If the Serial Fornicator is More Forgiven and Accepted than the Divorced Person, Why Bother Risking Marriage?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,695
5,605
113
They're just transidentity. Are you a transidentityphobe? So much hate.
Dag nab it, Bees - you just exposed me.

Nobody is going to vote for a transidentityphobe in the next election.

There goes MY bid for president in 2020. :(

NOW what am I going to do with all my time... Write threads on CC??? o_O
 

17Bees

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2016
1,380
813
113
Dag nab it, Bees - you just exposed me.

Nobody is going to vote for a transidentityphobe in the next election.

There goes MY bid for president in 2020. :(

NOW what am I going to do with all my time... Write threads on CC??? o_O
Hmmmm.....I'm thinking....... nah - go ahead and run for President. ;)
 

ChandlerFan

Senior Member
Jan 8, 2013
1,148
102
63
So, does this apply to you as well?
Haha, yes, yes it does. I have had my share of moments of being an idiot on the internet.

I had two thoughts when I read this:

1. Thank goodness I only take into account anything I say on the internet about 10% of the time. :cool:

2. Where would catfish fall under this, since they are pretending to be 100% someone else, 100% of the time? :unsure:
Lol I love that people latched on to that particular statement. My belief in it has caused me to want to speak less online in general. And I guess you could lump catfish into the 90% about 100% of the time :D
 

Princesse

Active member
Feb 16, 2020
259
123
43
The vow is the tipping point. The marriage failed and no one is privy to the reasons. Few can scrutinize both parties and hear their story. In most instances, you’re hearing from one person. Humans are apt to clean things up a bit.

No one is eagerly lining up to marry womanizers or someone with children. I’ve advised single fathers in the past with similar frustrations. People are unwilling to take on problems not of their making. Whether its debt, health issues, familial responsibilities or something else.

Baggage is frowned upon in our culture. Divorce isn’t the lone issue people avert. Ask singles dealing with mental illness or social anxiety how they fare. Or those with fewer resources than others. More weight than the rest. Less attractiveness and so on.

We value the exception not the norm.
 
M

MegMarch

Guest
The vow is the tipping point. The marriage failed and no one is privy to the reasons. Few can scrutinize both parties and hear their story. In most instances, you’re hearing from one person. Humans are apt to clean things up a bit.

No one is eagerly lining up to marry womanizers or someone with children. I’ve advised single fathers in the past with similar frustrations. People are unwilling to take on problems not of their making. Whether its debt, health issues, familial responsibilities or something else.

Baggage is frowned upon in our culture. Divorce isn’t the lone issue people avert. Ask singles dealing with mental illness or social anxiety how they fare. Or those with fewer resources than others. More weight than the rest. Less attractiveness and so on.

We value the exception not the norm.
Tangent from the thread topic to some degree:

I have not found having a child to be a deterrent to the men I have dated. I have actually found it to be the opposite. I have disqualified men, who wanted to continue to pursue me, because they didn't meet my standards when it came to influencing my son.
 

Princesse

Active member
Feb 16, 2020
259
123
43
Tangent from the thread topic to some degree:

I have not found having a child to be a deterrent to the men I have dated. I have actually found it to be the opposite. I have disqualified men, who wanted to continue to pursue me, because they didn't meet my standards when it came to influencing my son.
Did you ever inquire why that’s the case?

Some men are willing to accept a child if she possesses qualities he desires in the measure he wants. If she enters with others beyond that her value is raised. In spite of the impediments some would cite.

Attractiveness, wealth, poise, social standing, and disposition can offset much. :)
 
Jul 20, 2019
1,228
882
113
From my understanding and study of this, God is a very understanding God, if your in a bad relationship and find the one, I doubt very much he would condemn you for trying again with the right person. Jesus died on the cross for our sins, past, present and future. My rule is to always follow the heart, you just know by instinct that your dating /marrying the right person. And prayer of course.
 

Princesse

Active member
Feb 16, 2020
259
123
43
Following the heart has landed people in compromising situations. Including divorce. We can’t base our decisions wholly on our feelings. We’ve been given wisdom, understanding and discernment for a reason.
 

cinder

Senior Member
Mar 26, 2014
4,436
2,423
113
From my understanding and study of this, God is a very understanding God, if your in a bad relationship and find the one, I doubt very much he would condemn you for trying again with the right person. Jesus died on the cross for our sins, past, present and future. My rule is to always follow the heart, you just know by instinct that your dating /marrying the right person. And prayer of course.
Ummm.... if you know by instinct who the right one is, how is it possible that so many people marry and then later divorce someone they thought was right but decided later on was wrong? Either instinct is unreliable, we don't follow it well, or the "right one" is more the right now one than the right forever one.

