Living together before marriage - thoughts?

ZeldaGirl · #61

Even if I had the necessary relationship strength right now, for example, I don't have the necessary economic footing. (Considering that I know what your current job is, Zig, I get the feeling this might've been one of your reasons. ;) )

I meant to address this. Well, I recently got a promotion, so it's less the economic part (it would help us both out, but we both don't want to be beholden to the other at this point...plus, we both are really independent and enjoy the challenge of being financially capable on our own).

Actually, at this point, as I'm starting grad school next year, he wanted to give me more space to build new friendships without necessarily feeling like he's always butting in (which would happen, naturally, if he were always around). Plus, he's starting a new job, so we both want to be adjusted to those new phases and the stress that will come with that before trying to juggle a new phase of the relationship as well. We both think we are strong enough to handle it (we already know we're gonna get married), but we aren't in any rush. :)

heheh, I just realized why people got so fired up about this. We're not arguing over an issue, we're arguing over ideals. That's far more personal.

Aptly put, Crav.

Fairlight Excalibur · #62

I am curious ZG, what were the reasons you came up with, and did any them resemble the ones I presented?

Also ML, just to clarify, my post was not meant to be an argument against you, as I have a feeling that we agree on most of this issue. It was instead intended for everyone else's consideration, as I personally feel that your articulation of our somewhat similar beliefs was not incredibly clear, and, in some cases, slightly inaccurate.

Deepfake · #63

ML, while I love you, and I trust your judgement for your personal situations 90% of the time, I'm pretty damn well certain that attending an all-boys boarding school is more likely to grant you homosexual experiences.

Get out while you still can. The calls are coming from inside the house.

Marilink · #64

Trav: Oh, no, I pretty much totally agreed with you. I was just adding on to my earlier post and clarifying some things.

Crav: I understand what you're saying. In most cases I'd agree to it, in fact. I hate to sound like a broken record, but if I'm talking to a fellow Christian about this or a congregation member or whatever, that's what I would say to them. You don't want to tempt yourself and you don't want to cause others to stumble (a.k.a. offense). Would I even talk to a non-Christian--Even more, someone outside of my own congregation or personal ring of friends--about cohabitation? Probably not, because I know I'd have no basis for an argument. First I'd have to get them to agree that premarital sex is wrong, then I'd have to get them to agree that another Christian's loving concern for you is something that's important. When I'm talking about this on the internet with a big group of people that strongly don't believe either of those points, I sound like an inconsiderate ****ing retard.

I brought that upon myself, I know.

AI: It's not all-boys. Good try though.

Everyone: I never meant to offend anyone here. I'm really sorry I chose words so poorly and I just want to let you all know that I still respect and love all you guys.

Cravdraa · #65

You're still not getting that religion isn't an excuse for doing something like that, ML.

Advising another human being, on the verge of a life altering choice, to set aside their wishes because it might offend somebody or even if it will offend somebody, is a really terrible thing to do.

The people responding to you aren't doing so because you fumbled your words and miss spoke. In a bizarre role reversal, we're doing it because that sort of argument and reasoning is actually offensive and causing us concern for you, because it's logic is so twisted and dogmatic that you can't even see how wrong it is.

Basicly, you said in most cases you said you'd completely agree with me.
I ask you this, then: Why is this situation different?

Why, in this profound and potentially life altering choice, should a person set aside what they personally think is best for them, because of the gossip, rumors, judgement, and even legitimate concern when they've done nothing wrong?

Everyone here can agree that it's not nice to make people worry about them needlessly, but such a situation isn't needless. It's potentially one of the most personal and important choices that they'll make in their entire life.

If the only answer you can come up with is "because the Bible says so." Then I would urge you to ask yourself why the Bible says that.

I'll remind you again, it's not the issue of cohabitating that I find so disturbing. It's your reasoning for the answer you gave.

If you so desire, I'll leave it at that.

Deku Tree · #66

I think, at best, one could make the argument that a Christian might want to be careful that, as representatives of Jesus, they don't come off as hypocrites and turn people off of Christianity. Still seems kinda weak, though. And I'm not even sure how Calvanists think about that sort of thing, with people being predestined and all.

Marilink · #67

I just don't understand why what I said is such a colossal problem.

I'm just gonna stop talking. Unfortunately I should've done that 4 pages ago.

#68

That's easily the worst part, ML. You don't understand. You aren't reading our words clearly, you're on the wrong track. Then you disrespect our opinion by refusing to talk it through and try to see where our concern comes from. You're stuck in your reasoning, and you think it's what you've SAID that's the problem, when it's the action behind it that worries us.

