I feel terrible

[Chevaleresse]

And I doubt there are other posts in any quantity at all on this forum where anyone is speaking of
“forgiving” someone else for a past that does not involve them.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=440409

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=589960

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=524834

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=590022

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701142&page=4

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7075853

Just the first results for the search. I think you could have them yourself.

 

[kozlosap]

Please explain to me why anyone who is obsessed with virginity marry someone who wasn’t a virgin? If my fiancé was intimate with a girl friend before I even met him how on earth could I even deem it appropriate for me to “forgive” him for something that has nothing to do with cheating? Thank goodness that humans have the ability to change their minds and attitudes as they progress through life. What someone believes and acts upon at age 20 is usually far different than at age 35. Obsession is obsession and whether it is marrying someone who is a size zero or a 30 year old virgin, it still is self limiting when meeting people.

 

[Chevaleresse]

Please explain to me why anyone who is obsessed with virginity marry someone who wasn’t a virgin?

?? Not everyone who wants to marry a virgin (especially if they are one) is obsessed with virginity. Maybe you’ve heard about STDs? I intend for my future husband to be a virgin, but that’s for a whole range of reasons.

“If my fiancé was intimate with a girl friend before I even met him how on earth could I even deem it appropriate for me to “forgive” him for something that has nothing to do with cheating? Thank goodness that humans have the ability to change their minds and attitudes as they progress through life. What someone believes and acts upon at age 20 is usually far different than at age 35.”

I was only explaining the OP’s usage of the word to Julie who is apparently unaware of how the word is mistakenly used on this forum. I was only providing examples to back up my interpretation of the OP’s post.

I personally think telling people to forgive someone else’s sexual past is just plain wrong.

“Obsession is obsession and whether it is marrying someone who is a size zero or a 30 year old virgin, it still is self limiting when meeting people. ”

Lots of my friends say I’m obsessed with marrying a Catholic guy. It’s not an obsession. They’re called deal-breakers and criteria. The whole point of deal-breakers and criteria is that you reduce the size of the pool. It’s funny, actually. People who had fewer criteria for selecting a spouse often question their choices later. And it doesn’t look pretty.

 

[Qwestions]

Hi, Bytebear! In essence, your posts indicate that you are unable to forgive non-virginal women for their sexual pasts and worry that you’ll be unable to find a wife who meets your criteria. Accept that maybe you are correct, and will not be able to marry. None of us are guaranteed that we’ll find a spouse, even if we accept people as they now are, totally excluding their pasts. That’s life. Do pray about your situation; prayer will guide you and sustain you.

Since you cannot accept non-virginal women, your spouse possibilities diminish significantly. There used to be a very popular song titled, “Looking for Love (In All the Wrong Places).” I think therein may lie your major problem. The pools in which you’ve met the non-virginal young women you’ve dated are beyond stagnant (very few virgins and so elusive that you’ve not found them). Fish someplace else in clearer waters (only virgins)!

The posters who suggested that you discuss your concerns with a priest gave you excellent advice. Priests, in order to be ordained, have studied the ins and outs of our faith way beyond most of us and can help you to clarify your thoughts, so not only would you benefit by talking with one, but most are aware of chaste candidates searching for a chaste mate–priests are fairly good matchmakers!

When you told us that you’re unable to forgive a non-virgin for being so, “trying to get over the emotional pain,” and “this is really eating me up,” then asked how others have been able to forgive a woman’s sexual past, most of us responded to those questions and other comments you made, simply offering possiblities for you to ponder, but I could see no derision directed at you. Contrary to the attackers’ rants, posters didn’t suggest where you might find chaste candidates because you didn’t ask, but none of them belittled you for wanting a pure life partner. I can’t imagine any young Catholic growing up thinking, “I don’t care about how chaste my spouse is, so long as I marry;” but life happens, and tugging heartstrings, not exclusiviely Catholic ideals, usually dictate a mate choice.

