quote:

ORIGINAL: Ninjaearth

quote:

No, I'm not assuming that, and I apologize that my words left that interpretation open. People are different, some are bold, some are shy, some have a headache and don't want to talk. You know. Ideally I think a guy (and you're probably going to think I'm nuts here. OK) should hang out in mixed groups, learn to understand women without the pressure of dating, and when he thinks he's found the one God may be leading him to as a marriage partner, call her father and present himself as a potential suitor. But you're talking about dating, so I'll go back to that. A guy is going to have to find his way in relationships with women, knowing that women are different. He'll have to match his personality and style with how he approaches a woman. 1 Pet. 3:7 says:

You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way

which indicates that men might not understand their wives unless they make an effort to learn how they work (hence, that's why it's given as a command).

A few things. I didn't think you were talking about all guys, so that assumption is more on my part.

quote:

Now, it's not a bad thought but most guys and gals don't have the luxury alot of times to be involved in groups like this and only learn about the opposite sex from home. In reality, everything starts at home including having the examples of how a husband/wife relate to one another. Unfortunately, most of the homes today just don't have that type of example.

quote:

Also, it's not necessarily wrong to think, depending on how one would define it as well as what is practiced. It is certainly possible for a man to marry a woman without dating her, but it's still a good idea to get to know her before he does.

quote:

1 Pet 3:7 takes about a husband understanding his wife. Well, to be honest with you, I'm sure many husbands didn't understand their wives when they first met or even married.

quote:


I think it's virtually impossible to learn and understand wife in a very short period of time...

quote:

....but I do think it's possible to understand what a feels and deals with in terms of personality and character. Of course, a husband will understand his wife in time, which is essentially what this means; the NASB says "in an understanding way" and points out that the wife is a weaker vessel but is to also give her honor. I think this goes back to the husband loving his wife as Christ loved the church; often times, the husband is instructed to be more a loving servant-leader towards his wife while the wife is called to love, respect, and submit to her husband as if she was submitting to the Lord Himself. However, the 1 Pet 3 passage, the latter part of it, applies to both parties.

quote:

I absolutely agree that God can do and is able to do any and everything. However, just because that is does not negate the responsibility of man to do what is right.

quote:

I can trust and know that God will bless me with a job, but I do nothing in looking for a job then nothing's going to happen. James talks alot about faith and works going together and is how things operate, even in salvation; no, God is in charge of salvation and man doesn't choose God within their own will. However, one who is saved will have the works of a person who is saved;otherwise to say that a person is saved and does not do anything in demonstrating that salvation, it's jus words and not faith. The same thing can be said when it comes to finding a wife, regardless if one dates or not. Faith without works is dead; great examples are scattered throughout the OT in how wives were found. Nothing has really changed in that aspect; so while waiting on God is good, He also works sovereignly in accordance with the will of man in order to carry out His will. Also, though, God is not obligated to bring a wife either because in God's Sovereignty He only does what pleases Him. While it is not His will for man to be alone (without a wife) it is not His will for every man to have a wife, just like it's not His will for all people to be saved (I know that will catch some heat, but Scripture is clear that God has a purpose in mind for those who are evil).

quote:

Plus, does having a girlfriend mean that a guy and his gf will automatically engage in immorality.

quote:

I think that's where the concept of having a girlfriend/boyfriend are wrong and are widely misunderstood. It's inevitable to believe that a bf/gf will show affection to each other, but even that affection is bound to Scripture limits (i.e. no sexual immorality). So, I don't believe you can make a case against gf using Scripture, but you can make a case for immorality and appropriate conduct in regards to purity and holiness.

quote:

quote:

BTW, the doctrine of the Trinity has been accepted in all mainline Christian circles from Acts until now, but the Rapture hasn't. It's the theology of premillenial, postmillenial and amillenial escatology. The Rapture was never accepted by the Christian church between the time of Acts and the 1800s. But I digress).

