More Problems With Dating

I will have to break this topic into several posts…first let me list several MAJOR problems with dating you may have not considered…because unless you’re convinced that it’s wrong, what motivation is there to entertain anything else? (I promise, Civilla, it’s coming

(BTW, there are quite a few articles on Dating and Courtship in my archived posts.)

1. Time frame. We typically start dating as early as 13 or 14 in America. (And preparing for it much earlier: “Do you have a boyfriend yet?”)

This is nothing short of absurd. What purpose does dating fulfill? Based on the thoughts below, it is blasphemous to use such activities for recreational purposes. The idea is no different than sending a child into a candy store with no money. So he licks the pieces he likes and puts them back.

2. Pre-mature romance. Dating assumes that being romantically involved with someone other than your spouse is harmless, or normal. In most cases, the typical person will have a relationship with 5 or more people before marriage.

Not harmless. Would I consider my husband’s involvement with another woman harmless? What if it were only emotional? “Well, of course not, you’re married–that makes it different.” Not so much. Our involvements do not magically disappear at the altar. They are with us for life. My husband NOW was the same man before we married.

We should help our children understand that intimacy, romance, dating, etc. is nothing to play with. Until they are ready to pursue marriage, there should not even be a hint of pursing a relationship with the opposite s*x.

(Consider if a spouse does have a marital affair; let’s say he repents, wife forgives, and they “start over”. Will not the residue of that activity still remain in their marriage? So the “pre-marriage affairs” affect a couple after they are married.)

God created the intimacy between two people to be bonding by nature (thus the “one-flesh” language), with s*x being the seal of that bond. Intimacy was never intended for anyone other than your spouse. There are lifetime consequences otherwise. (This is why the bible says that most sin a man commits is outside of his body; but se*ual sins are against his own body.)

As someone mentioned in the comment thread last post, dating is logically incongruent with marital faithfulness. “Falling in love” then breaking up, repeat, repeat, repeat…is nothing more than creating the habit of a heart to leave when “I don’t like it anymore”.

Nothing about dating involves loyalty and faithfulness; it’s easy to get in, and easy to get out. Hmmmm…kind of resembles most marriages. (Let’s think about it!)

A “spotless bride” is so much more than physical purity! This is the problem I have with the well-intentioned “Love Waits” campaigns many churches have done. It assumes that as long as we don’t “go all the way”, we’ll be OK. Not so. Love waits, indeed–for everything.

3. Deception. Another BIG problem: dating allows for a “smoke screen” that easily deceives. If I’m considering a person for marriage, don’t I need to see them in action? How do they relate to their family? What are they really like in the grind of life? A movie and dinner doesn’t reveal those things. I’ll talk more about what I mean here in a later post.

“But how does someone know a person is the right one unless they’ve dated several people?”

This reasoning is illogical; if it had any substance, it would assume that a person must date every person alive before he could know which one was right. (I could try 10 different shampoos and go with #10; but what about the other 437 brands left? I’m still left wondering.)

I wish I could plead with parents to grasp the flawed model of dating, to understand its devastation, to be willing to say “NO” for their children.

I challenge you to really think about it, if you haven’t before. I’ll post more on “if not dating, then what?”

Dating: Recipe for Disaster

Few subjects ruffle my feathers like the favorite past time of America’s youth–recreational dating. I’m ruthless on this one, so hold on.

And I feel I can be, because I ran with the best of them–and have all the battle scars to prove it.

I speak against it boldly only to try to save someone from its destructive clutches. Have you ever considered it to be “destructive”? Something so “normal”, so common, even among believers?

Chip Ingram (Living on the Edge Ministries) was speaking from Ephesians 5:3,4 this morning when I flipped on the radio….

“But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks.”

He said we aren’t serious about the sins of immorality because we don’t understand the sacredness of the marital act of s*x, or the intimacy God intended. This passage says not only is fornication and immorality a sin, it is not even to be joked about. Do we take it that seriously?

(He asked how many of us laugh at Jay Leno’s opening bit which is often se*ual in nature…)

But this stood out to me:

“Let it not even be named among you.”

If the passage is clear (and many like it) that s*x before marriage is sin, and there should not even be one incident of it among believers, that it shouldn’t even be mentioned, tell me, where on earth did we get the idea to send our unbridled, unaccountable teenagers out into the dark, together for hours at a time, many of them dressed to evoke physical intimacy???

In case there is any doubt about what I’m saying, “dating the world’s way is not for the people of God!”

Because EVEN IF they do not succumb to the enormous pressure of physical intimacy (which includes activities other than s*x), a “date” assumes they have a romantic interest–which is already giving to another only that which God designed to save for one–a wife or husband.