It is always upsetting to read a post lashing out meanly to a previous poster–the old “kill the messenger” scenario. The only posts that I see to be “attack” posts are the ones made by some posters against previous posters who didn’t agree with you that virginity is the only route for a successful marriage. The latter were saying that 1) if you maintain your virginity requirement, then, yes, your field is narrowed and you may not find a wife; and 2) since your requirement is troubling you, a) date only virgins, or b) assess why you feel previous sexual behavior requires forgiveness from you , and c) determine why you persist in dating non-virgins when you are incapable of forgiving them–setting yourseif up for a perpetual can’t-win proposition, and THAT’s why responders have asked probing questioins and recommended consultation with a priest…

Yes, we should all aspire to a stainless soul, and a few fortunate people have few or no opportunites in their lives to test what they’d do when faced with particular temptations. It’s easier for them to judge (although none of us are supposed to do so) from a “holier than thou” vantage because they’ve never been placed in situations tempting enough to cross the threshold to the mortal sin that they find so despicable in others. (Shakespeare wrote a play, “Measure for Measure,” about that very situation. Do read it!) There are others who have been able to remain above mortal sin by making decisions that have left them in anguish or bitterness; and still others who have been betrayed and deeply wounded by the one they loved.

Perhaps those who contemptuously attacked the posters responding to you identify with one of those groups. I did not at all interpret those being attacked as having first attacked you. The attackers sound like they’re very concscientious and moral (but certainly bitter and contemptuous) people who simply misread the intentions of the first posters, and spoke scathingly without giving sufficient thought to the way their words would sound. I’m sorry this has occurred.

 

[djames99]

I tend to agree with you by today’s standards, but there was a time where the past held some reliable traditions, and that was at courtship. In the recent past the maturing of a child into courtship and eventual married life was a duty of the Catholic family. The family’s responsibility didn’t stop when the child attained sexual maturity. After first determining the individual came from a devout Catholic family, the parents would be allowed time to come familiar with the partner and had a say in the matter. Good character and social standing as well as the ability to make good moral decisions was sought for in the young adult.

The couple were watched carefully by either adult chaperones lest they fall into temptations, and this process was later shown in a humorous light in later movies, but it was true and a serious matter back then. Young brothers and sisters of the individual were sent by the parents to play in the parlor just in case, while mom would be in the kitchen.

The past sexual antics of a partner would have been considered a sign of low self control. It was also considered a risk for scandal for the new marriage starting out. There was no such thing as socially acceptable free sexual expression as there is today in the Catholic family, and this rule still stands by law, and also a sin of our times.

What we need is to return to working and striving on creating virtuous and holy Catholic families, and the return of solid traditions, the absence of today reflected in problems that seem to be new and pandemic.

But sure, the past should be forgiven, but what is now important is what changes and lessons were learnt from it. We still need to ensure the good character of the potential spouse, that is still important.

 

[kozlosap]

?? Not everyone who wants to marry a virgin (especially if they are one) is obsessed with virginity. Maybe you’ve heard about STDs? I intend for my future husband to be a virgin, but that’s for a whole range of reasons.

I was only explaining the OP’s usage of the word to Julie who is apparently unaware of how the word is mistakenly used on this forum. I was only providing examples to back up my interpretation of the OP’s post.

I personally think telling people to forgive someone else’s sexual past is just plain wrong.

Lots of my friends say I’m obsessed with marrying a Catholic guy. It’s not an obsession. They’re called deal-breakers and criteria. The whole point of deal-breakers and criteria is that you reduce the size of the pool. It’s funny, actually. People who had fewer criteria for selecting a spouse often question their choices later. And it doesn’t look pretty.

I think wanting to marry another Catholic is not obsessive, it is obvious that if one is Catholic and wishes to live by the faith, then they should marry another Catholic. The “virgin” requirement is totally different requiring only one (1) physical action to change ones status from virgin to non-virgin. Living as a Catholic is a way of life.

 

[Marie1234]

So, you’re judging him for judging? I’m sure he’ll respect your opinion.

And thanks for making it sound like almost all Catholic women sleep around. I don’t appreciate that.

Biological differences. Read a book.

How would this be a biological difference? I mean, there are many obvious biological differences between men and women which make they act and think differently, but I don’t see how views on virginity could be one of them. If anything, views on virginity are culture-based. Most cultures favor women who are virginal, but not men. In fact, men are usually looked upon as less masculine if they want to maintain their virginity until marriage. Therefore, a virginal woman thinks it’s not a really huge deal if their man is not a virgin on their wedding night. But a virginal male would most likely feel uncomfortable on their wedding night if their new wife was not a virgin. I see absolutely no biological basis in your argument that women are okay with marrying non-virgin men due to biological make-up. It’s most likely because society tells them to behave this way.