The term Rapture hasn't appeared until recently, but theologically speaking the concept of what the rapture is has existed since the completion of the canon. I'm not going to discuss this topic here since it's not the topic of discussion, but gather what Jesus told His disciples in John 14 and also consider passages like 1 Thessalonians 4, and Revelation 2-3. I'm not making a case at this point directly for any view on the rapture, but only to illustrate that the Bible speaks of an immediate removal of Christians at some point and time in history and that is it not the second coming.

quote:

teaching about purity and marriage is really the issue, not necessary the issue of having a girlfriend or boyfriend.

quote:

Having a girlfriend may not have a biblical foundation but there isn't anything that also suggest the opposite either. Because even if you talk about what a bf/gf would do, it still goes back to the issue of purity and not to whether or not having a gf/bf is biblically supported; there are tons of things that are not listed in Scripture but are morally acceptable and within the given standards of the Word of God.

quote:

quote:

But the Bible talks in more than one place about fornication and sexual impurity. How common is it for dating people to have sex? That is culturally accepted, too, in most circles. Hollywood glorifies and encourages it. So you've got a cultural, secular idea of dating that often leads to something the Bible absolutely forbids, and many churches aren't preaching against it inspite of the fact that fornication and sexual immorality is a sign of an unsaved person (Gal. 5, for example). Hey, if you can date without touching or defrauding your date sexually (arrousing passions that can't be righteously fulfilled) then no one can say "you're wrong" or "you're sinning." It seems unwise, but that's not sin.

That's if the couple is having sex while they are dating. If not, then it's not a problem biblically because they are still morally abiding within the standards of those who are not married. Even with this though it still goes back to issues of purity and holy conduct that glorifies the Lord. A Christian couple that practices abstinence and abides in purity prior to marriage but yet their relationship is classified as a gf/bf title is still Biblically acceptable because they are not practicing immorality. So...it's hard to really stretch and solidify that .

quote:

quote:

There's a thread in the marriage section of this forum, and a lot of people have done just that. God gives grace. But if you know someone for a while in a group of friends or go to church or work together, you can see some of the things that pique your interest: godly behavior, kindness, loves others, biblical standards, good hygiene (hey, we live here and have noses ) and you can say they don't look like they have anything that would be a dealbreaker. You could ask her father about her and let him ask you questions to see if you have any dealbreakers. If he, who knows her so well and has been looking our for her best interests (ideally), thinks you're a good guy and good marriage material, he can ask her if she wants to get to know you better or let you ask her.

And yet in American society, this just doesn't happen,not to many, anyway depending on where you are and the type of family you are in. Even then, though, you are still dealing with a particular culture. While I think the strategy is good, why do that when a guy could easily just ask the woman that himself. Most likely many dads are going to expect that the guy will be talking his daughter. There are exceptions to this. Plus, depending on the family itself, it may not be a good model. Considering the amount of families that are dysfunctional as well as many that are not of the faith, this wouldn't work universally. So, for those who that can't follow this model, other things have to be done and considered. So, it would work in some, but in most cases you wouldn't get this. How you followed this model or know anyone around you that has a successful marriage as a result of this? Is this the model you are planning to use in your own household or have used before?

quote:

quote:

OK, let me challenge you on this: how much effort did you put into getting saved? None. God found you dead and helpless and made you alive in Him by His effort on the cross and the empty tomb. Can God not also bring you a wife? He did for Adam and Isaac. Jacob was running for his life and found Rachel.

