anyone.
If you know you have things about yourself you can improve, do it, and have fun doing it. Both of the comments you wrote seem to blame someone else for your inability to find a mate. How about you change what you can change, enjoy life and let God work out the details.
I was at a wedding last summer of a young man I know and his new bride, and frankly I thought she was ugly. In fact his mother said the new bride looked awful. But, he seems to be very happy. He did not do exactly what you're accusing all guys of doing. He chose a woman who is the exact opposite of beautiful. So please quit blaming all guys for your situation.
Beside, I highly doubt you are as you portray yourself. Most women have huge issues with their own personal perceptions. They think they are fat when they really just need to lose a few pounds. They think that because they don't have a certain color of hair, height or measurement that no one will find them attractive. That is not true and you're lying to yourself if you believe it.
Later.
58. BDB said the following at 4:07 PM on May 8:
58
I do think there is a verse relevant to the older guy hitting on younger woman situation, Ruth 3:10.
Then he said, “Blessed are you of the LORD, my daughter! For you have shown more kindness at the end than at the beginning, in that you did not go after young men, whether poor or rich.
While Boaz showed Ruth kindness from the beginning, this verse suggests to me that he was holding back due to the age difference. It's clear that he had noticed her, but assumed she would be seeking someone younger. Until she made it explicit that she was OK with the age difference. THEN he moved forward.
59. farmer Tom said the following at 4:10 PM on May 8:
59
Have you tried the online thing?
That's how my brother met his wife.
This guy I'm talking about occasionally checks out the on-line dating thing. Most of them scare him because they are adamant in their desire to have a career and stay near their current home.
60. farmer Tom said the following at 4:30 PM on May 8:
60
One more, Keb. Have you read a book entitled?
Getting Serious about Getting Married
by Debbie Maken
I disagree with some of her points, particularly the parity nonsense, but her discussion of Genesis chapter 24 and an "agent" is right on the money. So if you need some help or a new perspective you ought to read that book.
Here is a review of the book at my blog
Part 1
Part Two
and proof of my awful face, scared my niece to the point that two years later she still runs screaming from the room when I come in,
Be Very Afraid
You want some more punishment, go to Debbie Maken's blog, see where she and I tangled about her feminist worldview. I'm dumb enough to take on a lady lawyer on her page in public.
61. farmer Tom said the following at 4:33 PM on May 8:
61
Perhaps we should have a picture from farmer Tom, wearing a mask, in front of the pigs, saying, "I'm here - the hog house!"
Picture has been sent, talk to management at Boundless.
62. Chris said the following at 9:08 PM on May 8:
62
farmer Tom writes:
That's to bad because from my reading of Scripture, that particular marriage shows a very good pattern for how Christians ought to pursue marriage.
Good idea. Where can I get a slave and ten camels?
63. the most frequent Kate said the following at 10:13 PM on May 8:
63
I like the idea of having profiles for commenters, since I see another Kate commented here and that's confusing and happens from time to time... so now I'm going to go by "the most frequent Kate."
Anyway, I have been absent from the Line this week due to starting a new job and getting a bit of a virus (NOT swine flu) all at once. It's funny though because I got to thinking about how the VERY subject of this post has affected my life after I dug out some of my old CD's to listen to on my new (longish) commute this week.
I was listening to some Celine Dion (I will admit it) and I just couldn't get over how irrelevant the songs are to me now. In fact, it was a struggle to try to listen to the entire CD. It's so strange to me because I used to feel so "inspired" and "moved" by these songs in the past. I think I formed most of my (former) ideas about what love is from these songs, others like them, movies like Titanic/stories like Romeo & Juliet, and other typical and current romantic comedies. Although I was never drawn to the premarital sex part of Titanic, I was really moved by the intense devotion that Jack and Rose had for one another and the whole "prince charming rescues damsel in distress" story present there. Same with the Disney romances, and Teen magazines and so on. I think Jeffrey has described this secular idea of romance pretty well. I'm still working on how to write about my transition away from seeing love this way so please forgive the messiness that follows...
