1PeaceMaker
New member
No, it only takes one to divorce. One person can drive their spouse away and that spouse is free when that happens. 1Cor 7:15
Why men won't marry you
- Thread starter serpentdove
- Start date
No, it only takes one to divorce. One person can drive their spouse away and that spouse is free when that happens. 1Cor 7:15
The one leaving isnt the free one there. That says when a non believer leaves, the other is free. Seems you misunderstand what you read.
A believer shouldn't be driving their spouse away and a believer shouldn't be the one leaving.
See full context:
12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her.
13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.
15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. 16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?
1PeaceMaker
New member
In the context of my point about divorce, it only takes the one hard heart to drive another away/divorce.
Your point about the prohibition on believers seeking divorce comes in superfluous to those understanding that a tender hearted person does not divorce without getting cornered into it.
Do you, A4T, believe that Paul was telling women to stay in abusive marriages?
1PeaceMaker
New member
I believe he's talking about your claim that my husband was trashing me in that post you quoted. Is that the sort of thing a person does when they want to sow discord between a man and wife?
You did not claim what was said. You claimed something much more advanced than me suggesting polygamy during a relaxed theological discussion between man and wife. You claimed I tried to get him to try polygamy, which would be more like me bringing women over for him to meet or starting polygamous dating profiles to get him into it.
If I was trying to get him into it I'd do a lot more than make a casual suggestion and explore the idea.
So you have no responsibility for starting trouble with spouses by intentionally framing posts nearly a decade old in an ugly light to their SO?
(Highlight added)
That last part is a fabrication and you need to consider why you added it. Divorce was given because of hard hearts, according to God. If it's used for any other reason it would be a perversion of what God intended it should address.
So you take no responsibility for stirring up trouble if you do? Would it make TOL look good if you were running around starting fights between member-couples based on posts over 9 years old?
1PeaceMaker
New member
No, at most it implies that something is different about the old maids/very old maids who are disgruntled they haven't been chosen yet.
The article implies a lot of things, actually. More than just about women, but about men, too.
There are a vast number of reasons people get a divorce - not every marriage that ends in divorce is someone driving someone away.
Every situation isnt so cut and dried that you can stamp a one size fits all on it.
I stated what the scriptures say, if you don't like that talk to God.
Read it again, i gave no interpretation other than what the scriptures plainly state:
Different people define "abuse" differently, some guy not liking that his wife isnt his beck and call girl or who wont roll over every command for sex, isnt abuse (for example).
I would need to know the particulars of a situation from both sides to determine actual abuse that would rise to the level of being against God and the marriage.
We live in an easily offended culture, so abuse is a wide wide term, and not all of them would rise to the level of being against God.
Unlike you, unless i know the particulars, no way to answer that.
Once again, the reply I would expect from a fourteen year old child due to lack of maturity. It's too bad you are incapable of participating in adult discussions.
Since it doesn't go into the context of "treat others as you demand to be treated", it's meaningless.
1PeaceMaker
New member
That place of quiet can be reached by young people, correct? When we learn to pray daily and all day long, isn't it to maintain a listening attitude? Eventually I began to see my life as an unbroken prayer where I don't really ever hang up the phone.
So what makes this something other than a parlor trick? You know I didn't pray for the gift of understanding all things. I prayed for the knowledge I needed to marry well.
I do not need complex prefrontal processes to make the choices I need to marry. Theory of mind is not needed to assess Biblical qualifications for marriage and read the signs God puts out for His children to follow. It's not even needed for a lasting, happy marriage.
But it was my faith that enabled me to use reason and counsel to arrive at a successful relationship. God has hidden the recipe for marital bliss in the Bible, not the prefrontal cortex.
See, it said ALL your needs. I needed a companion. I have a Biblical justification for that need, too. So since it was a valid request my faith bore fruit in results - a happy marriage.
But statistics are mean. They paint the poor as less marriageable, the autistic as nearly untouchable, etc. So I really think me saying that there's a strong trend of immature daters in the failed marriage pool is really a soft punt. I really think marriage is mostly engaged in without much reverence for the choice and more infatuation than listening.
Do you think teen marriages turn good men and women bad? I mean, I don't think marriage corrupts anybody. But if you were going to look at those teen marriages again, would you say it was poor character at the start of the marriage or did the marriage corrupt somebody?
Do most teens date? Look at the statistics. It used to be about 85% now it's more like 2/3. So take into consideration that 2/3 number is awfully similar to the 2/3 failed marriage rate. Correlation with a possibility of some causation being spotted?
Ah, I don't believe that a godly woman would be hoodwinked under those circumstances unless God wanted her to be another Hosea. Even then, God warned Hosea what it would be like, like God warned Paul he would meet his death if he went to Jerusalem. God's neat like that. He warns us about the consequences of our choices. It's not about sin, blame or shame, it's about sowing and reaping, as well as about the glory of God.