Scripturally speaking, none. However, Scripture does say that unless one repents of their sin they will perish.

quote:

We all that God is responsible for salvation and are not able to repent to unless God's Spirit brings them to God. The same thing is said about finding a wife; I can trust God to bring the woman, but if I never pursue her nothing's going to happen.

quote:

God doesn't do everything for us, in terms of doing the work for us, otherwise we'd be lazy. That's like finding a job; if I never look for one I will not get one no matter how much I want one. The Bible does say that if you seek you will find. Even using what you gave, Jacob worked for Rachel for a long time; if he didn't, he probably wouldn't married her. Adam's scenario was very unique, and would only fit your context because he was the only human there; unless God brought Him a wife it'd just be him and God. With Isaac, though, the servant was charged with going to find a wife and even he had to go and find out which woman God had selected and bring her back home.

quote:

So, while this does prove that God will provide, it is still up to man to do the "effort" in that seeking His will in order for him to be blessed by God. Remember, faith without works is dead.

quote:

In all though, I don't think it's okay to say not having a girlfriend is unbiblical because there is simply no basis for it, no matter how you argue it and nor is there case for having a girlfriend. This is a matter for the conscience and Christian liberty, which will leave some to believe in bf/gf and leaves others with not supporting them biblically. In either scenario, you have to be very careful (which I know you were doing the last post). Also, it also depends on the understanding of what things are you following as Scripture in terms of models because there are some things are that cultural and things that are given as universal Scripture irregardless of culture. The Bible speaks alot about immorality and it should definitely be heeded; even when you're talking about bf/gf you can't really flat out rule them as something sinful, automatically attributing them to the acts of immorality.

quote:

And the whole point concerning the effort was to say that God does expect us to do the leg work when it comes to certain things, including the growth of salvation. If a person gets saved and never read their Bible or pray, they will not grow and produce any spiritual fruit. Just like if anyone has a job but doesn't go and work faithfully will never get paid. In no way am I saying that man has to work is responsible for something that only God can do, but we do have commends in Scripture that show the responsibility of man towards God in concern to work and home and even our faith. In other words, if I don't this, then this doesn't happen, although God provides and controls all things. So, if I don't go out and find a wife, I will most likely never get one. I agree God provides, but He will most likely provide the woman by putting her in my path to talk to and get to know, but I don't get to know her or even talk to her, nothing will happen. Prayers that require waiting on God are the only prayers that don't need feet, for all else, I pray as I go.

quote:

But the servant was told not just any woman, but one from the family. That's not all of society, but one to a few women. His job was pretty easy because he knew the father's name, and one of his daughters was the master's choice. There was a father's authority working here. Jacob asked for Rachel and was told to work 7 years for her (fahter's authority, and granted, an exploitive one)(and then he got her sister. Laban was a dishonest guy even to relatives - talk about dysfunctional families...). But the sevant did give God a fleece and God was gracious to have the girl water him and his camels if she was "the one." And notice the progression of relationship with Isaac and Rebeccah - he saw her (knowing the servant had gone to get a wife his father approved of) and took her home. That was fast but not sinful.

These people weren't turning over rocks looking for a wife. They were doing what they were doing and either tripped over a wife or someone got a wife for them.

quote:

You are correct about liberty - very good point and I can't argue against that. But the idea of girlfriend (and I'm using that word synonymously with dating) in the culture we are emersed in does have a strong connotation of immorality. Paul said he was free to eat meat but if his liberty hurt a weaker Christian's conscience he would never eat meat again. That's a whole different thread so I'll leave it, but liberty isn't the perfect answer to the dating issue. Yes, you can do stuff in liberty, the question is one of wisdom. All things are lawful but not all things are expedient (I don't know how the lawful part here meshes with immorality; maybe you have a handle on that. I'd be happy to hear what you say). Is it wise to be involved in a situation where TV and movies and people talking all involve something you are forbidden? Your own body isn't made for celibacy, yet you're not married and have to wait. It's difficult.

quote:

I think the problem you and I may be having is understanding regeneration and how God works in our lives. God does it. We respond, but He calls us to respond. He gives us the faith in the first place - Heb. 12:2 says:

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith."