I’m a woman who wants to wait until marriage and I would prefer to marry a man who’s a virgin too, but if I were to fall in love with a man who made some mistakes in the past and wasn’t a virgin, that most certainly would not be a deal-breaker. My preferences have nothing to do with my “biology”, rather my spirit, will , and intellect. Choosing a partner on the basis of biology is dangerous and short-sighted. We are not solely animals; we are much more than that. We are humans. God wants us to choose mates not just based on what our bodies tell us. We should try to rise above our animal-instincts and connect with our potential spouses on a spiritual level as well. We should try to find love, not physical attraction.

Saying sexuality is based in only in biology seems, to me ,to just be an excuse for people to create double-standards.

By the way, I have no interest in gender studies. I am not a feminist. I am a conservative, Catholic, pro-life woman who is currently studying Biology and Scientific/Technical writing at a collegiate level . I know my Biology and I also have insight into human psychology and behavior. This does not seem to be biology-based to me, but rather cultural; it’s mental not physical.

 

[Chevaleresse]

“How would this be a biological difference? [etc etc] It’s most likely because society tells them to behave this way.”

Wrong. Start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_jealousy_in_humans. When you’re done reading that, send me a PM and I’ll email you a bunch of studies. Culture is based around biology, by the way, and you seem to be following the culture just as closely as a man who wants to marry a virgin.

“I’m a woman who wants to wait until marriage and I would prefer to marry a man who’s a virgin too, but if I were to fall in love with a man who made some mistakes in the past and wasn’t a virgin, that most certainly would not be a deal-breaker.”

How do you know he won’t fail again? How about (latent) STDs? How do you he’s actually repentant and not just trying fake it? How many past partners would you accept? 1? 5? 10? 50? 300? “Some” mistakes?

“My preferences have nothing to do with my “biology”, rather my spirit, will , and intellect. Choosing a partner on the basis of biology is dangerous and short-sighted. We are not solely animals; we are much more than that. We are humans. God wants us to choose mates not just based on what our bodies tell us. We should try to rise above our animal-instincts and connect with our potential spouses on a spiritual level as well. We should try to find love, not physical attraction.”

LOL. You choose on the basis of biology whether you want to or not (unless it’s an arranged marriage).

 

[Chevaleresse]

I think wanting to marry another Catholic is not obsessive, it is obvious that if one is Catholic and wishes to live by the faith, then they should marry another Catholic.

So you’re saying if someone marries a non-Catholic they don’t want to live by the faith? (Logically, you are saying that.) But how is not obsessive, in your mind? The point of a Catholic marrying a Catholic is “like marrying like”. That’s no different than the latter.

“The “virgin” requirement is totally different requiring only one (1) physical action to change ones status from virgin to non-virgin. Living as a Catholic is a way of life.”

Well, yeah, it’s different and it’s only one action. What’s your point? Murder is only one (1) action. So is drug use. They are all things that are deal-breakers for me. You will allow me to have deal-breakers, won’t you?

 

[Marie1234]

*"Culture is based around biology, by the way, and you seem to be following the culture…

How do you know he won’t fail again? How about (latent) STDs? How do you he’s actually repentant and not just trying fake it? How many past partners would you accept? 1? 5? 10? 50? 300? “Some” mistakes?

LOL. You choose on the basis of biology whether you want to or not (unless it’s an arranged marriage)."*

