That's a stable formulation. The other way around would be a problem.
-
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.
Churchianity Lacks PRACTICAL Answers For Single Women!
- Thread starter Frank S
- Start date
That's a stable formulation. The other way around would be a problem.
To clarify my perspective on this as staff - I see this as simply an introduction, as @Mage has said. ANY respected man here could be approached to be the introducing party, they do not need to be staff. However, if someone didn't know who to ask, picking one of the staff is an obvious choice as they're all decent people. The suggestion is not that the staff would be formally arranging introductions or marriages.
It's just a simple suggestion to people that are nervous about asking somebody themselves, that they could ask someone else to introduce them, and if in doubt as to who a staff member is an obvious choice.
Last edited:
Darn it, you got to it first. I was thinking the same thing. To be honest, I think it's the healthiest way to operate a marriage (put down the chairs women). It certainly helps for polygyny...for a host of reasons.
Not to be overly contrarian, but I think Jesus loves His bride more than she loves him. I don't know if that's healthy or not, I just know that I would be scared if it were not so.
Agreed. What I said is true in the love = feelings sense; love as a reflection of relative attractiveness levels. Which is probably how the statement I quoted was meant.
But in the agape love sense, you're absolutely right. Good catch.
I'm not going to disagree, but what I was speaking to (I will let @rockfox speak for himself) was the idealized and romantic love. It's that whole emotional thing that we with the high AQ don't get wrapped up in as much.
It gets us back to the conversation about servant/leader. A husband that loves his wife by serving and doing finds it hard to understand why she wants words, when we prefer actions.
In polygyny, a man has to be dedicated to the hard work of the project because he loves his wives and family. It won't matter how much gushy, emotional love he displays if he can't put in the action parts of love.
Am I making sense?
THIS ^^^^^^^^^ A thousand times over!!!!!!
Heck yes. Sorry fellas, my AQ is so high that it didn't occur to me we were talking about emotional type love.(Pray for my wife, lol) In which case I'm 100% on board.
I would just like to say that the father didn't cause her to commit fornication. Those actions and decisions are her own. Dont be blaming fathers for wanting their daughters to have a good education so they can go far in life. Blame the women who make the choice to do wrong. Give honor where honor is due, I believe that is both negative and positive honor.
The 20's are the time of highest fertility for women. They are biologically driven (created instinct) to breed and bear children. To expect women to remain celibate for 10-15 years while pursuing education and being surrounded by young men looking for sex is hopelessly naive at best.
While some may see that as you not believing in women, I see it as you emphasizing the responsibility of the males in a woman’s life to protect her.
It’s not that she is that weak, it is that the forces arrayed against her are extremely strong. It’s the one place where if a woman has a 99.99% success rate it is still devastating.
I don't expect young men to make good decisions either if their parents don't raise them right. This is where fathers are supposed to be guiding and protecting their daughters.
But it's not a man/woman thing; it's a created order thing. God created her to be fruitful and multiply, we're expecting women to do something unnatural. It is equally unnatural for men to go decades without sex; but the drive is even stronger in women because they have a deadline on their fertility. Waiting until your 30's to have kids... by that time you're down to 12% of your eggs and getting pregnant is relatively difficult. Education and vacations have no such time limit.
But women are weaker than men, and that's ok. Women don't respect men who are weaker than themselves; they like strong men. "Weaker vessel" and all that.
I’m not sure why you replied what you did to that particular post. Either you totally missed the point of her thread, or you were just using it to present an entirely unrelated soapbox.
I don't see @rockfox's comment as being an unrelated soapbox. The point I see that he's making is that, while a father may be focusing on the "getting ahead in the world" aspect of things by encouraging his daughter to go to college, what the father is also inadvertently doing is sending his daughter, at the peak of her fertility into an environment in which (a) the professors will preach nonsense as well as convey facts; (b) the residence life and student affairs staff will have as their highest commitment denigrating and replacing every value with which the father has raised the daughter; (c) without the stopgaps previously provided by home, school and church, the daughter and her own pheromonal and hormonal raging will be surrounded hundreds of near-in-age males (also with hormones raging), the majority of whom will perform every stunt, lie and acrobatics to persuade her to give up her carnal treasure (up to and including lying to her about supposedly being in love with her); (d) feminism rules the day, even in almost all church-related institutions of higher learning; (e) the school's health division hands out birth control pills, condoms and abortions like candy; and (f) forming life-long attachments is looked down upon with a vengeance.
Keep in mind that I write this as someone who ran university residence halls and apartment buildings for 6 different institutions, from church-related small colleges to private engineering schools to large state universities. The differences among them in regard to the dynamics to which rockfox refers are negligible. Except at some elite Christian schools, Christian students are very actively discriminated against. My last assignment refused to allow me to hire openly Christian students as Resident Assistants. College has turned into 4-7 years of basically sex-and-booze-drenched summer camp with some classes thrown in to throw parents off the scent, and a diploma granted at the end to signal to the world that one supposedly accomplished something. And now girls outnumber boys almost 2-to-1, so the pressure on the females has ramped up considerably to be almost indiscriminately sexually active in order to fit in and to get attention from the mostly hapless boys in attendance.
I have a Masters degree, but I've been raising my children to seriously consider avoiding college, and I will not encourage them in any way to get a degree. Furthermore, I'm now encouraging my teenage daughters, who are young women, to set their sights on actual men. All of the males with whom they attend high school are mere boys, and college boys probably take a temporary step backwards in most cases until they get out of school and decide whether they're going to be responsible adults or prolong their adolescence for the next decade or two.