And don't get me started on wiggle words like God is an understanding God. Yes I believe God understands our motivations and struggles and failures even better than we do, no I don't think any of that understanding on God's part is going to cause him to spare us the consequences of disobedience (though a lot of people try to make it that an understanding God is a God who excuses anything in the right circumstances).
 
Jul 20, 2019
1,228
882
113
Ummm.... if you know by instinct who the right one is, how is it possible that so many people marry and then later divorce someone they thought was right but decided later on was wrong? Either instinct is unreliable, we don't follow it well, or the "right one" is more the right now one than the right forever one.

And don't get me started on wiggle words like God is an understanding God. Yes I believe God understands our motivations and struggles and failures even better than we do, no I don't think any of that understanding on God's part is going to cause him to spare us the consequences of disobedience (though a lot of people try to make it that an understanding God is a God who excuses anything in the right circumstances).
Dont get me wrong here, some marriages are failing merely because the two aren't taking responsibility for the marriage, IE they aren't even trying to make it work. When one is cheating, or treating the wife/husband as an ATM or slave and wont repent, its time to move on. It serves no one any good by staying in a toxic relationship, particularly if there are children involved and there is no spiritual growth happening. If someone else appears, well...
 

Princesse

Active member
Feb 16, 2020
259
123
43
No one appears. They see a vulnerable person in a bad situation and present themselves as the difference. You don’t happen upon a married person and become a hero.

You’re interested and acting on it.
 
M

MegMarch

Guest
Did you ever inquire why that’s the case?

Some men are willing to accept a child if she possesses qualities he desires in the measure he wants. If she enters with others beyond that her value is raised. In spite of the impediments some would cite.

Attractiveness, wealth, poise, social standing, and disposition can offset much. :)
If by inquiring you mean asking them why they would want to be with me when I have a child, then no. I knew why they wanted to be with me, but I also needed to know if they would value my son as much as they valued me.

That being said, I understand and agree with your overall point in your post. :)
 

Princesse

Active member
Feb 16, 2020
259
123
43
If by inquiring you mean asking them why they would want to be with me when I have a child, then no. I knew why they wanted to be with me, but I also needed to know if they would value my son as much as they valued me.

That being said, I understand and agree with your overall point in your post. :)
That’s what I was getting at. I’m glad you understood. :)
 

BrotherMike

Be Still and Know
Jan 8, 2018
1,617
1,671
113
I have had quite a few Christian males tell me that as a divorced woman, I have no business posting in the Singles Forum, and would cause any man who might be interested in talking to me to commit adultery.

May God have mercy on us all.
first verse comes to mind...

Matthew 7:3-5 New International Version (NIV)
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

I just don’t get why people condemn like this. As long as you are single, you are allowed to post and if you disclose you are married and not deceit people, you still can post in the singles forum! We all are sinners fallen short of the Glory of God.

The only advice I can give is Jesus doesn’t live in sin. Keep on praying without ceasing and fill His spirit in you as much as you can. God will judge the heart not man. We are commanded to love one another. Yes, I know we should go to our brothers and sisters to help guide them in the straight and narrow, but do this out of love and approach>content. Humility is the wisdom of God.

Yes, we need Gods grace EVERY DAY. ❤️
 
Jan 9, 2020
182
27
18
So is divorce the unforgivable sin? haha

Regarding some of the comments on baggage, majority of people are highly selfish christians included, so of course they aren't going to accept someones baggage unless they packed it together.

For the rare ones that are highly unselfish they might have much more room to help someone carry that load, but even they probably have in the past been burned way to many times, where they just dismiss people with certain baggage.

I know personally from a decade+ long relationship with someone with mental health issues, I would 99% never be in a relationship with someone who suffers from them, well let me preface mental issues that effect the significant other, not if it only effects that person and it doesn't flow to the other.

Same with children, I grew up with just my mom, and I saw how I was the priority in her life where it might of even been unfair to the guys she was dating. Majority of women are like this of course they are going to choose their own child over a strange man. Most man know this and they just don't want to bother with it. Nobody likes feeling left out / neglected, the first slight will cause her to get defensive and whole arguments can start around the child, coupled with not even my own blood = recipe for disaster.

Women also want men that can provide for them and yada yada. Moral of the story with imperfect beings + baggage you didn't help pack = a lot of single people haha.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
um.

This sounds rather complicated but...you gotta empty that baggage seoulsister.

Perhaps you might be holding on to a wedding gown that you just might wear again some day...I dont know. But really...I dont think you need to hold on to it. Dont be like Estella (Great Expectations) who just walked round in her faded wedding gown gathering cobwebs.