I knew my husband throughout high school and college before we eventually got into an marriage-focused relationship and married. Since I was an avid journaler, I can look back on what I wrote about him, other guys and relationships (I had many) and see how I was thinking. The things I would write about him and other guys seem almost absurd to me now because of how foolish my perspective was. I would write things about my now-husband like "K is basically the definition of integral" and went on to define this in a way I'd agree with now. "K is serious about faith and when we talk about this he really gets me thinking more about God." etc. I even thought he was good looking and we shared many common interests and activities! But I never considered him as more than a friend beyond a high school crush period. At that time, I'd go on to write about how some other guy "made me feel like a Celine Dion song." These, of course, turned out to be guys who led me to destroy my soul for a few years in my destructive relationships with them, and I pursued this.
Admittedly, my husband wasn't very "intentional" or explicit then about pursuing a romantic relationship with me and wanted to respect my desire to be "friends." It's impossible to say how I might have reacted at that time if he had been more intentional, and anyway I guess he also had some maturing to do too.
In spite of that, I think my disinterest also had something to do with why he didn't pursue a relationship. The main reason why I totally disregarded everything that made him an excellent match for me and didn't see him in a "romantic" way is because I had a STUPID idea of what romance was about. Like Jeffrey describes with the instability themes in secular romance, there is a wonderful relief of the anxiety about if he's going to "love you" or not when you do get his affection or when he comes back, or "losing" love and refinding it, etc. I was looking for that, and some kind of irrational, intense and lifelong all-consuming emotional feeling of devotion that would pop up out of nowhere (like Jack and Rose in Titanic).
Really dumb also considering that my husband was actually appropriate with physical affection, gave me thoughtful gifts and flowers, was a good listener, etc. when no other man who showed serious interest in me did those things... In a way I was looking for somebody like him who also gave me that "Celine Dion feeling," for lack of a better word. Talk about exchanging the truth for a lie and treasures for rubbish!
What I failed to understand is that that feeling is a cheap illusion that comes at a huge cost. You cannot and will not feel that way for long, plus you have to feel pretty awful in the inbetween while putting up with a lot of nonsense or downright harmful and painful things. So is that "romance?" That thrilling, wonderful (addictive) and fleeting feeling of relief after being treated right for once or getting some perceived ounce of devotion/commitment is something I NEVER experience now, and that's good. I think women (and probably men) often believe that feeling to be "romance."
But I don't have to feel that way now because I am always respected and loved and cherished and kept close. So there is a certain "feeling" that I have with my husband that goes beyond a temporary emotion like the "Celine Dion song." It's that covenant commitment, it's knowing we are building something solid with God here, I don't know really how to explain it... since I don't think we really have a specific word for this in English or America. Maybe this is what "love" and "marriage" are supposed to mean, but we don't know this or understand it in a universal way.
I used to have all sorts of stupid superstitions about how I'd "know" who was "Mr. Right." I was looking for signs, and this wasn't even common Christians ones like waiting for God to directly say "yes he is the one." I was expecting some wild and magical thing (when in fact many people actually do see my real story as "magical"). In a way I was like a person trying to read tarot cards instead of God's word laid out plainly about what kind of man to marry and what kind of wife to become.
So no, I can't say being married or the dating or the engagement has been "magical" like I used to think it would be. But that is good! Our "big moments" and longer developments have always had a deeper mystery to them, even though we ignored it for quite a while. By the Grace of God we both woke up in time to allow ourselves to be formed in his ways and marry each other rather than ending up with nonbelievers who were so destructive to our souls! I can't even say how much of a blessing this is, or how much of a hope we have for the service for his kingdom that we can do now and in the future together!
Anyway, this is getting super long and it's the weekend and a sort of old post. So I hope people are still following the comments here!
64. BDB said the following at 11:34 PM on May 8:
64
63. the most frequent Kate - thanks for 'distinguishing' your Kate-ness!
Fun Fact: There were a few years where Celine Dion was the top-selling artist. She didn't have enough scandals to be considered the most popular singer apparently, and it really ticked off the fans of other genres when I'd mention that to them...
(I agree - listening to them now makes me realize they aren't Christian music!)
65. BDB said the following at 11:40 PM on May 8:
65
Funnier Fact: soon after Titanic came out, a cruise shp sunk near Malaysia. Everyone survived. But, reportedly, as the ship was sinking, the survivors in the lifeboats started singing the Celine Dion song...