You would change someone's life just because it might start a rumour.

That is messed up from where we are standing. You would never do that in any other situation. You would be upset to see someone doing that in another situation. But because this is pre-marital cohabitation, you have a loophole. Why does this loophole make it okay for you to dictate someone's important life-actions?

Marilink · #69

Apparently we can't agree to disagree on this one because I'm so wrong. Fine.

You would change someone's life just because it might start a rumour.

No. That is not what I'm trying to say.

First off, let's just say for argument's sake that premarital sex is wrong. When you live together with your boyfriend or girlfriend, you're placing that temptation in front of you all the time. As a Christian, you want to avoid tempting situations such as this so you don't succumb.

Among Christians, to cause offense to another Christian would mean to cause them to doubt what's right--literally, to cause them to stumble or place a stumbling block in front of them. That's what the problem is. Not a rumor or people looking down on others, but Christians being concerned that their fellow Christian is doing something wrong. Why is it wrong? Because it's placing the huge, giant temptation of premarital sex in front of both members of the couple every single night they live together. As a Christian, you just don't want to put yourself in that tempting situation, and you don't want a fellow Christian to put themselves in that tempting situation, either.

Okay. Now tell me what the problem is with that. I promise I'll read carefully.

Deepfake · #70

Dowdy Kitchen Man wrote:AI: It's not all-boys. Good try though.

Twice the temptation! You'll pull through yet, chum! You can do it!

#71

Sure, for argument's sake, pre-marital sex is wrong.

First step you're taking is assumption about temptation.

If someone strongly believes that pre-marital sex is wrong, adding temptation will not change that belief. If they truly believe that it's wrong, they will simply avoid having pre-marital sex. You don't want to have temptation because you are afraid that you will give in to it. I find that insulting to all people. Just because you LIKE cake, and you WANT cake, doesn't mean you're going to EAT cake, even if it's sitting in your fridge. Just because you love someone, and you are in the same house as them every night, does not mean you WILL have sex before you are married.

I don't inherently doubt everyone's will-power. If they make the decision to live together, and they believe that pre-marital sex is wrong, I trust those people to stick to their beliefs even if they live in the same house. Living together won't even be the same level or kind of temptation to every couple as it is to you or the next guy.

This is pivotal to the next point. Carry this thought with you: living together DOES NOT mean you are having sex. Living together DOES NOT mean you are GOING TO have sex.

So the next issue, that to cause offense to a fellow Christian is to cause them doubt in their beliefs of right and wrong.

1. That is THEIR OWN failing of belief. You cannot change their faith, only they can do that.
2. If you are not having sex, you are not disobeying your faith. Living together DOES NOT mean you are having sex.
3. Temptation and will-power are not universal. What is difficult for one person will not automatically be difficult for all.

Again with the cake: you're on a diet. So is your fellow Christian. You are helping one another, being supportive, praying together every Sunday at Church. They feel like they have to avoid exposure to cake, because they don't believe they will refuse a slice if it was offered to them. You, on the other hand, are doing fine with your diet. Now your mother's birthday is coming up, and you are completely at ease buying, and keeping her birthday cake in your fridge. You friend finds out, and they are so worried! They are afraid that you might break your diet! How can you avoid all that temptation? Because, you tell them, you have faith in yourself and your diet, and you know that you will not eat the cake. To you, it is not a temptation so great that you will cave in, even though you would love to eat that cake.

YOUR PERSONAL FEELINGS in any given situation are NOT universal. If YOU would be so tempted to have pre-marital sex by living together that you would go against your faith, your religion, the things you believe are right and wrong, that's YOU. If any other couple WANTS to live together, and they believe they will not give into the temptation just because they share a house, that's THEIR choice.

You would advise against it because of YOUR fears.

You would not advise someone to make their OWN decision, even if they have every confidence that they will stay true to their beliefs.

You would advise someone, not because of what they ARE doing, but what they MIGHT MAYBE ALMOST do (IF they were to just give into temptation).

You aren't advising them against having pre-marital sex. You are advising them against sleeping under the same roof IN CASE they have pre-marital sex.

And also, you are advising them to avoid temptation because it will make other Christians worry about temptation, make other Christians worry that they will give in, make other Christians worry about the truth of right and wrong. Fears that other Christians hold, that you cannot control, because it is their fear in their heart.

Seeing my friend break into someone's car will NOT MAKE ME THINK IT'S OKAY.