I believe that we are really suited in every way, like two puzzle pieces that were once scattered around on opposite ends of a table find that they were made to fit.
I can't think of a defective thing about him. Even his health problems have been for the glory of God.
There is only one way he could fail me theoretically, and that would be to live contrary to Matt 7:12. But that's impossible because his heart has been made soft and fleshy with God's love imprinted in it.
He wouldn't be perfect if he wasn't a real man.
And he can err, as can I. He doesn't err where it counts, though, which would be in matters of the heart. He's tenderhearted and always will be. I don't think our marriage would work if he wasn't a man of high character. Not just anybody can do it.
It takes a hard heart to cheat or be willfully disobedient. We have theological ground to cover that would fit another thread there, I think.
That correction goes to the erring-tenderhearted, I believe.
But whether she's 12 or 30 she may not be ready if she did not put away childish things yet. Show me a 12 year old sexually mature who has completely set aside her childhood and I'll show you a 12 year old adult.
It's wisest to wait until you're mid twenties if you want the brain that will control your tongue and considerations to be in the shape God designed it to be in order for you to make mature judgments.
I think it's not fair to say that mature judgments only come to the over 25 group. God would have set a limit of 25 on marriage if it was as good of an idea as starting the priesthood at 25.
A couple that only knew me as a younger teen came to my husband weeks after we tied the knot and told him to annul on account of the fact I was pretentious; not really as mature as I was deceiving him that I was. They also said I was manipulative. I was not using my abnormal kind of intelligence to fool anybody. The days of childish things really were behind me.
Also you are implying that I still wouldn't be accountable or competent because my prefrontal cortex is inferior to yours? Why should I be in a different caste than the young people you see as non-adult thinkers on account of the one brain function difference?
Yet you would let her date someone she could fall deeply in love with. That would be cute in most people's minds. Isn't letting her have a reserved, serious, get-to-know-you/see-if-we-really-click courtship with supervision and counseling better? We are talking about the start of a meticulously careful process, not the conclusion of it.
I disagree with your image of her as a child. I know too many people who married that young and didn't strike their parents or friends that way. Their behavior during marriage as young parents who raised healthy respectable kids reinforces the idea that they really were adults.
God wants us to reproduce early. That's why God made us biologically able. That's why it's the healthiest, and to exclude the under 25 group you'd have to exclude intelligent adults who have the same limitations in theory of mind as over 25s with autism.
We are not in a better state in terms of reproductive success. Just look at our replacement rates.
1PeaceMaker
New member
Somebody is serving divorce to the other. Not the tenderhearted one, right?
God said divorce was for the hardness of hearts. True or false?
You did. Your only problem was in reading what I wrote and assuming I was contradicting that directive in any way.
Let's assume the particulars involve real abuse that rises to the level of being against God.
So now relate that back to my question and see how you'd answer.
Because of course a woman with a tenderheart toward God and her children, couldnt possibly be serving a wife beater with papers to protect her kids, nah, it has to be the way your immaturity defines it...
I hope no one takes you seriously.
In one place, yes, and something else in another. A woman for example whose husband commits sexual immorality is free to bring a divorce, doesnt mean her heart is hard.
That hard heart thing was for a man to put his wife away for any cause - seems you dont understand that.
Wrong - you challenged what i wrote as superfluative, when i gave no personal interpretation. See:
One more time, youll need to define exactly what you mean by "real abuse" See my earlier response:
You do not need a fully developed brain to choose to marry but that also means that you may not make the best choice. When we are young, it's fun to be rash and impulsive. But as you age, your brain will finish developing as will your spouses. Likely at different rates. Many young couples find that as they mature the person they married is no longer that person. They have changed in wYs such that they are no longer compatible roughly 70% of the time. That us why it is better to wait until you are fully, or nearly so, mature.
This is an unsupportable assertion on your part. Being physically capable of having a baby and being ready to have a baby are two very different things. While some health risks do increase with age, the increase is small well into a woman's 30's. Refer to the Susan G. Koman link. Certainly there is little to no difference between late teens and early 20's. If you really card about kids then waiting a few years to marry and start a family so that the kids have a better than three in ten chance of being raised in a two parent family us certainly the wiser and in my mind, the more Godly choice. Good habits, healthy eating and excercise typically more than offset the health risks if waiting for a few more years before becoming a parent.
And you think that is because people are marrying later? Do you think that there may be other factors such as economic stability that might actually play a greater roll in people's decisions to have fewer children later in life?
This goes back to my comment about "men first mentality". Phrases such as "real abuse" is the mentality that gives us cases such as OJ Simpson and Chris Benoit.