Every time we do something right it's because He is moving in our lives. Ephesians 2:10 says: "

For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this verse because I always thought the good works was like a wheel barrow moving along by God's hand and we just put our hands on the handles and walked along with it. Maybe I'm wrong. But they are predestined (if you aren't from a Reformed background this may be the source of our disagreement) to be done by us doing them, and God makes it all happen.

To sum up, I agree with you that dating is not condemned specifically by Scripture, and Christians walking in obedience in their everyday actions aren't sinning to date. But as sexual beings dealing in a social manner that is tempting and almost universally touted as permission to sin, it seems unwise. Many Christians are untaught and could be easily snagged by their own desires, hence the broad brushstroke of disapproval of dating is not unwarrented. If every Christian for age 10 on up was seriously digging into their Bibles and saying, "God, I want to obey You in every area of my life!" then I would have no problem with this at all.

quote:

Thank you, Ninjaearth, for your hard work on this thread and your thinking and reasoning; I hadn't realized before that I had embraced this idea to protect young Christians not knowing how to live in a way to avoid sin. God bless you - and give you a great wife in His perfect time. I give you my blessing as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: deermousie

You are right, Stimulus. Vine ("Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words") says that, too. The Greek word hapto also means "to kindle a fire" or "cling to." I'm wondering about this, since it's a concession according to Paul, and not a command, since fornication is commanded to be avoided. So there's a difference here and I don't know enough scholarship of Greek and theology to take this any further (frustrating, isn't it?).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ninjaearth
That's true, but examples do you have of this from the early church?

quote:

Israel has a good number of examples and we can learn alot from them, but I don't think this is one of them (this was also before they had the Law of Moses as well). I"m not saying this argument is invalid, but it doesn't hold any weight on a large scale because you are dealing with a single nation and separate culture from the Gentiles. While there are some good principals in these examples (i.e. marrying within the family of believers, God granting knowledge of the right one), in most cases knowing the "one" is really indicated by the woman saying yes to the engagement. That the simplest way; accompanying that is the personal understanding of the individuals themselves in whether or not they want to marry each other. After all, one could be so convinced and the other may not be. Nevertheless, the person that God has a man to marry, Sovereignly, is the one that they were meant to be with (I may get into some trouble here, but marriage is clearly something that happens by God's hand (Genesis 2, Matthew 19). I think in essence, though, Deermouse, we may be saying the same thing but I may be saying it a bit differently.

quote:

Can't really make girlfriend synonymous with dating (they are to different things by definition) just like you can't put dating synonymous with immorality.

quote:

By definition, these are all different things of themselves, but each can involve something of the sort (i.e. immorality with the gf, dating the gf, etc) but gf does not equal immorality. That's putting a label on something that isn't and that does cause problems. I would be careful of that; besides, when it comes to the truth of something being something, has to be consistent (which is why gf = immorality cannot be true, given certain factors, as there are many relationships outside of marriage that are pure and have no hints of immorality).

quote:


My main point is that you can't call something "this" firmly and sure because it's doesn't have consistent qualities that would it make it so.

quote:

Well, I have something written but I lost it (lol)

quote:


..so, I'll just say that my theology is based Biblically (making it reformed theology in a sense) so I'm fully aware that repentance is a work of God as illustrated and declared in Scripture, but I do also believe that repentance works in cooperation with man's will, enabling him/her to repent (via the Spirit of God) which still makes it a work of God because without God man isn't able to repent. You can't ignore the Scriptures that call forth man to respond in repentance, just like we can't ignore the Scriptures that reveal that salvation is a gift from God. If that is true, then if the Scriptures call forth a person to repent, then how do we understand a dead person doing something that they can't? The simplest answer comes, based on 6:25-58, tells us that the Father draws the person to Jesus via the Spirit of God (John 1, 14-16, Acts 2; Romans 10:8-9) and grants them repentance leading to salvation.

quote:

