"But its just lunch?"

I would not advise lunch, or any other meal, with a married person. However, if my husband drove past one of my firends who was in need I would be furious, and I would not expect that friend to remain so after the fact.

 

My husband has been known to pick up little ladies in the mall parking lot and drive them around for 30 minutes to help them find where they parked their car. I would certainly expect him to stop and help a woman with car trouble, even if that meant them being in the car alone!


Diane

 

I had a blowout on the freeway a number of years ago and got safely to the side of the road. I had three children with me, all quite young, with one still 'riding the hip.' We stood outside that stranded car for over an hour and NNE stopped to help -- and there were plenty of cars with Christian decals that drove by. I was wondering just how dangerous a woman with three little kids looked!

I deeply appreciate the men who have helped me when I needed it. This includes plumbers, who actually come to the house while I am alone here (shock!), the window repairman, etc. etc.

If there is evil going on between any two people, they most probably will NOT be having lunch together in public! It's pretty obvious when you look at two people in public whether or not they are simply discussing whatever or if they are cozy.

If it is a purely social lunch, and both spouses know about it and it does not bother either of them, then what's to worry? If it is a business lunch, then what's to worry? If, however, it is not business and one or both of the other spouses is not aware of the lunch, then there is already trouble in River City! The lunch may only be a symptom!

Dinner is different. It is the end of the day when people start to relax. If you are married, do your relaxing at home -- your own home! Unless, of course, your spouse is with you.

And, of course, one lunch one time is a whole lot different than a regular series with a member of the opposite sex who is not your spouse...

 

Our Lord Jesus Christ was exposed to all the temptations that mankind faces and needed not fear Satan. We should strive to live as He did but there is an important difference that we all should know to be true. We do not, in and of ourselves, have the ability to resist temptation. Thus in this respect we can not be like our Lord and must, in our self, fear Satan's clever deceitful trickery. Only with the Lord need we not fear Satan as He gives the power over him.

All mankind has a tendency towards sinful behavior. All Christians need the constant presence of the Lord Jesus Christ to avoid that tendency. Regardless how strong we believe ourselves to be we must understand that without the Lord we are easy prey for Satan's many snares. Knowing and accepting this fact it is then very wise to avoid any and all situations where temptation may lurk.

Men and women are naturally attracted to one another by God's great design. Unfortunately, we have corrupted the application of that design with our own lustful thoughts and deeds entering into relationships outside marriage that were intended to be only within marriage. Married people have to work very hard to remain faithful to one another and can't do it without the Lord in the center of their marriage.

We are foolish to pretend that temptation does not lurk for us in the daily interactions of life. We play with Satan's fire - and will likely be burned by it - if we permit ourselves to be teased by it.

It is best to avoid all situations that could lead wandering eyes, heart, mind, or hands into a sinful relationship. This does not mean that every situation involving contact between men and women married to others is evil. We by necessity must often interact in these situations at work and other venue. It does mean that it's best to keep the stage of that interaction as free from temptation as possible so that there is no opportunity for evil to come of it. That means we should avoid the private lunches, extended personal discussions, "innocent" friendships, etc. if there's any way they could lead to more. We should keep the contact open and limit the interaction.

We should avoid these situations, not only because of our own conduct, but also for the risk of giving others an opportunity for gossip leading to damaged reputations thereby weakening the example we Christians should set in this world. We, as Christians, can not just think of ourselves. We must realize that others watch carefully what we do. We must realize that even if we are not tempted by a particular situation the other party may well be.

I know these things to be true not because I am better than any one else. I know them to be true because, as a natural man, I am as evil as the rest of us.

 

He did not go there with her, nor did she meet him there for a prearranged meeting. She walked up as He was there...

 

So even though the Lord Jesus already knew everything about this woman even though he had never met her before, we are supposed to understand John 4 as an unanticipated chance meeting?

Talk about special pleading!

 

A few further thoughts on this issue, which seems to be that a married man and a married woman (not married to one another) who meet together, may be observed and thought wrongly to be having an illicit relationship.

