guitarpreacher
New Member
Sularis said:
That's the best you've got???
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A young mans responsibility
- Thread starter trumpet01
- Start date
That's the best you've got???
ccrobinson
Active Member
No doubt, guitarpreacher. You break it, you bought it is the best advice? I'm truly stunned by that post, sularis.
I can't imagine what you're talking about here.
I'm shocked you would criticize Helen's post. Helen is one of the best posters on the BB and she didn't fail to deliver on this one too.
I can't imagine what you're talking about here.
I'm shocked you would criticize Helen's post. Helen is one of the best posters on the BB and she didn't fail to deliver on this one too.
Book? Chapter? Verse?Sularis said:
exscentric said:
Actually, this verse isn't about a holy and Godly marriage. Nor is it about two people in love who have pre-marital sex, get pregnant, and have a desire for each other and to marry each other. This is about the punishment that a man had to bear for raping a girl that was not married or engaged.
Please read verses 13-30 of Deuteronomy to see what the law was talking about.
Verses 13-19: This is about a man who marries a woman who doesn't gratify him sexually and he gets angry and calls her foul names to the general public and makes unfounded charges that she wasn't a virgin when she married him.
If he is lying, (her parents have to prove it by showing the elders of the town where she bled on her wedding garments), he has to pay his father-in-law 100 shekels of silver and the elders of the city are to forbid him from divorcing her.
Verses 20-21: If a man is not happy with his wife and he does want to make a stink about it and he knows that she was not a virgin when she married him, then if it can be proven, then she is to be stoned to death.
Verse 22: If a man commits adultery with a married woman, then they both are to be stoned.
Verses 23-24: If a man has forcible sex with an engaged woman in the city and she doesn't scream loud enough for help, then they are both to be stoned.
Verses 25-26: If a man has forcible sex with an engaged woman out in the country, then only he is to be stoned, because she couldn't scream for help anyway with no one around to hear her.
Verse 28: This is about a man who forces himself on a woman who is neither engaged nor married. If it is discovered that he raped her, he has to pay her father 50 shekels of silver in restitution and he has to marry her and can never divorce her. The money is to save her family's honor and the marriage is to make her respectable. This has nothing to do whatsoever with love, affection, tenderness, nor a holy union ordained by God.
I, for one, am awfully glad that christians are not bound by the civil code of the Law.
El_Guero said:
I'd like to understand what you are saying, El_Guero. Can you help me?
responsability
Thank you for all of your responses. It seems some think that I'm the father and am looking for an out. Please read my original post. My wife and I were married when she was 18 and I had just turned 20. She would get on the school bus and go to school and I would get in the car and go to work. This Nov. we will be celebrating our 25th. year of marriage. I know that everone has an opinion but we try to teach our youth about marriage, abortion,how to live etc. and we use the Bible to back up our teachings,SO, what do we teach,and where do we find the scriptures to back up what we tell them about what they should do when this happens. Yes they made a mistake and when you get the order of things that God has planned out of wack,marriage first then a baby,but where do we go in scripture to help them make a decision. They confess to be Christians and they both were in the same youth group at church. God Bless <><
Thank you for all of your responses. It seems some think that I'm the father and am looking for an out. Please read my original post. My wife and I were married when she was 18 and I had just turned 20. She would get on the school bus and go to school and I would get in the car and go to work. This Nov. we will be celebrating our 25th. year of marriage. I know that everone has an opinion but we try to teach our youth about marriage, abortion,how to live etc. and we use the Bible to back up our teachings,SO, what do we teach,and where do we find the scriptures to back up what we tell them about what they should do when this happens. Yes they made a mistake and when you get the order of things that God has planned out of wack,marriage first then a baby,but where do we go in scripture to help them make a decision. They confess to be Christians and they both were in the same youth group at church. God Bless <><
How about - The ten commandments were for theocratic Israel.
(BTW - I do not believe that )
I am shocked Helen! you usually make such decent posts.
