Simcha Fisher on male-female friendship

[DarkLight]

Youse need to stop dwelling on the objects of the analogy and look at the lesson being told, unless it is that underlying lesson that for some reason you feel threatened by.

Given that the underlying lesson is basically “if you’ve committed sexual sin, you’re now used up/damaged and no one’s going to want you,” that’s a pretty bad lesson. Even leaving aside the effects on rape victims, it’s not exactly a good message for anyone who has committed a sexual sin either. If you’re already ruined and it’s not going to be possible to ever have a healthy marriage anyway, why not keep having sex?

Sin - all sin - damages us, but there is healing in Christ. Can any of us say we have kept ourselves pure in every way?

 

[Xantippe]

Given that the underlying lesson is basically “if you’ve committed sexual sin, you’re now used up/damaged and no one’s going to want you,” that’s a pretty bad lesson. Even leaving aside the effects on rape victims, it’s not exactly a good message for anyone who has committed a sexual sin either. If you’re already ruined and it’s not going to be possible to ever have a healthy marriage anyway, why not keep having sex?

Sin - all sin - damages us, but there is healing in Christ. Can any of us say we have kept ourselves pure in every way?

Right.

And as far as analogies go, isn’t an erring human less like a cup full of spit, a licked candy bar, a soiled Kleenex or a crumpled rose and more like a classic car that needs extensive body work and a new engine? If we’re talking about a human being, we’re talking about something inherently valuable, and any analogies that imply that a human being is worthless garbage do not belong in the Christian’s mouth or mind.

 

[ATraveller]

Those analogies are too focused on people. I liked how we were taught overall it’s about discipleship. More focused on God than people.
Simply that we are followers of Christ, we honour and glorify God in how we live and the choices we make. Because we love God with all our souls, hearts and minds, we strive to follow His commands. Saving yourself for marriage is not about STDs. It’s not even about sharing an intimate aspect of yourself with your spouse. It’s about obeying God and trusting Him. If you fail, try again and work harder to avoid like any other sin.
Overall, the article is good but I think this part is hyped.

How can they flip a switch and suddenly learn how to enjoy and respect each other, when just yesterday, each other’s bodies were their worst enemy?

It’s a possibility and overall it’s rare. Of course, the few who react that way must be considered too and help them avoid that.

 

[AdamP88]

I think any anology that uses “disposabe” items is probably going to suffer from the same problem of making it seem like the person who commits sexual sin is damaged beyond repair.

I do like the classic car analogy that @Xantippe suggested.

 

[Xantippe]

I think any anology that uses “disposabe” items is probably going to suffer from the same problem of making it seem like the person who commits sexual sin is damaged beyond repair.

I do like the classic car analogy that @Xantippe suggested.

Of course, even the classic car analogy suffers from the problem that it’s a thing and doesn’t have any agency or free will.

But at least it’s not obviously worthless after being damaged.

 

[alice24]

Another problem with this sick view on purity as shown in the image of the bike is downgrading the wife and mother. Even a once new bike can be boring/dirty after years of use. The owner (hate the term) can now buy a new one, or, if morally tough, continues riding the old bike, always knowing it will never be that pure and new as in former times.
I see this strange view on women in secular and religious groups. Once a woman becomes a mother she’s no longer that sexy, the secular would say (it’s that common that I feared the baby theme myself when thinking of my future. SICK.)
In Duggar- inspired groups the consequence is an obsession of virginity, laying first on the woman during courtship, later on her daughters, and it scares me that this men seem to look with the same interest in physical virginity at their daughters as former on their girlfriends.

 

[Xantippe]

Another problem with this sick view on purity as shown in the image of the bike is downgrading the wife and mother. Even a once new bike can be boring/dirty after years of use. The owner (hate the term) can now buy a new one, or, if morally tough, continues riding the old bike, always knowing it will never be that pure and new as in former times.

That’s a very good point.

That’s an argument against marriage and childbearing and in favor of keeping one’s “bike” as shiny and new-looking as possible.

 

[alice24]

Strangely, this argumet is often used by “modern” secular people, too. A mixture of simone de beauvoir-ish “marriage is the death of freedom” and “a mother can´t be sexy” is still present in many minds, no matter how high the education level may be. I wonder if this has influenced religious people, or if they developed this idea on their own.

 

[Xantippe]

I wonder if this has influenced religious people, or if they developed this idea on their own.

I think people start with true ideas (like that virginity and chastity are important) and then they generate bad arguments in favor of good ideas. I think the ideas come very naturally–I myself generated some of them myself as a teen.