1. Culture is NOT always based in biology. An example? Abortion. Abortion goes against our very biology as “animals.” By nature, females protect their young at any cost. In humans, our culture has told us that a “fetus” is not a baby but a cluster of cells and that it is our choice to keep or remove this “parasitic” thing inside us. The truth, is we are all just a cluster of cells and our biology tells us to protect our young even before birth, but our culture says that it is our “choice” to keep or discard our babies. Unfortunately, too many people listen to culture on this matter.
2. How do I know he won’t fail again? Faith. There’s no guarantee anyone won’t cheat; even a man who is a virgin on his marriage night has the potential to cheat. I think I will know my future husband enough to tell if he’s “faking it” or is really repentant. It seems to me you need to have a little more faith in people. Not everyone is a lying sack of dirt.
3. Yes, we choose by biology in the sense that I’m a girl and am attracted to men. But the choice in choosing a specific mate is not merely based in biology. Yes, pheromones and physical attraction are very important, but frankly, there are a lot of men that who would meet that criteria. The factor that is most important is the soul of the person: What are their values,and beliefs? His personality and humor? Those factors are what we are SUPPOSED to look for in spouses. We’re supposed to rise above the mere animalistic aspects of our humanity and find beauty in the souls of people, not just their physical characteristics. If I were to listen to my biology, let me tell you, I would not wait until marriage. But I’ve chosen to rise above my biology AND my culture which also tells me to have sex when I feel physical attraction to another, and instead listened to my soul. I listen to God and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

"Great men are they who see that spiritual is stronger than material force, that thoughts rule the world.”- Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

[Godfollower]

So I’ve got a bit of a problem, and I’ll just get straight to it: all of my girlfriends have had sexual pasts. Some worse than others.

Im more sensitive/emotional for a guy my age (23) than others. I’ve tried really really hard to overlook my girlfriends’ pasts, but I just can’t do it.

I’d like to forget it, but no matter how hard I try, it won’t work.

Am I doomed to never get married? Am I immature or unChristian for this? Am I weak?

I feel terrible because of it. I feel like a lesser person.

It seems as though every one else can accept those things, except me.

This is really eating me up.

If you were a virgin who married or dated someone who wasnt, how did you get over it? could you give details?

Thanks

Hi, Bytebear!

I’m not in a position yet to offer advice, because most of the posts on this thread seem to be aimed at attacking each other rather than responding to you. But I do have a few questions for you, if you don’t mind answering:

• Assuming that you had gone out on a few dates with an attractive woman, found mutual interest, and had begun learning more about her, which of the following would be worse:
• A woman who had sex once in high school (and, of course, got dumped immediately afterward), or a woman who used to be pro-choice?
• A woman who had a sexual relationship with one long-term boyfriend but no longer believes in premarital sex, or a woman who is currently pro-choice?
• A woman who had a couple of one-night stands in high school, or a woman who just doesn’t believe in transubstantiation?
• A woman who has repeatedly tried to have sexual relationships but failed (and is therefore technically still a virgin), or a woman who believes in chastity but succumbed to temptation once?
• A woman who thinks premarital sex is okay between two people who love each other if they agree on the subject, or a woman who doesn’t buy “all that stupid God stuff”?
• A woman who has had sex, or a woman who has desecrated the Eucharist?
• A woman who likes you but thinks you’re prudish for waiting, or an atheist?
• A woman who thinks engaged couples need to try sex to see whether they’re sexually compatible, or a woman who was raped and had an abortion?
• Suppose you’re dating a woman and you have strong feelings for her, then you find out that she has a sexual past. What specifically causes the pain? Do you feel that she has betrayed you? Is it that she betrayed God? Is it a fear of STDs? Is it a fear of inadequacy by comparison to her previous boyfriends? Is it the loss of the opportunity for shared loss of virginity (the “we were each other’s firsts” idea)? Is it a feeling that she isn’t adequately committed to God (and, if so, what if she didn’t believe at that point)?
• To put the previous question another way, what specifically are you trying to get over? Her past? A lost hypothetical future with her? An image of her purity that has now been shattered? Or something else?
• What would happen if you were dating someone and discovered at the same time that (A) she had a sexual past; (B) she was raised, and has been, an atheist her whole life; and (C) she has recently begun to believe in God and (without your prompting) is halfway through RCIA? What would you feel?

I have a hunch that your answers to these questions will help guide your response to the problems you’re feeling.

Of course, this is an anonymous internet forum, so take it all with a grain of salt.

Peace.

 

[kozlosap]

How do you know he won’t fail again? How about (latent) STDs? How do you he’s actually repentant and not just trying fake it? How many past partners would you accept? 1? 5? 10? 50? 300? “Some” mistakes?