Thank you, but unless you also believe that we should wash our houses out when they show mold, make the sacrifices, etc. etc., you will have to recognize a distinction between the Ten Commandments, which are universal and able to apply individually without societal sanction and the law which follows which was specifically for the Israelites at that time!
adoption is certainly a viable and acceptable option, but to dismiss the OT like that is breathtakingly horrific
Please, I am not dismissing it. I am trying to be a little discerning here...
and I loved PastorSBC - asking where the passage was that said that they had to get married - it's like woah! Blow my mind!!!
That is part of the law for the theocracy, not part of the universal law of the Ten Commandments. I'm sure that is what he was getting at.
You break it - you bought it
I'm sorry, but a woman is not a thing to be bought.
Let's face it not as many people go to college or university as we'd like, and they still manage to raise a family. They got it on - they have to pay the consequences - Even if they give the kid up for adoption - they have to get married.
Why? We don't even know that these two are Christian. Or are you saying we should force our morality on the world? And even then, I'm not sure that the laws for the ancient theocracy of Israel are a good basis for our morality today. The Ten Commandments, yes, but there is a definite, and historically recognized, difference.
By removing consequences we have caused our own societal degradation.
We can't remove consequences. We can change them, but not remove them. It's a cause and effect thing. But forcing consequences would do a couple of things I am aware of. If the families were not supportive (and we don't know that they are), three families would be torn apart -- his, hers, and theirs. These are far worse consequences. Secondly, by forcing this issue, the young couple very easily might rebel against what they see as Christianity altogether and cause even more harships for themselves. THAT would certainly give a little impetus to the societal degradation in their neck of the woods!
(Divorced and remarried(with the spouse not being dead)) people serving as church leadership. Have pre-marital sex and yer only on the hook til she gives birth; then if she doesnt give it up for adoption - that's not yer fault. Faith is being shoved into the toilet full of excrement and being given a "swirlie"
That part of your response is crude and uncalled for and, in parts, extremely wrong. [I agree; edited by DHK]
the guy fulfilled the one of the requirements/rewards of marriage - consumation (being one flesh) - he should get the whole package. No free samples
These are kids who made a grievous error. That's a little different. It's what the world -- and possibly their sex education in school -- actually condoned. Let's try to help them out and not push them deeper into their error, eh? Jesus forgave prostitutes, and this is certainly less.
(BTW - I do not believe that )
I am shocked Helen! you usually make such decent posts.
Thank you, but unless you also believe that we should wash our houses out when they show mold, make the sacrifices, etc. etc., you will have to recognize a distinction between the Ten Commandments, which are universal and able to apply individually without societal sanction and the law which follows which was specifically for the Israelites at that time!
adoption is certainly a viable and acceptable option, but to dismiss the OT like that is breathtakingly horrific
Please, I am not dismissing it. I am trying to be a little discerning here...
and I loved PastorSBC - asking where the passage was that said that they had to get married - it's like woah! Blow my mind!!!
That is part of the law for the theocracy, not part of the universal law of the Ten Commandments. I'm sure that is what he was getting at.
You break it - you bought it
I'm sorry, but a woman is not a thing to be bought.
Let's face it not as many people go to college or university as we'd like, and they still manage to raise a family. They got it on - they have to pay the consequences - Even if they give the kid up for adoption - they have to get married.
Why? We don't even know that these two are Christian. Or are you saying we should force our morality on the world? And even then, I'm not sure that the laws for the ancient theocracy of Israel are a good basis for our morality today. The Ten Commandments, yes, but there is a definite, and historically recognized, difference.
By removing consequences we have caused our own societal degradation.
We can't remove consequences. We can change them, but not remove them. It's a cause and effect thing. But forcing consequences would do a couple of things I am aware of. If the families were not supportive (and we don't know that they are), three families would be torn apart -- his, hers, and theirs. These are far worse consequences. Secondly, by forcing this issue, the young couple very easily might rebel against what they see as Christianity altogether and cause even more harships for themselves. THAT would certainly give a little impetus to the societal degradation in their neck of the woods!