Essentially taking a dead will and making it alive and filled with the knowledge and desire of how to be saved and essentially believing it by acting on it; all of this is done by God's Spirit not leaving the person voluntarily responsible for what happened because they were unable to believe and repent on their own. That's my understanding of regeneration, at least the short answer anyhow.

quote:

But even with this, after salvation, it does become a responsibility of man to grow in their faith by the means in which God supplies (the Scriptures, prayer, fellowship, worship). A good case for this is Hebrews 5, where the Hebrews who were very knowledgeable stop growing in their faith because they became dull of hearing and had to be reintroduced to Christ. Yes, there were saved, but if they were not looking to grow it doesn't lead to spiritual maturity

quote:

All of this was in response to a man finding a wife; the point being that there's a responsibility of man to respond appropriately when able according to Scripture, otherwise it's disobedience and not necessarily the fact that God will or will not provide. A God-fearing wife is from the Lord indeed, but a man that does not take the responsible part (making the first move for example) in doing what he knows is right, he will not get a wife. Just like he won't be able to eat if he doesn't have a job (despite the fact that God does provide food and clothing) (2 Thess 3:6-15). Again, God does bring people together but it still up to the people themselves to get to know one another and decide to marry one another, based on the Sovereignty of God. That is my thinking on this subject. But again, this is me; where responsibility is given to us in Scripture, it needs to be obeyed regardless of God's actions in response to our obedience.

quote:

Thank you, Ninjaearth, for your hard work on this thread and your thinking and reasoning; I hadn't realized before that I had embraced this idea to protect young Christians not knowing how to live in a way to avoid sin. God bless you - and give you a great wife in His perfect time. I give you my blessing as well.

quote:

That's good, I'm glad you do. However, as you do, I want to challenge you (and I'll challenge myself as well, I"m not an expert on anything) to be careful before defining something solely as against God's will (sin) if Scripture doesn't specifically does so.

quote:

Something that isn't biblically defined (good or bad) you have to really be careful and give the proper understanding of Scripture itself and realizing at the same time that Scripture is silent on many issues (mostly modern issues) but are clear on many other matters. I appreciate and thank you for your blessing. Thanks for your imput on this thread as well. God bless!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: deermousie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ninjaearth
That's true, but examples do you have of this from the early church?

There is the example of Joseph and Mary, but technically that's before early Church. There is nothing in Acts or beyond. The problem is, God never says "thou shalt" but leaves the meeting and relationship development in the dark, and that would be the critical point. We don't know the specifics, so we have to lean back on the general rules of relationships in God's will: be honest, edify with our words, speak the truth in love, don't defraud, etc.

quote:

Israel has a good number of examples and we can learn alot from them, but I don't think this is one of them (this was also before they had the Law of Moses as well). I"m not saying this argument is invalid, but it doesn't hold any weight on a large scale because you are dealing with a single nation and separate culture from the Gentiles. While there are some good principals in these examples (i.e. marrying within the family of believers, God granting knowledge of the right one), in most cases knowing the "one" is really indicated by the woman saying yes to the engagement. That the simplest way; accompanying that is the personal understanding of the individuals themselves in whether or not they want to marry each other. After all, one could be so convinced and the other may not be. Nevertheless, the person that God has a man to marry, Sovereignly, is the one that they were meant to be with (I may get into some trouble here, but marriage is clearly something that happens by God's hand (Genesis 2, Matthew 19). I think in essence, though, Deermouse, we may be saying the same thing but I may be saying it a bit differently.

That's certainly a possibility. Since God doesn't say how we have to do it, it becomes a matter of knowing God's general will. Marriage is instituted by God and He says he who finds a wife finds a good thing. So marriage is a go unless a person is called to lifelong celibacy, and it appears few are. It's also not a go if the person is unable to be married (supporting a wife or taking care of a family comes to mind).