Its not becoming. You deserve better. You are free to ditch the baggage and find a NEW wardrobe.
 
Aug 26, 2024
1
0
1
I've heard that argument before but it can't be true because JEsus told the woman at the well that she had no husband even though she had been married 5 times. I'm sure she must have had 5 wedding nights as well. :sneaky:
Actually, what you're using as an argument here as a reason that "it can't be true" isn't relevant to that at all. And therefore cannot be used as an argument to prove true or false the claim that "if you have sex with someone you are marrying them according to scripture".

John 4:17 Jesus is saying essentially, because you're not with your original husband, the one you're currently with is not your husband. Therefore she speaks true to say "I have no husband". It DOESN'T mean that sex didn't consummate her original, legal marriage. Or that sex couldn't be the act to make marriage official. Just to note I'm not speculating on that as being true or false, I haven't considered the topic enough to draw a conclusion.

Are two wed if they do not consummate? So one can argue here that consummation is only legitimate in a couples first marriage, and other legal marriages. Like in the case she was widowed and re-married. Otherwise if a woman was divorced, she was to remain single, or reconcile to her original husband. One could also speculate with potential accuracy to say it's possible the 5 husbands that are referred to here are all illegitimate, and there's a sixth unmentioned husband which was her legitimate husband. Why? Because Jesus does recognize '5 husbands' in a social/worldy sense, but also saying she's not currently wed/with a husband, and surely that's the latest one of the five.

Commentary from biblehub below confirms my understanding here. You can read the full commentary from the site, the complete of both were a little too much I felt to paste here.

https://biblehub.com/john/4-17.htm

Pulpit Commentary
Verses 17, 18. - The woman answered, and said to him, I have no husband. Jesus saith unto her, Thou said correctly, Husband have I none: for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband. This true thing hast thou spoken. The woman resists the description which Jesus assumes that she bears to the man with whom she stands in illegal relations. Convinced, brought to bay, she cannot lie to Jesus. She says, in penitence and shame, "I have no husband." There is no concealment of the fact; she must need the cleansing of the life-giving stream. Jesus, not without a tone of solemn remonstrance, accuses her of a life of loose morals. It is implied that the first five husbands were conventionally allowable; but the suggestion is that, either by divorce or wanton rushing to further nuptials if the former had been ruptured by death, her character had been ever deteriorating until, under present circumstances, she was committing an overt act of illegality and impurity.
 

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
Aug 13, 2014
27,713
9,645
113
Actually, what you're using as an argument here as a reason that "it can't be true" isn't relevant to that at all. And therefore cannot be used as an argument to prove true or false the claim that "if you have sex with someone you are marrying them according to scripture".

John 4:17 Jesus is saying essentially, because you're not with your original husband, the one you're currently with is not your husband. Therefore she speaks true to say "I have no husband". It DOESN'T mean that sex didn't consummate her original, legal marriage. Or that sex couldn't be the act to make marriage official. Just to note I'm not speculating on that as being true or false, I haven't considered the topic enough to draw a conclusion.

Are two wed if they do not consummate? So one can argue here that consummation is only legitimate in a couples first marriage, and other legal marriages. Like in the case she was widowed and re-married. Otherwise if a woman was divorced, she was to remain single, or reconcile to her original husband. One could also speculate with potential accuracy to say it's possible the 5 husbands that are referred to here are all illegitimate, and there's a sixth unmentioned husband which was her legitimate husband. Why? Because Jesus does recognize '5 husbands' in a social/worldy sense, but also saying she's not currently wed/with a husband, and surely that's the latest one of the five.

Commentary from biblehub below confirms my understanding here. You can read the full commentary from the site, the complete of both were a little too much I felt to paste here.

https://biblehub.com/john/4-17.htm

Pulpit Commentary
Verses 17, 18. - The woman answered, and said to him, I have no husband. Jesus saith unto her, Thou said correctly, Husband have I none: for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband. This true thing hast thou spoken. The woman resists the description which Jesus assumes that she bears to the man with whom she stands in illegal relations. Convinced, brought to bay, she cannot lie to Jesus. She says, in penitence and shame, "I have no husband." There is no concealment of the fact; she must need the cleansing of the life-giving stream. Jesus, not without a tone of solemn remonstrance, accuses her of a life of loose morals. It is implied that the first five husbands were conventionally allowable; but the suggestion is that, either by divorce or wanton rushing to further nuptials if the former had been ruptured by death, her character had been ever deteriorating until, under present circumstances, she was committing an overt act of illegality and impurity.
First: Howdy and welcome to the forum.

Second: Did you really just dig up a four year old thread for the sole purpose of arguing semantics? o_O