(Divorced and remarried(with the spouse not being dead)) people serving as church leadership. Have pre-marital sex and yer only on the hook til she gives birth; then if she doesnt give it up for adoption - that's not yer fault. Faith is being shoved into the toilet full of excrement and being given a "swirlie"
That part of your response is crude and uncalled for and, in parts, extremely wrong. [I agree; edited by DHK]
the guy fulfilled the one of the requirements/rewards of marriage - consumation (being one flesh) - he should get the whole package. No free samples
These are kids who made a grievous error. That's a little different. It's what the world -- and possibly their sex education in school -- actually condoned. Let's try to help them out and not push them deeper into their error, eh? Jesus forgave prostitutes, and this is certainly less.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sularis said:
I don't see where she dismissed the Old Testament.
Sularis said:
Why don't you cite some scripture that says that unwed parents must marry for the sake of the baby having a home.
[
Sularis said:
Offensive. Crude. But at least you have made a better summary of Deuteronomy 22:28 than others.
Sularis said:
Why? There a thousands of married christian couples who are devoted to each other in love, respect, and Godly committment who weren't each other's first sexual experience. It's sad, but true. I'm sure that some people on the BB can testify to that, although they should really keep that to themselves.
Wouldn't it be wise for them to stop having sex and wait until they are old enough to decide if this is their life's partner or not? if so, then get married and sex will take on a whole new meaning. If this is not the person that God has planned for them, then at least they have stopped the relationship and prevented disaster.
Sularis said:
Marriage is not a punishment nor a consequence to the New Testament believers. It is a holy estate, ordained by God that paints a picture of Christ and His Beloved Church.
Sularis said:
I still don't see where two teenagers who are only fulfilling the lust of the flesh in the back seat of a car are a picture of Christ and the Church and should have to get married.
They should stop having sex. Then be counseled by wise adults into the proper decisions of life. Marrying each other may or may not be wisest of desicions.
trumpet01 said:
Thank you, sir, and congratulations on your marriage and the length of it! Since the two kids are in your church youth group, the two families are also presumably Christian? The parents MUST be brought into the picture so that the young people have full support and wise advice. I'm sure you know most marriages that start at that age simply don't make it. But if that is what both families and the young people choose, then with that kind of support, they are starting on a good foundation, at least.
God give you wisdom.
So what I am getting from this is that alot of you are saying that being bound to a family by marriage to the mom of the children is not really all that important?
Marriage is for the enjoyment of the adults and not a way to bind famlies together for the good of the kids?
So why is it that the majority of the religous right fight against gay marrage. If marriage is for the enjoyment of the adults why not let gay people be married, they are going to be gay married or not. I thought the argument is that it is bad for the family.
Helen makes a great suggestion that adoption is a good way to go. But not all couples will take this option. If that is the case then I stand by my opinion that the couple should be bound be marriage because they have the responsability to raise there children in a family unit the way God intended children to be raised.
Does ANYONE here disagree that God intended children to be raised in a family bound by marriage?
Also agreed that the father is responsable to take care of the children.
But $$$ is only a small part of what a child needs. Who is going to provide what only a father can provide in 7 years when the young man has found another woman and has children who live in his household.
Marriage is for the enjoyment of the adults and not a way to bind famlies together for the good of the kids?
So why is it that the majority of the religous right fight against gay marrage. If marriage is for the enjoyment of the adults why not let gay people be married, they are going to be gay married or not. I thought the argument is that it is bad for the family.
Helen makes a great suggestion that adoption is a good way to go. But not all couples will take this option. If that is the case then I stand by my opinion that the couple should be bound be marriage because they have the responsability to raise there children in a family unit the way God intended children to be raised.
Does ANYONE here disagree that God intended children to be raised in a family bound by marriage?
Also agreed that the father is responsable to take care of the children.
But $$$ is only a small part of what a child needs. Who is going to provide what only a father can provide in 7 years when the young man has found another woman and has children who live in his household.
DeeJay said:
No, DeeJay, no one is saying that at all.
It's because family is so important, a child having a mother and a father who can raise them in a Godly environment, that I believe that teenagers should not be forced to get married.
Forcing teenagers to marry just for the sake of polite society is not wise.
Encouraging them to marry after they have received much marital counseling and much instruction from their own parents and after they have expressed a biblical desire to make a commitment to one another....a mature and one-on-one commitment that stands on its own merit, without the baby.....then marriage should be encouraged.