(Off the subject just slightly…it still shocks me every time I hear a parent who is upset when they find out their daughter is pregnant. ??? It’s like giving your toddler a pair of scissors and being upset when he cuts his hair.)

Chip went on to describe how so many married couples struggle with wounds so deep they are incapable of intimacy with their spouses. Could it also have something to do with the hideous “divorce epidemic” that has strangled the church?

Why would parents want to give their children such a bad start to such an important part of life, one that is already a challenge?

If you have never thought about the destruction of dating, (which by the way is a fairly new concept in our culture…only 80 years old or so), I urge you to steer your mind out of the rut that tells us it’s “normal”, and think it through from a biblical perspective.

P.S. There is a plan B

Dating–Recipe for Disaster

Few subjects ruffle my feathers like the favorite past time of America’s youth–recreational dating. I’m ruthless on this one, so hold on.

And I feel I can be, because I ran with the best of them–and have all the battle scars to prove it.

I speak against it boldly only to try to save someone from its destructive clutches. Have you ever considered it to be “destructive”? Something so “normal”, so common, even among believers?

Chip Ingram (Living on the Edge Ministries) was speaking from Ephesians 5:3,4 this morning when I flipped on the radio….

“But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks.”

He said we aren’t serious about the sins of immorality because we don’t understand the sacredness of the marital act of s*x, or the intimacy God intended. This passage says not only is fornication and immorality a sin, it is not even to be joked about it. Do we take it that seriously?

(He asked how many of us laugh at Jay Leno’s opening bit which is often se*ual in nature…)

But this stood out to me:

“Let it not even be named among you.”

If the passage is clear (and many like it) that s*x before marriage is sin, and there should not even be one incident of it among believers, that it shouldn’t even be mentioned, tell me, where on earth did we get the idea to send our unbridled, unaccountable teenagers out into the dark, together for hours at a time, many of them dressed to evoke physical intimacy???

Because EVEN IF they do not succumb to the enormous pressure of physical intimacy (which includes activities other than s*x), a “date” assumes they have a romantic interest–which is already giving to another only that which God designed to save for one–a wife or husband.

(Off the subject just slightly…it still shocks me every time I hear a parent who is upset when they find out their daughter is pregnant. ??? It’s like giving your toddler a pair of scissors and being upset when he cuts his hair.)

Chip went on to describe how so many married couples struggle with wounds so deep they are incapable of intimacy with their spouses. Could it also have something to do with the hideous “divorce epidemic” that has strangled the church?

Why would parents want to give their children such a bad start to such an important part of life, one that is already a challenge?

If you have never thought about the destruction of dating, (which by the way is a fairly new concept in our culture…only 80 years old or so), I urge you steer your mind out of the rut that tells us it’s “normal”, and think it through from a biblical perspective.

P.S. There is a plan B

Frogs, Epitaphs and Pragmatism

And the epitaph reads:

“It never seemed dangerous, it never felt hot; the jacuzzi I loved was a cast iron pot!”

“I contemplate divorce every day. It tugs on my sleeve each morning when my husband, Will, greets me in his chipper, smug morning-person voice, because after 16 years of waking up together, he still hasn’t quite pieced out that I’m not viable before 10 a.m….

We were groomed to think bigger and better — achievement was our birthright — so it’s small surprise that our marriages are more freighted. Marriage and its cruel cohort, fidelity, are a lot to expect from anyone, much less from swift-flying us. Would we agree to wear the same eyeshadow or eat in the same restaurant every day for a lifetime? Nay, cry the villagers, the echo answers nay. We believe in our superhood. We count on it. So, did our feminist foremothers set us up for failure?”

Overpopulation–Did God Think of it?

Claire brings up a good, thought-provoking discussion…one we ought to follow through to an answer.

“Be fruitful and multiply”…no wait, overpopulation.

This subject, for me, is one more reason to trust the sovereignty of God. Why? Just like other variables (affording children, health, etc.), our limited wisdom insufficient to make life-altering decisions based on circumstances far beyond our ability to know.

The terrorist attacks wiped out over 3,000 people in one day; tsunamis have taken the lives of over 20,000 each hit, in a matter of minutes. Can we predict population variables enough to overturn the command to “multiply”?

Here is an excerpt from an article suggesting the OPPOSITE problem of the loudly-touted overpopulation…thought it was very helpful. (Link to entire article is below.)

“The world is over-populated and heading towards demographic catastrophe, right?