I agree with the poster who asserts that some people come into their belief in chastity when they are adults, so many will have pasts which included being sexually active. From what I gather, in your opinion, any person who has “failed” in their past life even if they weren’t part of the Church at the time, have the propensity to fail again. Our Church is the hospital for sinners, we are encouraged to heal and sin no more. LOL- I’m so full of a bagel and coffee that I can’t even think to type! Hope everyone is having a great Friday

 

[Chevaleresse]

From what I gather, in your opinion, any person who has “failed” in their past life even if they weren’t part of the Church at the time, have the propensity to fail again.

Yes, and statistically they will.

 

[Chevaleresse]

“1. Culture is NOT always based in biology. An example? Abortion. Abortion goes against our very biology as “animals.” By nature, females protect their young at any cost. In humans, our culture has told us that a “fetus” is not a baby but a cluster of cells and that it is our choice to keep or remove this “parasitic” thing inside us. The truth, is we are all just a cluster of cells and our biology tells us to protect our young even before birth, but our culture says that it is our “choice” to keep or discard our babies. Unfortunately, too many people listen to culture on this matter.”

They’ve convinced women that their babies aren’t human/alive/persons/etc. This overrides the protection/nurturing reaction. That’s why ultrasounds are an effective tool.

Culture is based in biology. There is not a perfect correspondence/congruency between the two, obviously. But it is still based in it. Why is it that every culture that we know of and have ever known of values female purity? Why? Even cultures that are separated and entirely cut off from surrounding cultures value it. The elements that are common to all cultures have a biological basis. Modern Western culture has tried to ignore it. Non-virgins enjoy a much, much higher divorce rate. Again, you seem to be following the culture just as closely as a man who wants to marry a virgin.

“2. How do I know he won’t fail again? Faith. There’s no guarantee anyone won’t cheat; even a man who is a virgin on his marriage night has the potential to cheat.”

No, there’s no guarantee. But you’re hiding something in the dilemma: the chances of someone cheating are different for a virgin (low) versus a non-virgin (much higher). I won’t accept someone who didn’t have enough self-control to just say “no”. BTW, would you accept a man with 100 partners? 1000 partners? Why/why not?

“I think I will know my future husband enough to tell if he’s “faking it” or is really repentant. It seems to me you need to have a little more faith in people. Not everyone is a lying sack of dirt.”

No, not everyone. But you do realize men do lots of things because they can get away with it. And if you read threads on here about unchastity in marriage, you’ll realize the frequent outcomes.

“Yes, we choose by biology in the sense that I’m a girl and am attracted to men. But the choice in choosing a specific mate is not merely based in biology. Yes, pheromones and physical attraction are very important, but frankly, there are a lot of men that who would meet that criteria. The factor that is most important is the soul of the person: What are their values, and beliefs? His personality and humor? Those factors are what we are SUPPOSED to look for in spouses. We’re supposed to rise above the mere animalistic aspects of our humanity and find beauty in the souls of people, not just their physical characteristics. If I were to listen to my biology, let me tell you, I would not wait until marriage.”

Then you are part of a very, very small section of humanity if that’s actually how you decide on your spouse.

“But I’ve chosen to rise above my biology AND my culture which also tells me to have sex when I feel physical attraction to another, and instead listened to my soul. I listen to God and I wouldn’t have it any other way.”

I’m surprised you’d accept someone who didn’t feel the same way.

And the questions you ignored: How about (latent) STDs? How do you he’s actually repentant and not just trying fake it? How many past partners would you accept? 1? 5? 10? 50? 300? “Some” mistakes?

 

[Chevaleresse]

• Assuming that you had gone out on a few dates with an attractive woman, found mutual interest, and had begun learning more about her, which of the following would be worse:
• A woman who had sex once in high school (and, of course, got dumped immediately afterward), or a woman who used to be pro-choice?
• A woman who had a sexual relationship with one long-term boyfriend but no longer believes in premarital sex, or a woman who is currently pro-choice?
• A woman who had a couple of one-night stands in high school, or a woman who just doesn’t believe in transubstantiation?
• A woman who has repeatedly tried to have sexual relationships but failed (and is therefore technically still a virgin), or a woman who believes in chastity but succumbed to temptation once?
• A woman who thinks premarital sex is okay between two people who love each other if they agree on the subject, or a woman who doesn’t buy “all that stupid God stuff”?
• A woman who has had sex, or a woman who has desecrated the Eucharist?
• A woman who likes you but thinks you’re prudish for waiting, or an atheist?
• A woman who thinks engaged couples need to try sex to see whether they’re sexually compatible, or a woman who was raped and had an abortion?

