@Well loved wife very nicely said but I don't understand what hover courting is?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Talking or courting?
- Thread starter Patricia C
- Start date
What I define as ‘hover courting’ is where a family or parents are so restrictive of the couple‘s time and conversations. Where the couple can’t be out of ear shot, out of view or ever left to private conversations. Character is rarely able to be seen. We all can talk and explain what we think or believe but hover courting doesn’t let life happen. Important conversations can’t or don’t happen. For example a man asks the gal what do you think about topic (xyz) and she feels she can’t speak freely, due to listening/prying ears, or concerned she’ll offend her daddy’s heart by having her own beliefs... so she answers somewhat according to ‘the line of belief ‘ and stays safe. Or the girl is to googly-eyed to ask how much debt are you in?
Getting to know someone isn’t all sitting at the table with coffee and talking. It’s a HUGE part, but a gal can say I like fish, the guy thinks ohh, she’s a keeper now I’ll have a fishing buddy... they go fishing after the wedding and find out she’s not a fisher woman, she doesn’t know how to fish or cook it... she likes to eat it. In real life he would’ve taken her fishing before the ‘I do’ as another way of getting to know her/incorporating her into the family. Another example- what do they believe about child training? Let’s babysit...
you see if she coddles or corrects. You see if he’s passive or corrects a child and how each one does the correcting. Anyway, you can’t cover every life topic in living it before marriage but you can see something more of their character when you’re ‘living a courtship.’
Getting to know someone isn’t all sitting at the table with coffee and talking. It’s a HUGE part, but a gal can say I like fish, the guy thinks ohh, she’s a keeper now I’ll have a fishing buddy... they go fishing after the wedding and find out she’s not a fisher woman, she doesn’t know how to fish or cook it... she likes to eat it. In real life he would’ve taken her fishing before the ‘I do’ as another way of getting to know her/incorporating her into the family. Another example- what do they believe about child training? Let’s babysit...
you see if she coddles or corrects. You see if he’s passive or corrects a child and how each one does the correcting. Anyway, you can’t cover every life topic in living it before marriage but you can see something more of their character when you’re ‘living a courtship.’
@Well loved wife
Ah I understand. That's not something I will have to worry about. Thank God! LOL! I do have friends that have had that issue but I haven't heard the term. It was always described as chaperoned dating.
Ah I understand. That's not something I will have to worry about. Thank God! LOL! I do have friends that have had that issue but I haven't heard the term. It was always described as chaperoned dating.
That sounds like a definition of dating to me.
Biblically speaking, it was the father who makes this choice, not the woman, or at least has final sign off.
100 years ago they just called that courting. That practice was so dominant it even affected the architecture of their homes (the front sitting room, with a wall opening to the main living area to allow monitoring).
And it wasn't only conversations they were concerned about, but other ways of 'getting to know' each other. Your analogy reminds me of a song: Fishing in the Dark.
Your definition of courting is sounding more and more like dating. It was when dating came on the scene that young folks starting going off unsupervised and becoming couples.
To be honest, I don't have a settled opinion on how any of this should or shouldn't be done. I'm mainly trying to achieve clarity about what we're talking about. Suffice it to say, we're all using the word courting differently.
Maybe it would be more appropriate, sticking with the OP, to ask @Patricia C : has your question in this thread been answered to your satisfaction? If so, we don't need to turn this into a debate on courting. And if not, how do you / your father / your prospective husband view the process that should take place between here and marriage? Or are you just not sure about what that process should be?
Maybe it would be more appropriate, sticking with the OP, to ask @Patricia C : has your question in this thread been answered to your satisfaction? If so, we don't need to turn this into a debate on courting. And if not, how do you / your father / your prospective husband view the process that should take place between here and marriage? Or are you just not sure about what that process should be?
Not in a Ketubah’ed wedding. The daughter, by custom had the final ‘say’ though she wasn’t supposed to say anything. The groom to be would pour a glass of wine once the negotiating had been concluded and place it in front of her. If she consented to the terms she would take a drink/sip. Then he would drink from the same cup and state that he would not drink from this cup until they both could drink from it together (at his fathers house). This is a later custom from at least as far back as the time of Christ.
This may not have been the case for the daughter of a poor man who was indenturing her to a rich man. There’s just not enough evidence that I have seen to say one way or another.
Genesis 24:8 seems to indicate that her consent was customary as much as 2000 years pre Christ.
And if the woman will not be willing to follow thee, then thou shalt be clear from this my oath: only bring not my son thither again.
Vrs 56-58 seems to support this also. And he said unto them, Hinder me not, seeing the LORD hath prospered my way; send me away that I may go to my master.
And they said, We will call the damsel, and inquire at her mouth.
And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go.
@rockfox
Yes I am satisfied. My father is not active in my life so I do not need to ask him, I am not in a "relationship" that I would need to ask.
My question was posed because I was curious about when talking becomes courtship. Yes that questioned has been answered. My next question that arose was what is the difference of "courting" and "dating" and from what i have gathered they are virtually the same in 2018.