How do we do anything? We check that it's not forbidden or stumbles someone or violates any precept of Scripture. Can dating or a gal asking a guy for a date do that? Probably not, but in our present moral sewer of society, dating can be too big a temptation and a gal asking a guy out can give a guy who doesn't have the means to be a leader a change to marry without it being expected of him. And God designed marriage to work a certain way and people shipwreck their marriages trying to make it different (no leadership, wife swapping, no support, killing children, etc.)

quote:

Can't really make girlfriend synonymous with dating (they are to different things by definition) just like you can't put dating synonymous with immorality.

I'm afraid I must disagree. What is a girlfriend but a woman who is dating someone? She's not a sister, she's not a financee (and I resent people ****izing the word "financee" to mean "she's fornicating and has no plans to marry"), she's not a wife, she's not an acquaintance. A girlfriend is someone a guy is dating.

In the minds of the average nonChristian, I think dating is synonymous with immorality. And even if it wasn't, there's the cultural expectation of some physical involvement sexually and time spent alone.

quote:

By definition, these are all different things of themselves, but each can involve something of the sort (i.e. immorality with the gf, dating the gf, etc) but gf does not equal immorality. That's putting a label on something that isn't and that does cause problems. I would be careful of that; besides, when it comes to the truth of something being something, has to be consistent (which is why gf = immorality cannot be true, given certain factors, as there are many relationships outside of marriage that are pure and have no hints of immorality).

A situation doesn't have to be 100% to be a majority. Look at any movie or TV show that involves a "girlfriend" and it's probably going to be an immoral situation sexually, or headed that way.

If you have a girlfriend, are not defrauding her sexually, are not touching her or leading her on in any way, you are a rare bear (and more power to you!). An exception doesn't negate the majority. And many dating Christians might think you're weird, because they haven't solved the Lordship problem of living in a decadent society that freely allows people to chase their jollies that by rights belong in marriage.

quote:


My main point is that you can't call something "this" firmly and sure because it's doesn't have consistent qualities that would it make it so.

Look at my 100% point above, please.

You're probably going to have kids some day I assume. Are you willing to let your 16 year old daughter be the girlfriend of a typical Christian 16 year old boy, where they are alone for hours at a time, day after day? Are you so sure of the consistant qualities of their good intentions combined with lack of experience and strength of hormones? Do you know how many girls going to Planned Parenthood for abortions call themselves Christians? And even the ones who aren't, most of them aren't married so who was the father of the doomed baby? Her boyfriend! Even people living in fornication typically call their partners "significant other" or gf/bf. Ask yourself (don't tell me or the list here) how many non-church people who know you are dating assume you are sexually involved to some extent?

quote:

Well, I have something written but I lost it (lol)

That happens to me all the time. Frustrating, isn't it.

quote:


..so, I'll just say that my theology is based Biblically (making it reformed theology in a sense) so I'm fully aware that repentance is a work of God as illustrated and declared in Scripture, but I do also believe that repentance works in cooperation with man's will, enabling him/her to repent (via the Spirit of God) which still makes it a work of God because without God man isn't able to repent. You can't ignore the Scriptures that call forth man to respond in repentance, just like we can't ignore the Scriptures that reveal that salvation is a gift from God. If that is true, then if the Scriptures call forth a person to repent, then how do we understand a dead person doing something that they can't? The simplest answer comes, based on 6:25-58, tells us that the Father draws the person to Jesus via the Spirit of God (John 1, 14-16, Acts 2; Romans 10:8-9) and grants them repentance leading to salvation.

Right. God grants them repentance - God moves in us and gives us the ability to do it. So we're doing something but it all comes from God moving in us. We can't take credit for that anymore than a tree can for moving in the wind.

quote:

Essentially taking a dead will and making it alive and filled with the knowledge and desire of how to be saved and essentially believing it by acting on it; all of this is done by God's Spirit not leaving the person voluntarily responsible for what happened because they were unable to believe and repent on their own. That's my understanding of regeneration, at least the short answer anyhow.