Some questions:
</font>

1. How come to date there has been zero comment on the busybodies who spread such gossip?</font>
2. Why restrict the issue to married people? Seems to me that the sewing circle who assumes two married people are sleeping together will probably think the worst of two single people in similar circumstances.</font>
3. Isn't this the same questionable "logic" that says you shouldn't go to movies, in case someone sees you and thinks you're there to see an R-rated movie instead of Finding Nemo? (By the same argument, doesn't this also mean a single man should never go to the drugstore, because someone might think he was buying condoms instead of aspirin?)</font>
4. Isn't Scripture silent on the morality of married persons having a lunch meeting - unlike gossip and bearing false witness?</font>

 

He is God, we are not. His knowledge of her came from divine omniscience, not because of a human assignation. It's the God-Man thing...

 

IMHO, an innocuous meeting between two people that are not married is not sin. I have had lunch with some of the ladies with whom I work, and it was purely platonic. We ate in the cafeteria in our office building, in full view of the public, and sat on opposite sides of the table.

I have seen some post that many adulterous relationships start with things like this. That, quite simply, is not true. Adulterous relationships begin much earlier than this, with desire.

 

1. Because that isn't the subject.

2. Depending on the circumstances, there are certainly places we ought not to go to. I err on the side of caution.

3. No, but he should not be buying condoms!

4. Again, this is about avoiding the appearance of evil and about being as much above reproach as possible.

You aren't going to hell because you live dangerously; you are just living dangerously. I've seen enough hurt to not want to live dangerously. But you also would not be on the staff of the church where I belong! Nor, would you be working for the board that controls the counseling ministry I work for.

 

Please explain this statement.

Oops, never mind: I did not notice the word "single" - still trying to wake up!!

 

I don't know how much time you've spent counseling couples in crisis, but my experience tells me that nearly all adulterous relationships among Christians begin innocently. Certainly, there are exceptions, but most of the ones we've dealt with started with friendships or acquaintances between people brought together by other circumstances (work, church, mutual friends, the spouses' best friend, etc. etc.).

 

Please explain this statement. </font>[/QUOTE]A single Christian man (the subject of this answer) has no reason to be buying condoms.

 

Please explain this statement. </font>[/QUOTE]A single Christian man (the subject of this answer) has no reason to be buying condoms. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes, I edited my post, and went to get coffee in an attempt to wake up!!!

 

Are you saying that a purely platonic meeting can lead to adultery? NO CHANCE. The adultery began in the mind of the person prior to the adultery actually taking place. If a chance meeting does lead to adultery:

1. The meeting was most likely more than platonic.
2. There are much bigger problems at home.
2. We are incapable of restraint.

That sounds a lot like the old "The Devil made me do it" excuse....

 

You need another cup of coffee, maybe two, and go back and read all the posts in this thread. I am not talking about one chance meeting leading to something. I am talking about two people of the opposite gender developing a friendship that is too close. Again, in over 20 years of formal and informal counseling, almost all of the adulterous relationships we've dealt with started out as innocent friendships or working relationships that got too close. Were there other factors?
Yes, but this one is nearly a universal factor.

We are also talking about appearances, as a kind of side-thread within this one.

 

I don't think that there is a pat answer that will cover every situation. There are other factors than being of the opposite sex.

For example, I took an old family friend, who was the opposite sex, across town alone in my car. No one who saw us together showed any suspicion. Of course, I was in my early 30's and she was in her late 70's.

I would not, however, feel comfortable having a late supper with a woman my own age. Even though having a sexual relationship would be out of the question, I would not put myself in that situation.

 

Major B said:

He is God, we are not.

Red herring. We were not talking about Jesus' nature, but his circumstances.

Meeting a woman and speaking with her at the town well is as analogous to a lunch meeting as we can get. (More so, in fact, since in Jesus' day, speaking to strange Samaritan women simply was not done.) Bottom line: If Jesus could do it and not sin, two Christians can commit the lesser evil of eating lunch together without sinning.

 

Undoubtedly, that comment was for my edification, so thank you very much.

What is the proverbial yardstick to gauge "too close?" Is it "one chance meeting?"

We are all well aware of your work in counseling, as you have stated this with repetition.

This statement contradicts your sentence above. First you say that you are not talking about a "chance meeting." Now you state that "all of the adulterous relationships" started out as innocent friendships. I do not believe that adultery is borne out of "innocent relationships." I would venture to guess that there were ulterior motives even before the initial "innocent friendships."

Are you equating "appearances" with "occurrences?"