Found the article.
66. Jenn said the following at 1:34 PM on May 9:
66
Regardless of how you phrase it, I completely agree with the concept of Jeffrey's post. It is encouraging to hear of another person who is choosing to go the shockingly "conservative, prudish, legalistic, etc" route.
A few things that have encouraged me to hold to this have already been mentioned (1 Tim 5:2 treat younger women as sisters, Eph. 5:3 there is to be no hint of sexual immorality, and much by Elisabeth Elliot).
Three other things have also greatly influenced me. My freshman year of college a prof gave us some relationship advice,"Remember, whatever you do with your boyfriend or girlfriend, you are doing with someone else's husband or wife." I think, until you've said "I do" before man & God, that statement remains true. If I wouldn't want someone kissing, massaging, (fill in the blank), my husband, then I better not be doing it to someone else's (potential) husband. Is that a hard line? Yes! Is it helpful? Yes! - there's not a lot of gray "would this be okay" left - I can just ask myself, "would I slug some chic if she tried to do this to my man?" ( ;
A second influence came quite randomly from a secular book I picked up in the library once. "A Return to Modesty" by Wendy Shalit is a look at modesty from a non-religious perspective. It's all worth a read, and specifically the intriguing part in regards to physicality in dating. The author stumbled upon an old Jewish custom which was being practiced by modern, young couples. This custom involved absolutely NO touching before marriage. And yet these couples were all very happy, very in love, and went on to have great marriages.
The third influence is my own personal experience. I have had one relationship that involved physical affection. Though we kept my standard of not kissing on the lips, we found plenty else to do. If I could, I would take it all back, even the hand-holding.
As soon as we allowed physicality into our relationship, it became like an electromagnet. We wanted more of it and more often. Conversation and actually getting to know one another became a smaller and smaller part of our time together. Because we'd shared some elements of physicality, it greatly impaired my ability to see clearly the need to break off the relationship. I realized too late that I'd rather have only shared those things with my husband and so I tried to rationalize away the negatives and convince myself this man could be him.
As crazy as it seems, as I look at marriages in the Bible, it seems to support the concept of "no touch" and then "all touch". (i.e. Isaac & Rebekah Gen. 24:62-67)
No matter how hard it makes things, I don't think your love language, desire to make sure you're compatible, seeing if there's a spark, or whatever are worth the risk of justifying physicality. It's pretty common knowledge that most forest fires start from pretty innocent little sparks.
If you're holding to a "conservative" standard that others knock you for, take heart, you are not alone.
67. BDB said the following at 4:28 PM on May 9:
67
#63. the most frequent Kate chronicles something I have suspected for some time but could never prove.
Here is a relevant Elisabeth Elliot quote:
It is a great mistake to put too much stock in physical beauty or in thrills and chills. Neither has anything to do with a sound foundation for a marriage. Remember that the love of 1 Corinthians 13 is action, not a glandular condition. The love that makes a marriage is basically a deep respect and an unselfish kindness. That's pleasant to live with.
Pleasant to live with...now there's a thought.
It has been my observation that some of those who achieve the "Celine Dion effect" can be downright unpleasant as soon as you disagree with them. Some of the most exciting people you meet can be remarkably unkind once you get to know them.
So, as #63 outlines, the best thing to do might be to set aside the chills and thrills, and any other items on one's "list." Instead, try and identify the people around you who exhibit kindness in a consistent way. You may discover the people you've been overlooking.
Who wants to live with an unkind person anyway?
68. Rachael said the following at 5:50 PM on May 9:
68
","Remember, whatever you do with your boyfriend or girlfriend, you are doing with someone else's husband or wife." "
--Just, be careful with that kind of thinking, if you can help it.... I believe I've also read an idea about the thought of kissing at the altar equated to kissing everyone else the person has kissed...or something, I'm probably messing up that idea.
--If I were to write out my ideals for a courting couple, I would not have fit into the category. Yet, I may still have some 'idealistic thinking' of how I feel courtship should go (though I'm married).
If both people fit into the 'idealistic thinking', wonderful!! However...it's probably often the case where at least one of the people do not fit the ideals. Yet, the other person (like me, perhaps) may still have the 'idealistic thinking' in my mind, even though I don't fit into that category...how do I explain it...