So.... thank you to everyone who contributed tidbits and Biblical history. It has been enlightening
Yes I am satisfied. My father is not active in my life so I do not need to ask him, I am not in a "relationship" that I would need to ask.
My question was posed because I was curious about when talking becomes courtship. Yes that questioned has been answered. My next question that arose was what is the difference of "courting" and "dating" and from what i have gathered they are virtually the same in 2018.
So.... thank you to everyone who contributed tidbits and Biblical history. It has been enlightening
I would take 1st century customs as informative of that time and place but not indicative per se of what the OT law teaches; a lot changed by then.
Genesis 24 indicates what the custom was for that family, or for their culture. But this is pre-law and that culture was the Mesopotamians. Again, potentially relevant but not directly indicative of what the OT law teaches. Especially considering that culture practiced things such as bride auctions and dowry/bride price; which indicate women often had no choice in the matter in that culture.
Granted, a lot changed between the patriarchs and the first century, and the family was from Mesopotamia, but I cant recall anywhere that I’ve read (cannon or not) that indicated that the woman didn’t have a say in the matter unless she was indentured or a slave and even those mentions are inferred or assumed.
In a spiritual comparison, the bride not having a choice would sound an awful lot like irresistible grace.
I’d be leery of assuming that the family of Abraham followed those Mesopotamian customs just because they lived in the region. I’m sure that there was a specific reason why Abraham wanted his daughter in law to be from his family specifically though I confess I don’t know exactly what those reasons were.
Romani custom has bride auctions, dowries, and bride prices. It's been that way as far back as memory permits and brides have always had the final say, yes or no. There's a difference between a wife who has a choice and a slave who is owned. That's not say that women weren't pressured to say yes by their fathers or brothers. The thing is they had to agree. I'm saying this as someone from a culture who still practices this according to several millennium of tradition and not someone who's looking at a custom that's foreign to them. Looking in the window of a house doesn't let you know the temperature of the house. A person who's been in that house can tell you if the A.C. works.
Last edited:
Abraham didn't just spring forth from a rock; he came from Ur. The Mesopotamians and specifically those of Ur were Semetic peoples. They were Abraham's people, his culture. He sent his servant back there to get a wife from his people; those of Palestine were not. If you look at Abraham's actions with his wives they map directly onto the Mesopotamian law of his day; even though he no longer lived amoung them.
In our culture the total say rests with the woman. So it is our cultures assumption others must be that way or that it should be that way. But the Ancient Hebrews are a foreign culture; there are foreign cultures even today that operate on arranged marriage (where the kids have no say).
I'm not aware of a verse in the OT or NT that specifically goes into detail on what level of say a woman has. But then the OT doesn't go into detail on a lot of the matters related to marriage (such as dowry/bride-price).
I'm not saying she didn't have any say (though that could be); I'm sure many fathers asked her opinion. But the authority rested with the father, not the daughter. This is why Paul could say the father could prevent his virgin from marrying in 1 Cor 7:36. Why a father could deny the compulsory marriage of Ex 22:17. Why Jacob went to Laban to deal for his bride, not to the daughter (admittedly pre-law). The practice of bride-price/dowry in the OT is consistent with cultures that practice arranged marriage.
No it doesn't. The subject at hand in v58 is explained in v54-55; whether to leave now or delay 10 days. The father already consented in v51 and told him to take her. And the servant asked the father permission to leave, not the daughter. By starting at v56-58 you're taking it out of context. Furthermore look at Abraham's instructions in v41...
Note it doesn't say: if SHE refuses to consent as would be the case if the bride had final say, but if the FAMILY refuses to give her.
Generally speaking, Mesopotamian marriage was an arranged sale with the woman promised by her father to the father of the bride. Now there are some reasons to think they may have varied from that in this case, but that's the essential practice of that culture. Again, this is all pre-law so subject to that caveat; but it isn't showing what you think it shows.
Great analogy
@rockfox my comment about the verses later in the chapter was referring back to this initial comment which does indeed place the bride to be in a position of being able to agree or not.
BTW. I’m not saying that the father had no role Biblically, just that the idea of the daughter not having any say in who she married is unfounded from what I’ve seen with the possible exception of the indentured servant and the slave and that’s because I haven’t seen anything either way on those but I assume that the slave woman had no choice.
@rockfox that article on Mesopotamian marriage was great. Thanks for that. I’m sure I’ll be referring to it more.
One thing I noticed was that there really was no mention of the consent mentioned in Genesis. I suppose one could take that to mean that no consent was needed, and perhaps the father could decide her fate without consulting her, but Abraham’s comment makes me think that it was more likely to be just an understood custom and perhaps only utilized in a ‘ketubahed’ type betrothal.
I did notice that in spite of all the information that they did know, there was much that they didn’t know or couldn’t confirm, perhaps because most of the poorer ‘contracts ‘ were oral only. I think this is one of those places that I’d be leery of trying to prove a position strictly by omission.
One thing I noticed was that there really was no mention of the consent mentioned in Genesis. I suppose one could take that to mean that no consent was needed, and perhaps the father could decide her fate without consulting her, but Abraham’s comment makes me think that it was more likely to be just an understood custom and perhaps only utilized in a ‘ketubahed’ type betrothal.