Only when they have learned how to be husband and wife, in all that entails.....only then will they make good parents.
If the teenage wife just sits home all day watching SpongeBob Squarepants and MTV waiting for her mother to take care of her and the baby and if the teenage husband hangs out at the arcade with his friends and never even makes an attempt to make physical nor emotional contact with the baby, then what kind of marriage and home is that?
I've seen that many times. But everybody's happy.....they got the two kids hitched.
It's not that anyone believes that teenage marriages won't work.
It's that they don't work when neither one of them understand what marriage means. Too many times these shot-gun weddings are only performed to give the baby a name.....not a home. In other words, just to ensure that the baby won't be called a bastard, but never to ensure that he or she will be taken care of nor loved.
Guide the teenage parents correctly and there's hope.
Force them to marry and stick them in a trailer somewhere with no spiritual supervision nor training in responsibility and you have a horrible home life for the two teenagers and their child.
Scarlett O. said:
If they do not get married then the child will not be raised by a mother and father in a Godly enviroment. You can not (or should not) force them to get married. It should be something they do out of responsability to the child. FORCE no. But I do believe the parents should want to raise their kid in a family. The visitation share the kid is a poor substitute for a family and if the parents are to inmature to make a marriage work then what are the chances that they can work out visitation with the mother (most likely) resenting that she does not get to see her kids for weekends and the father resenting that half of his paycheck goes to support.
I agree not to force. But I would encourage. I would tell my son that it is his responsability to make the right choice. But in the end he is 18 (in this synario) and makes his own choices.
Finding a relationship that works then getting married would have been the best thing. I also would recomend that a couple be married a couple years before having a baby and not getting married or having a baby until at least 25 years old. But it is to late for that. They have made a baby and now responsability kicks in. What would have been best is not an option now.
Giving the baby a name or saving face, avoiding embaresment would not be my goal. I believe that marriage is important to a family and that a married mother and father are in the best interest of the child. I understand that is not the goal for everyone. Like I have said I disagree with the shotgun wedding. But the question was not " My 18 yo son got a girl pregnent, should I make them get married" The question was "What should I do as an 18 yo."? The answer is you should want to take responsability for the best interest of your child and get hitched to the mom.
Absolutly councling and guidance would be appropriate. They will have to work HARD everyday to make it work. But they have as much a responsability to make there marriage work to keep the kids in a family as they do to get married and bring the kids into a family.
The tragedy of a young couple getting married and having the marrage fail is that the children will be brought up in a broken home. So it does not make sense to me to avoid that by bringing up the children in a broken home.
Last edited by a moderator:
So you prefer them to get married and start to resent each other and the child and then later get divorced and REALLY rip that kid up?
My ex left me with six children (five adopted). Just walked out with one of his other women in 1991. We were all devastated beyond description. But, as the years went past, and as I learned to cope with being a single parent (he never bothered involving himself with them again), I heard from each of the kids except the retarded one who can't talk that it was so much better with just me. They could never please him; their memories of him revolved around him coming home, watching TV, and going out to bars. He didn't care about the pictures they drew him or the little gifts they gave. He left everything behind when he left.
Each of those five came up to me at some point during the years that followed and asked me, "Mom, if you had not had/adopted me, would Daddy still be here?"
That is an absolutely heartbreaking question.
Better to be raised by a single parent than to face the kind of rejection my children had to live through.
Marriage is NOT for the sake of the kids. If it is, then when the kid misbehaves or gets sick or difficult the marriage falls apart, and then they blame the kid. That is the rottenest thing that can be done to a child.
My ex left me with six children (five adopted). Just walked out with one of his other women in 1991. We were all devastated beyond description. But, as the years went past, and as I learned to cope with being a single parent (he never bothered involving himself with them again), I heard from each of the kids except the retarded one who can't talk that it was so much better with just me. They could never please him; their memories of him revolved around him coming home, watching TV, and going out to bars. He didn't care about the pictures they drew him or the little gifts they gave. He left everything behind when he left.
Each of those five came up to me at some point during the years that followed and asked me, "Mom, if you had not had/adopted me, would Daddy still be here?"
That is an absolutely heartbreaking question.