Like, even though I'm far from perfect, I wish some things were different about my husband's background. So for me I think my idealistic thinking has also been incorporated into sins such as a lack of letting go, unhealthy thoughts, jealousy, and feelings of insufficiency or something. And it's unfair because I myself did not fit into the perfect ideals, so why should I subconsciously or consciously hope for my husband to have come into marriage according to the imaginary ideal?
Anyway, I guess, if people can help it, of course it's fine if they can keep high ideals for themselves. But if you can also cultivate a gracious spirit of forgiveness and keep in mind the log-speck principle, then I'd recommend that. I need to grow in those areas.
Just, if people can help it, be careful...
69. Jo said the following at 2:31 AM on May 10:
69
I don't buy into the whole 'kissing your boyfriend is kissing someone else's husband' thing. It's an emotional argument that doesn't seem at all logical to me. Surely we would all agree that there's a world of difference between kissing a currently single person and kissing a currently married person. We live in linear time, and whether someone may eventually end up marrying someone other than us is both unknown and irrelevant to our decisions today.
Otherwise you end up with a philosophy where the ends justify or condemn the means. If I kiss a guy today and he ends up marrying me or remaining single, it's okay. But if I kiss that guy and he ends up marrying someone else, I've sinned against his future wife.
We don't usually make decisions based on pure guesses about other people's futures! We make decisions based on God's standards for human behaviour, so in my view, kissing outside of marriage is either sinful or it isn't. Hypothetical future spouses have nothing to do with it.
Keb -
There's been a lot of discussion about weight, but I just wanted to say that I know some overweight women (a couple who are very overweight) who honestly are beautiful. They dress stylishly in flattering clothes, they wear tasteful makeup and spend time on their hair, and they smile a lot. I expect they still have some insecurities about their weight, because we live in such a 'thin is beautiful' culture, but they are genuinely attractive women. So just being overweight is certainly not the end of the world. If you can't control that, then work on prettifying the bits you can control. :)
70. the most frequent Kate said the following at 11:14 AM on May 10:
70
BDB, I did not know that about Celine Dion when I was a major fan, and that is funny about how people sang on that other sinking ship!
That is a good quote you mention. Not only is there the chance for unkindness like you mention, but everything else that comes with being a person (or committed to a person) who is primarily on a quest for his or her own emotional highs. Some examples would be infidelity, financial instability because of careless/frivolous spending, or even emotional or physical abuse!
It's interesting now to think about what people seem to mean when they make various comments about my husband and me as a "fabulous" couple and how much they wish they had what we have. (I'm still trying to figure out what people really mean by "power couple?") But often people say our story is such a fairy tale or it's so magical and I think they must be imagining a lot of that "Celine Dion" romantic comedy stuff.
They usually seem to feel like I'm spoiling the party when I try to explain that we were just friends who stayed in touch, and eventually became and realized we were a good match because of our submission to God's guidance, and working at being formed in his ways. In this way we have learned what is important about evaluating a potential partner, AND been formed into those good partners. When peers talk to me about their relationship woes, it often seems like they lack discernment and maturity in both of these areas. It's hard to know what to tell them because they are not actively looking to gain discernment or maturity. I think most of them truly desire the stability and support of a Godly relationship, but they aren't really aware of what they're looking for or missing, and/or like I was, they are unwilling to stop seeking that "Celine Dion" thing or whatever else it may be.
I still feel a sense of awe when I look back on all this and see what all I would have missed out on and what I would have had to endure had I decided to continue in those selfish and self-guided ways with relationships. It's a lot like the way it feels to wake up from a vivid nightmare in which one did something horrifically bad and realize it was just a dream.
71. Sarah P. said the following at 12:02 PM on May 11:
71
Farmer Tom (#61): HAHAHAHA!!!
Sometimes you are very funny.
But you also make a lot of sense, when you talk about living life with joy, no matter how we are made.
72. Tarot cards said the following at 11:46 PM on Feb 2:
72
Hmm Well I was just searching on Google for some Tarot readings of some Tarot reader
and just came across your blog, generally I just only visit blogs and retrieve my required
information but this time the useful information that you posted in this post compelled me
to reply here and appreciate your good work. I just bookmarked your blog