I did notice that in spite of all the information that they did know, there was much that they didn’t know or couldn’t confirm, perhaps because most of the poorer ‘contracts ‘ were oral only. I think this is one of those places that I’d be leery of trying to prove a position strictly by omission.
It's worse than that. The Mesopotamian Civilization was large and long lasting and made up of many different kings and dynasties. So custom's changed a lot over time and different customs were held to on the edges of the empire. Not only that but it seems that in general, the terms of marriage were set by the contract, with only limited protections and guidance by law. So you could have a lot of variance from marriage to marriage; esp. if the wife was a rich widow or if her family was more well off. I ran into this a lot studying on polygamy, concubinage and other marriage customs among them as different encyclopedia's and historians would contradict each other frequently due to the above factors.
But since Abraham was pre-law and following Mesopotamian customs, I'm not sure how much it matters either way.
Anyway, we should probably take this into a new thread if you want to continue the discussion.
Love this! I've seen it so much in the homeschool type movements. It paralyzes pair bonding in young people.What I define as ‘hover courting’ is where a family or parents are so restrictive of the couple‘s time and conversations. Where the couple can’t be out of ear shot, out of view or ever left to private conversations. Character is rarely able to be seen. We all can talk and explain what we think or believe but hover courting doesn’t let life happen. Important conversations can’t or don’t happen. For example a man asks the gal what do you think about topic (xyz) and she feels she can’t speak freely, due to listening/prying ears, or concerned she’ll offend her daddy’s heart by having her own beliefs... so she answers somewhat according to ‘the line of belief ‘ and stays safe. Or the girl is to googly-eyed to ask how much debt are you in?
Getting to know someone isn’t all sitting at the table with coffee and talking. It’s a HUGE part, but a gal can say I like fish, the guy thinks ohh, she’s a keeper now I’ll have a fishing buddy... they go fishing after the wedding and find out she’s not a fisher woman, she doesn’t know how to fish or cook it... she likes to eat it. In real life he would’ve taken her fishing before the ‘I do’ as another way of getting to know her/incorporating her into the family. Another example- what do they believe about child training? Let’s babysit...
So how do you strike a balance between that and free for all dating and sex?
I think it depends on the kids involved. Have they been trained to do right and do they have the moral and ethical fortitude to do right when others aren’t around? So often I’ve seen parents never give their young people the freedom in their homes to demonstrate character. The result is that the young men or women coast on their parents convictions and ethics until such a time that they have this freedom and then what’s on the inside is exposed. Usually this is after they are 18 and they consider themselves a free agent. This is a horrible time IMO to find out that they were just making Mom n dad happy til they were on their own.
I’m not saying I know how to cut that fine line, I’m just saying I’ve seen the results of the free dating, the cloistered courting, the courting dad and the arranged marriages and I can unequivocally say that I’m not impressed with any of them for various reasons.
Train up your kids in the way they should go, Grant limited freedom as they grow and progress into maturity and give them the opportunity to fail under authority, teach them to discern and critical thinking and when they reach that point of personal decision, hopefully you have earned their respect and they will value your council enough to discuss their options or decisions with you so that you may speak life and peace and caution into their young adult life.
I’m not saying I know how to cut that fine line, I’m just saying I’ve seen the results of the free dating, the cloistered courting, the courting dad and the arranged marriages and I can unequivocally say that I’m not impressed with any of them for various reasons.
Train up your kids in the way they should go, Grant limited freedom as they grow and progress into maturity and give them the opportunity to fail under authority, teach them to discern and critical thinking and when they reach that point of personal decision, hopefully you have earned their respect and they will value your council enough to discuss their options or decisions with you so that you may speak life and peace and caution into their young adult life.
I am in development on this issue but I'm coming to think "dating" isn't a completely destructive evil. I don't have it worked out yet and may never but I have had pretty good results so far with requiring young men who want to spend time with our girls to come to the house and meet us. Then we manage the time, keep tabs on our daughter and where she's going and when she's there. A few hard rules, and some strict but unobtrusive supervision can go a long way.
What Christians are doing now though essentially requires a young man to show up ready to get married before we let him find out if he wants to marry our daughters. And it cloisters our daughters and makes the world's alternatives look very appealing. We freak out over some things that are nowhere in scripture. I would never tell my daughters that they can kiss as many boys as they want but I can't really tell them that God forbids kissing. He doesn't.
As I get more and more legalistic (and proud of it) I really focus on trying to only get wrapped around the axle on the things that God gets wrapped around the axle on. Yes dating is fraught with peril, but locking our kids away in a tower is just as fraught with peril.
I have also had good results with teaching them what sex means, marriage; and how it limits their future choices and the ramifications of adultery. We don't teach the "pre-marital sex" heresy or that the government or the church has any role in their marriage. It raises the stakes of their behavior very high. We also never ever use pregnancy as a scare tactic. There are a host of reasons why.
Basically our current culture of easy grace, dismissal of rule following or obedience and all the other folderol of the modern Christian world view makes any system unworkable. When you start cutting all of that out, not just enforced monogamy, everything starts getting a lot easier although no less scary on the front end.