Better to be raised by a single parent than to face the kind of rejection my children had to live through.
Marriage is NOT for the sake of the kids. If it is, then when the kid misbehaves or gets sick or difficult the marriage falls apart, and then they blame the kid. That is the rottenest thing that can be done to a child.
Helen said:
I prefer them to do the responsable thing. That includes alot of things, including bringing the child into a family committed by marriage, working hard to make the marriage work and puting the interests of the child first.
I am sorry you and your kids went thru that. Obviously your ex did not have the best interest of the children or you in mind. That is all I am asking of the young man in this synerio.
Marriage is for the sake of the kids. It is in there best interest. But I will qualify that by saying that a good Godly marrage is in the best interest of the kids.
If this young man wants to do what is best for his new family he will marry the mom. BUT that is only the first step, he also needs to make sure that the enviroment of the marriage is good.
Like I said before
The tragedy of a young couple getting married and having the marrage fail is that the children will be brought up in a broken home. So it does not make sense to me to avoid that by bringing up the children in a broken home.
If there is even a hint of conditionality in the guy and girl's attitude, (the "if things don't work out" model) they have no business getting married.
These marriages need heavy-duty counseling from the get-go...they're starting with several tough scenarios:
These marriages need heavy-duty counseling from the get-go...they're starting with several tough scenarios:
- the strain of a new child--emotional, financial, etc.
- so many life changes in so short a time.
- at best, a good relationship got things out of order and sinned (saying here: if these were Godly kids who intended on getting married and had sex, it's still wrong, and will be tough to overcome (but can be). Tougher still would be a relationship that was superficial to begin with)
- Being delicate here--the newlyweds will not have the physical enjoyment of each other to the degree that most do...there are, um, extenuating circumstances, and that can strain a young marriage.
- the shame, guilt, bitterness, and other stuff associated with sin. If confessed, it's still something the devil will try to drudge up. If unconfessed, it could wreck the marriage.
DeeJay said:
did God say, "Marriage is for the sake of the kids?" It sounds true, but what scripture supports that?
What if the guy or girl either one have serious issues...violence, drug abuse, other serious problems...should they compound one sin (fornication) with an unwise vow to God and another?
I realize you qualified your statements...that may mean we agree more than I thought we did.
I simply object to this "we HAD to get married" statement.
A horrible marriage IMO is much worse than no marriage at all.
Keep in mind: I've counseled many pregnant unwed couples. Some were "ready" to get married (not excusing their sin). Others were so unhealthy in their views of love, marriage, priorities, and the like...their vows wouldn't have been taken seriously, in my view as one who counseled them. And I'd rather a person not make a vow to God than to make it lightly.
rbell said:
I cant say that "marriage is for the sake of the kids."
BUT I do believe that kids belong in a marriage, a family that is bound and commited by marriage.
Can I support it with scripture, I will have to study. But I have not read the answer to my earlier question. Does anybody doubt that a commited marriage (mom and dad) is the way God intended for children to be raised?
DeeJay said:
That is God's best blueprint, for sure. When kids aren't on the way (or here to start with), there's nothing better. But if the kid is coming, or here, you don't get married just so that there's two parents, IMO.
Let me approach it from another angle. Let's say a woman has a 9 and 7 year old, and she's single. Should she rush out and get married, so the two kiddos will have "two parents?" No...that's not the reason there should be a marriage.
Now...once again, back to the OP situation...if mom & dad to be are willing to make the commitment, understanding this is a vow before God, and they're willing to commit to do what it takes to make a new marriage with strikes against it work, (and preferably they're willing to be counseled and mentored) then yes...absolutely. But if it is a, "Oh, drat. We're pregnant. Now we have to get married." That's a divorce waiting to happen. It's a vow not taken seriously. And it's better a vow like that not be made.
Sure...God's primary design is two parents, committed to each other under God for life. Sin's in this world, and many times it doesn't happen: sometimes because of one's sin, both's sin, or just "junk" (death of a spouse) and there's a single parent left.
I just don't want to see one bad decision (having sex outside of God's boundaries) followed by another (a marriage that's not got the full commitment of both parties). This compounds, rather than alleviates, the first problem.