Peace.

I love how you’ve just given him choices just between serious mortal sins.

If he were smart, he’d say no to all of them.

• “Someone who wanted to murder his entire family, or someone who supports global mass genocide”

 

[Marie1234]

QUOTE=Chevaleresse;9858301]

“Then you are part of a very, very small section of humanity if that’s actually how you decide on your spouse.”

I am. I trust that my spouse will be too.

“I’m surprised you’d accept someone who didn’t feel the same way.”

**You’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. I wouldn’t marry someone who doesn’t have the same values as I do, for example :chastity. I, however, would marry someone who has made mistakes in the past and now wants to repent and live a chaste, christian lifestyle.

I know I’m different. I’ve felt the pull of the spiritual my entire life and I understand that not everyone is the same as I am. Most people don’t find true religion, don’t find God, until later in life and make many mistakes. I’ve been fortunate that God has given me graces to prevent me from being such a person. But I also know that I could have very easily been one of the many confused souls out there who have had less control over their primitive faculties and less understanding of God. Therefore, I don’t judge them, I hope and pray that they find God, for I know I am no better than them just because I value the spiritual so much. And I’m not perfect either. How could I expect someone to overlook my imperfections if I can’t overlook his?

I’m so happy when a man who did not understand the complexities of life and the soul has a change of heart and chooses to follow God. I don’t view him based on his past mistakes, but rather the current state of his soul and life. And I could absolutely marry a man like that. **

And the questions you ignored: How about (latent) STDs? How do you he’s actually repentant and not just trying fake it? How many past partners would you accept? 1? 5? 10? 50? 300? “Some” mistakes?

As long as he truly has a change of heart and truly loves God and accepts his rules, I don’t think there’s really any number that matters. STDs are another issue though, I have to take care of myself and my body as well. I don’t really know what I would do.

 

[Chevaleresse]

“You’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. I wouldn’t marry someone who doesn’t have the same values as I do, for example :chastity. I, however, would marry someone who has made mistakes in the past and now wants to repent and live a chaste, christian lifestyle.”

Do you the cause of their repentance?

“the current state of his soul and life”

Which is impossible to know. You’ve read the threads about men changing after the wedding, no?

“STDs are another issue though, I have to take care of myself and my body as well. I don’t really know what I would do.”

Well, HPV is on the rise again, and it has latent strains as usual. It’s your call.

 

[Marie1234]

Do you the cause of their repentance?
**
No, that wouldn’t be a true repentance if he were to change for my sake. However, if my faith were to inspire him to want to find God, that’s a different story.**

Which is impossible to know. You’ve read the threads about men changing after the wedding, no?

Again, faith. There are no guarantees, but without faith, hope and love, we truly have nothing.

" 'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all." - Tennyson

The Excellence of Love

13 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body [a]to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.

4 Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5 does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6 does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7 **bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of [c]prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I [d]became a man, I did away with childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror [e]dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the [f]greatest of these is love.

1 Corinthians 13
**

 

[Chevaleresse]

“No, that wouldn’t be a true repentance if he were to change for my sake.”

How do you know?

“Again, faith. There are no guarantees”

There are statistics.

“'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.” - Tennyson

Tell that to a divorced or abused person previously married. See what they say.

PS. “Cleave ever to the sunnier side of doubt” - Tennyson

 

[Marie1234]

Chevaleresse,

At some point, you have to believe in something . You seem to be an eternal pessimist and I feel bad that you have such little faith in people and in the world. I am an exteremely analytical person and I take any statistics, any scientific information (unless it’s from wikipedia, you know anyone can post anything on there) very seriously. I mean, I’m studying Biology in college! Do you really think I don’t know what’s going on in human biology and sexual statistics? That being said, I still do believe in faith, hope, and love despite all the terrible things I see people do. Why? Because I see the reality not only in the physical world, but at the spiritual level of humanity as well.

There’s really no point in debating this any futher. You will never be able to understand the soul unless you have faith. There are no scientific experiment that can explore the soul; no way to measure faith, love, or hope; yet they clearly exist.

Just because you can’t measure something scientifically doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Lets just agree to disagree, okay?