I agree, but the main mover is still God.

quote:

But even with this, after salvation, it does become a responsibility of man to grow in their faith by the means in which God supplies (the Scriptures, prayer, fellowship, worship). A good case for this is Hebrews 5, where the Hebrews who were very knowledgeable stop growing in their faith because they became dull of hearing and had to be reintroduced to Christ. Yes, there were saved, but if they were not looking to grow it doesn't lead to spiritual maturity

.

1 Tim. 1:19 talks about a good conscience, and John Calvin pointed to this and said that the loss of a good conscience is the mother of all heresies. We change our theology so we can excuse ourselves in sinning. And we have to take all the credit for that, because God didn't cause it.

I think you misunderstood Heb. 5:

11 of whom we have much to say, and hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God;

It doesn't say they needed to be introduced to Christ again but the first principles of the oracles of God. NKJV says "the elementary truths of God's word" and so does NIV. It's a learning problem and they need to be taught. That's passive; receiving.

quote:

All of this was in response to a man finding a wife; the point being that there's a responsibility of man to respond appropriately when able according to Scripture, otherwise it's disobedience and not necessarily the fact that God will or will not provide. A God-fearing wife is from the Lord indeed, but a man that does not take the responsible part (making the first move for example) in doing what he knows is right, he will not get a wife. Just like he won't be able to eat if he doesn't have a job (despite the fact that God does provide food and clothing) (2 Thess 3:6-15). Again, God does bring people together but it still up to the people themselves to get to know one another and decide to marry one another, based on the Sovereignty of God. That is my thinking on this subject. But again, this is me; where responsibility is given to us in Scripture, it needs to be obeyed regardless of God's actions in response to our obedience.

Men are commanded to provide for their families (and that includes food, I'm sure we agree), and God says they are worse than an unbeliever if they don't. No where does it say a man is to pursue a wife. It just says a wife is a good thing to find. Scripturally you can't support a pursuit. You may be able to rationalize it from a practical standpoint, but the Bible never says this. Providing and pursuing a wife aren't equivalents biblically.

quote:

Thank you, Ninjaearth, for your hard work on this thread and your thinking and reasoning; I hadn't realized before that I had embraced this idea to protect young Christians not knowing how to live in a way to avoid sin. God bless you - and give you a great wife in His perfect time. I give you my blessing as well.

quote:

That's good, I'm glad you do. However, as you do, I want to challenge you (and I'll challenge myself as well, I"m not an expert on anything) to be careful before defining something solely as against God's will (sin) if Scripture doesn't specifically does so.

And likewise saying something is biblical when it's never mentioned.

I don't think I ever said dating was sin; I said it was unwise. I'll go back and look...

No, you're the one who brought the possibility of that up, in post #26 (beginning of second paragraph). I countered that in post #28 with God saying it wasn't good for a man to touch a woman, not that dating was sin (after your fifth quote).

quote:

Something that isn't biblically defined (good or bad) you have to really be careful and give the proper understanding of Scripture itself and realizing at the same time that Scripture is silent on many issues (mostly modern issues) but are clear on many other matters. I appreciate and thank you for your blessing. Thanks for your imput on this thread as well. God bless!!!

Yeah, those silences drive me nuts. I'm lazy about figuring them out from the general principles I guess.

You're welcome, Ninjaearth. This has been fun, a work out, and a good learning experience. Thank you!

quote:

Should the guy always make the first move? Honestly, depending on what that move is, it will be yes or no. I mean, Ruth essentially made the first move in that story, so that brings to question as to whether or not the guy making "the first" move is consistent argument given in Scripture; this is much different than "responsibility" given in Scripture. While I do recognize that a pattern is given in Scripture it's not clear on the definite level in which one person makes the initial move or not in regards to a relationship, but I do believe that the guy should assume primary responsibility for leading the relationship overall regardless of who makes the first move. That's pretty much it for me I guess.