It’s just that grownup people need to be smart enough to realize a) that it’s an argument against marriage motherhood b) it makes even marital sex sound gross and terrible and c) it offers no hope or motivation to people with a “past.”

 

[DarkLight]

Yeah. I’ve also thought several times that the way it’s put, it’s always been about how once a woman’s had sex with a man she can’t be any good for any other man ever. I am pretty sure last I checked widows have always been able to remarry, and no one talks about them being “used up”. There’s no sin at all there, despite her having sex and potentially even children with her first husband.

 

[Xantippe]

Yeah. I’ve also thought several times that the way it’s put, it’s always been about how once a woman’s had sex with a man she can’t be any good for any other man ever. I am pretty sure last I checked widows have always been able to remarry, and no one talks about them being “used up”. There’s no sin at all there, despite her having sex and potentially even children with her first husband.

In fact, St. Paul was extraordinarily enthusiastic about the idea of young widows’ marrying. He said in 1 Timothy 5, “14 So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, rule their households, and give the enemy no occasion to revile us.” Presumably, that implies that Christian men were supposed to marry young widows, because if Christian men were all holding out for virgin brides, St. Paul’s advice would be nonsensical.

 

[Norseman82]

Just as I suspected…

 

[alice24]

?..and this is…?

 

[Norseman82]

If you’re already ruined and it’s not going to be possible to ever have a healthy marriage anyway, why not keep having sex?

it offers no hope or motivation to people with a “past.”

OK, let’s apply this line of thinking to another situation regarding sexual morality. If a virgin has no hope/possibility of marrying a fellow virgin - in fact, if he/she is criticized and mocked for it - what is his/her motivation for staying a virgin until marriage?

 

[DarkLight]

Because sin still has consequences, even if they’re not permanent consequences. There’s something between “this is completely consequence-free” and “this has such horrible consequences that once it’s been committed there’s no hope ever.”

As a virgin, why would I want to marry a guy who saw my virginity as a prize for him, rather than something between me and God?

 

[Norseman82]

In fact, St. Paul was extraordinarily enthusiastic about the idea of young widows’ marrying. He said in 1 Timothy 5, “14 So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, rule their households, and give the enemy no occasion to revile us.” Presumably, that implies that Christian men were supposed to marry young widows, because if Christian men were all holding out for virgin brides, St. Paul’s advice would be nonsensical.

If you read the entire chapter, St. Paul’s concerns were twofold:

1. They should marry so that they are not a financial burden to the Church.
2. He was worried that they would turn into “ladies of leisure”.

because if Christian men were all holding out for virgin brides, St. Paul’s advice would be nonsensical.

If you are implying that there were no virgins available for marriage in St. Paul’s time, I would point to 1 Corinthians 7:36-38, where it states “the man who marries his virgin, acts fittingly”. That would be nonsensical if there were no virgins.

Additionally, if you read further on, in verse 40, he states that a widow would be happier if she stayed unmarried (I don’t know what changed his views between Corinthians and Timothy).

 

[DarkLight]

If you read the entire chapter, St. Paul’s concerns were twofold:

They should marry so that they are not a financial burden to the Church.
He was worried that they would turn into “ladies of leisure”.

The original point here is that you can’t say that sex with one man permanently damages her from a stable relationship with another man, and then freely permit the remarriage of widows. Not that there was anything wrong with marrying a virgin woman, but that there was also nothing wrong with marrying a widow.

 

[Norseman82]

As a virgin, why would I want to marry a guy who saw my virginity as a prize for him, rather than something between me and God?

But is it really only between you and God? Have you ever heard of the saying “when you sleep with someone, you sleep with everyone they’ve ever slept with” ? (And yes, a priest actually said that once). Isn’t that sick?

 

[DarkLight]

But is it really only between you and God? Have you ever heard of the saying “when you sleep with someone, you sleep with everyone they’ve ever slept with” ? (And yes, a priest actually said that once). Isn’t that sick?

Yes I have, and the people who are saying that are wrong.

 

[Xantippe]

OK, let’s apply this line of thinking to another situation regarding sexual morality. If a virgin has no hope/possibility of marrying a fellow virgin - in fact, if he/she is criticized and mocked for it - what is his/her motivation for staying a virgin until marriage?

Eh, these are pretty distinct cases.

1. The virgin in your second case is not “wrecked forever” by being a virgin.

and

1. The people saying the unhelpful things are different in each case. In the one case, it’s probably Christians saying that the non-virgin is wrecked forever, while in the second case, it’s probably non-Christians. Needless to say, it’s more crushing to be told that one is wrecked forever by one’s co-religionists. A Christian need not listen very much to non-Christians.