Wrong. According to Max Singer, writing in The Atlantic Monthly of August 1999, “Unless people’s values change greatly, several centuries from now there could be fewer people living in the entire world than live in the United States today.” How does he come to this startling and unorthodox view? Simply because no demographer predicted that when fertility dropped to replacement level – which is 2.1 child per woman per lifetime – it would keep falling. But it has. In Western Europe, Japan and the East Asian tiger economies, the total fertility rate (TFR) is 1.5. and falling. Italy’s has fallen to a national suicidal 1.2. North African immigrants look like inheriting Italy.”

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0500overpopulation.htm

Quiver Full by Default

Invariably, this birth control topic really opens a can of worms. It’s impossible to address just one aspect; there keeps occurring a new path, a different thought, and we must keep pushing to the ends of the unknown trails to be able to step away with a full, thoughtful conclusion.

The term “Quiver Full Movement” has been used a few times here, mostly in a derogatory way. I was thinking that, of course, “quiver full” came from the Bible. QF is not a movement at all. Mankind was born in QF default mode, if you will. I don’t imagine Adam and Eve were sitting over dinner wondering how many kids they were going to be able to afford. I know, I know. They were supposed to be “filling the earth”…of course they weren’t thinking about birth control.

So, when did the earth get full? I don’t envision any New Testament couples having BC conversations either. But that’s another trail.

So, my challenge to you is, do you think there even exists a real “movement” called QF? Or do you think it would be more accurate for us to distinguish the groups by a term like, “Birth Control Movement”…or “Child Limiting Movement”…or “No More for Me Movement”. (Don’t get mad, I’m just joking.)

But do you get my point? I’ve always found it interesting that women who do not generally practice birth control are the ones put in a class; “those people”…”those QF people”. I find that odd. Women whose bodies are doing what they were created to do have to explain why they aren’t taking a synthetic drug that alters its normal function? Does this not seem odd?

See, it’s not me standing in judgement of those who practice birth control. I have no desire to make people feel condemned or less spiritual. Please don’t think that!

I want us to operate from a crystal clear understanding. That’s why I dig into the subject.

Imagine a person walking up to you at the store and saying, “Oh my goodness! You’re having s*x with your husband just for pleasure? You are purposely preventing conception? Only two children? Do you not want any more?”

How offensive! But can I say this gently…that is more accurate than what so many who know the sting of being questioned about a larger than normal family is.

I find it a wee bit offensive to be labeled as part of a movement. I didn’t join some new regime of people who see how many babies they can have in a lifetime. I don’t belong to a group that teaches how to stop nursing so you can conceive again quickly (???) It’s no group at all. It’s just believing that the principles in Scripture point to a sovereign God–even over the womb. If that is not the path you follow, it is no condemnation from me. But I think the pro-birth control position would more suitably belong in the “explanation please” category, in the case people feel the need for explanation.

For centuries, couples have been pretty much having children every few years. Yeah people avoided certain times of the month, I’m sure, but the whole concept of just using birth control to stop after a child or two has been completely FOREIGN to the world until around the 1960′s. So why is that group now the normal group, and the other group is “cultish” and weird?

Someone has asked why I don’t believe the womb can be compared to a field with the applicable “Sabbath rest”. (Which, to restate, by all means, let a couple faced with a difficult health issue prayerful consider God’s leading!) But go back to Scriptures…why would God have asked couples to abstain after a monthly cycle for 13 days, and resume their relations on the 14th–THE most fertile day of the month? God went to great pains giving the Israelites specific instructions about the details of their lives. He told them how to handle mold, for crying out loud! Why would the Sabbath rest for the womb not be brought up among those instructions? Or maybe, here’s a thought, the Sabbath rest was already built into the nursing practices of women. Just asking you to think.

Am I missing something?

In the case someone feels offended by this post, I assure you I am not condemning anyone at ALL. I’m not enemies with people who use birth control! I realize in some recent posts, that it is automatically assumed that if I say I believe God’s best for His people is to accept the children He gives them, then I am condemning those who don’t.

Some people think it’s God’s best for us to exercise; but they’re not accused of being judgemental towards those who don’t…same thing with eating healthy, being in debt, the list could keep going. Do you understand what I’m saying? In fact, I’ve said before, I have a great deal of respect for people who just say, “I didn’t want anymore children because I like to go on vacations”…or whatever else. Honesty is great! NO…I’m not opposed to those who use birth control. I’m opposed to the notion that to NOT use it is weird and irresponsible.

My only reason for posting about what I believe about fertility is to challenge you to rethink it yourself…when I was using birth control, I had not given it a second thought. I as so glad I was challenged to question WHY I chose a certain practice.