Knowing a friend is having pre-marital sex will NOT make you think it's okay.

Bad Dragonite · #72

being supportive, praying together every Sunday at Church.

I just wanted to point out that that made me laugh because I'm p sure if a Christian only prayed onSunday they would probably have alot more trouble with temptation than if they prayed all the time. xD

Umm I essentially agree with everything Trav has said. ^-^

I think ML's argument has been a bit misundeerstood so I pray I pick the right words here. Haha...

Though living under the same roof may NOT necesarily make you have pre marital sex, there is no doubt a much bigger chance of it occurring when living together. Even though you and your partner may be able to help each other and even get through the time before marriage without sex, you would've needlessly been making it harder on yourselves andmore importantly I think, you would lead others to attempt to follow your example that won't have the same strong resolve that the other couple had. They wouldbve bveen led into more temptation than was needed and then quite possibly fall because of couple 1's example they set. Hope that helps/makes any sense. ^^'

Altogether, I think it's best not to live together before marriage for several reasons, one being my Christ-relationship(and whatever reasons have been stated for setting examples ), others having to do with statistics, and the much higher risk of it leading to pre marital sex which also has it's own statistics, but um yeah. ^^

Hope everything tturns out/ turned out for the best, ZG. ^_^

Marilink · #73

Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds wrote:First step you're taking is assumption about temptation.

Okay, right here is where we already disagree, then. If you don't accept that everyone is tempted to sin, then yeah, my argument sounds like garbage.

I did read your post, but all of your points stem from this fundamental part of it.

I say everyone is tempted. Maybe not in the same way or at the same magnitude, but everyone is tempted. It's not the fact that I would be tempted by living together, it's the fact that it's a tempting situation.

I can't debate anything else you said because we disagree at the very root of the issue. That's gonna make our opinions branch off crazy-far, and we wouldn't be getting anything done.

Deku Tree · #74

I dunno. I lived with my now wife for something like two years and it was just sort of a matter of fact thing that we wouldn't have sex. It certainly wasn't any more tempting than when we weren't, as it honestly didn't provide us any more opportunities than we had living 5 minutes away from one another.

Marilink · #75

That's great, Deku (honestly, it is). But wouldn't you agree that you're kind of more the exception than the rule in this case?

Deku Tree · #76

Possibly. My point is that if you really know yourself, there needn't be a hard and fast rule about it.

Bomby · #77

There's such thing as sex within marriage?

Marilink · #78

I could see that. Unfortunately, the problems caused by living together are more common than the benefits (referring to premarital sex, which is wrong for argument's sake right now), so it kind of necessitated the rule. The temptation aspect of it is still the biggest issue.

I'm glad you and your wife were chaste enough to not have sex while having lived together. I commend you for it, even, and I'm definitely not condemning you for it. But if a friend of mine told me he was thinking about moving in with his girlfriend, I'd tell him that I wouldn't risk him putting himself in a constantly tempting situation, no matter how virtuous I thought or knew him to be.

To me, that would be a caring, loving thing to do. I can already tell I'm gonna get lampooned for it though.

Bomby wrote:There's such thing as sex within marriage?

*rimshot*

Bad Dragonite · #79

I think another question that comes up is if there is a situation where there is literally nowhere else for the gf/bf to ;ive than with you.

I don't actually so much think that living together in and of itself is wrong, but the leading by example thing along with the possibility for most to be more tempted by the situation tends to make not living together to be the better choice as far as I see it.

^@Lampooning: Maybe but if it helps prevent some of the sting of it, I agree with you. ^-^

#80

Dowdy Kitchen Man wrote:Okay, right here is where we already disagree, then. If you don't accept that everyone is tempted to sin, then yeah, my argument sounds like garbage.

I did read your post, but all of your points stem from this fundamental part of it.

I say everyone is tempted. Maybe not in the same way or at the same magnitude, but everyone is tempted. It's not the fact that I would be tempted by living together, it's the fact that it's a tempting situation.

I can't debate anything else you said because we disagree at the very root of the issue. That's gonna make our opinions branch off crazy-far, and we wouldn't be getting anything done.

:facepalm:

I never said there wasn't temptation, I said you're making blanket assumptions about what temptation is for other people. Yes, temptation exists. Now go back and respond to me properly instead of dismissing me on the one misunderstanding you took from my post. Man, as much as I love and respect you, I'm having a really hard time believing you did read my post, if the first line you read made you blank-out on everything else that covered temptation existing.

Deku of proves my point perfectly, though.