Exactly! I would rather be defined as hard hearted by childish women than dead though, wouldn't you?
A good bit of this we've covered, so I'll pare down to a couple of points.
Good on you. My wife likes most of what I do and mostly more of it, so she's exposed me to all sorts of writing and music that I likely wouldn't have looked into...she's lost her taste for the NBA though, so she clearly isn't perfect.
But we just can't. Too many people on their own and in the economy with full voting rights.
To me you're making the mistake of thinking the presence of feet indicates a runner, when you need the rest of the body's maturation and coordination for that to happen. Same here.
If it isn't completed you run a substantial risk of making a wrong choice, statistically speaking, overwhelmingly so.
They certainly can feel that way to the young.
I think that's probably true for the younger, cognitively challenged set, almost understandably so. Doesn't seem to be nearly the problem around the mid twenties.
I'd say David's wife had every reason to believe he was beloved by and a man of God. And then look what happened...
I bet that's what David's wife would have thought before his failure.
Good on you. My wife likes most of what I do and mostly more of it, so she's exposed me to all sorts of writing and music that I likely wouldn't have looked into...she's lost her taste for the NBA though, so she clearly isn't perfect. I'm happy it's worked out for you two that way, but, well, supra.
David had a hard heart? When did that evidence itself before his failing?
As you might say to me, it doesn't say that. I suspect it's aimed at people who fail and that's about the size of it.
And I'm saying your mind is still that of a child in the most fundamental way through all of your teens and a bit thereafter. It's why we withhold allowing contracts without adult supervision, including marriage up to a varying point. If it was practical, given what we have statistically and what we understand biologically, I'd bet we'd raise consent laws considerably.
But we just can't. Too many people on their own and in the economy with full voting rights.
I'd say it's fair to note I didn't say you can't get a thing right below that age, only that it's far more likely that you won't and won't consistently. Because you're process is routing primarily through the part of your brain that feels its way along.
I think I answered this earlier, but in case I didn't, do you think God warned people off shellfish because there was something fundamentally evil in them? Or was it because they didn't have refrigeration? Similarly, you can't very well forbid a thing necessary to the survival of the people you mean to see thrive. All you can do is place enough constraints and parental control into it to minimize the danger. That's not being done these days.
But you still had that bad calculator and we're all the heroes of our narratives until something forces us not to consider it that way.
I can't speak to the degree of impairment with you, though I have noted you sound young and maybe that's part of it. Depends on the degree of impairment, but mostly it's a matter of poorer, not insufficient judgment that will tend to lead to poorer choices and worse outcomes, depending.
Because I don't know how yours compares by degree.
At seventeen? I don't know... I'd let a boy come and be a part of family interaction under my supervision. But a year later, if not earlier, and she'd in college making most of her own decisions. Hopefully keeping us in mind and asking for opinions. I intend to share as much of my own experience in life with Jack, give him a serious consideration and work it out for him so that amazing brain of his can hopefully use it as a compass to guide him against inclination and impulse. That and the faith I'm instructing him in.
I think marriage requires a thing that mostly isn't present in people under 25, which is a measure of maturity their biology denies them.
To me you're making the mistake of thinking the presence of feet indicates a runner, when you need the rest of the body's maturation and coordination for that to happen. Same here.
Just look at the failure rate of young people who marry and the children left to grow in broken homes...not to be desired.
My quarrel with her is that she plays with words. She wants me to accept her meanings and then she changes the nuances of her meaning so that I'm not sure I'm following.
Sometimes she makes sensible statements but mostly I simply cannot follow the frayed threads of thoughts with which she toys.
This constant desire to debate rather than come to any sort of conclusions bespeaks someone loving the attention being garnered rather than a true desire to learn.
1PeaceMaker
New member
....When coupled with spiritual follies.
They certainly can feel that way to the young.
And the autistic.
Stats get better after hard lessons. Not all learn that way.
Was Samuel deceived? That would be a better question. BUT on topic, does young marriage corrupt?
David's wives still had a trophy of a husband. Especially after God created in him a clean heart.
Cute.
Outta time for now.
1PeaceMaker
New member
How does that relate to the verse you quoted to me about believers not leaving/being allowed to divorce their unbelieving spouse?
God gave her divorce for the hardness of his heart, no?
God gave divorce because of hard hearted people. Not so men could dump their wives. That just revealed why God wanted them to have the power to do that. Because they didn't deserve what they abused like that, and wives don't need to be murdered for a hard-heart to get out of commitment to a woman loathed.
Name the terms, yours are exactly fine, I bet.
1PeaceMaker
New member
Aren't you addressing A4T's reservation on the terms of "real abuse?"
She's the one who brought that up. I was forced to contemplate that because she said it would have to be "actual abuse."