It's like @steve said,
@Daughter_Of_The_King (more than one king, I might add) is also correct: the young women who make the wrong choices are to be held accountable for their choices, but I can guarantee you from watching it first-hand for many years that parents sending children to college (most especially female children) is akin to sending them into the lion's den. It is like a labyrinth of conflicting choices, with 99 dead ends and 1 way out without being eaten by the lion. Sure, college girls can make the right choices, and much of that will be determined by the manner in which they have been raised, as well as by the strength of their own individual character -- but every one of us has weaknesses, and Big Higher Ed preys on those weaknesses. Colleges now market themselves primarily on the amenities they provide potential students rather than marketing themselves on the quality of the classroom learning -- and the most prevalent amenity on campus these days is a atmosphere of freedom to indulge in supposedly being able to drink and screw oneself into oblivion without any real consequences.
Is it unreasonable to point out that this might not be the best use of 4 years of a young woman's life?
Same for boys.... I've encouraged trade school for my sons while continuing to live at home... the one working on his Masters now did two years of trade and the rest online while working full-time.... when he moves out at 24 he'll be nearly debt free and have a professional degree and an income to match. And, he is a man! For some lady or ladies, he'll be an exceptional leader.
I would respectfully disagree with you. Fathers have near total responsibility and culpability to lead their children. If the daughter rebels then of course the sin is on her, but putting her in harm’s way will be on the father.
It appears that we all are speaking truths that are not mutually exclusive. I find myself agreeing with each point to varying degrees.
Yes those years are the most fertile of a young woman’s life.
Yes a college campus and dorms are a smorgasbord of opportunity for young men and women alike to let down their guard and indulge in unwise behavior
Yes there are definitely other ways to get a good education for high paying jobs and careers.
Yes a father is ultimately responsible and accountable before God for his children.
And yes a young lady or man is personally responsible (at minimum to their father and future spouses) for their decision to be promiscuous.
I don’t have time this morning to reply as I’d like, but it seems there are three options for success.
It can still be done, but only if there is personal responsibility, accountability to a father and family, loving and watchful support from extended family and a goal and vision of what they want in a husband and family.
Yes those years are the most fertile of a young woman’s life.
Yes a college campus and dorms are a smorgasbord of opportunity for young men and women alike to let down their guard and indulge in unwise behavior
Yes there are definitely other ways to get a good education for high paying jobs and careers.
Yes a father is ultimately responsible and accountable before God for his children.
And yes a young lady or man is personally responsible (at minimum to their father and future spouses) for their decision to be promiscuous.
I don’t have time this morning to reply as I’d like, but it seems there are three options for success.
- Keep them sequestered and secluded from anyone not family.
- Chastity belt
- Teach them and train them to be able to live in the world but not as the world. To do this successfully they must have their own vision of the benefits of giving themselves to their spouse alone (something they have virtually no living examples of today) and a vision of the possible/probable consequences if they decide to be liberal with their affections.
It can still be done, but only if there is personal responsibility, accountability to a father and family, loving and watchful support from extended family and a goal and vision of what they want in a husband and family.
Prioritizing education and career before family results in more single childless women, more divorces, fewer families and smaller families. Expecting young people to go 10-20 years without sex has proven to be unrealistic, as should be expected because that was not God's created design; it is unnatural.
There are two paths you can send daughters on:
1. education, then career, and then maybe family (it plays out in that order and family will be the least of them, hampered by debt and smaller due to wasted fertility)
or
2. marriage, then children, and then maybe education/career
#1 is the path that the world and Christians all push. It's a mistake. The days of MRS degrees are over. And exceptions are just that and not to be counted on. The majority of young women who go on path #1 will not get married until their late 20's/ early 30's, if at all, and only have a kid or two, and maybe not even any at all. You only get 1 shot at fertility, then it's gone. You can always go to school and start a career later.
And even if they do manage to pull off #1, it means one of two things: your children are raised by day care (bad) or you do the right thing and quit to stay at home to take care of your family. But if you do the later, your degree will quite possibly become worthless. In many fields employers don't like to hire people with no recent relevant experience. That only works when you first graduate. Which means all that time and debt were a waste. This is especially true with STEM degrees, which are some of the few that still make financial sense in the first place.
Skipping higher ed isn't synonymous with sequestration. Nor do we need to send children into minefields for them to learn to live in but not of the world. Nor does focusing on family in your 20's mean you can't get an education later. Not to mention college is no longer the sure fire, and only, path to success (financial or otherwise).
There are two paths you can send daughters on:
1. education, then career, and then maybe family (it plays out in that order and family will be the least of them, hampered by debt and smaller due to wasted fertility)
or
2. marriage, then children, and then maybe education/career
#1 is the path that the world and Christians all push. It's a mistake. The days of MRS degrees are over. And exceptions are just that and not to be counted on. The majority of young women who go on path #1 will not get married until their late 20's/ early 30's, if at all, and only have a kid or two, and maybe not even any at all. You only get 1 shot at fertility, then it's gone. You can always go to school and start a career later.
And even if they do manage to pull off #1, it means one of two things: your children are raised by day care (bad) or you do the right thing and quit to stay at home to take care of your family. But if you do the later, your degree will quite possibly become worthless. In many fields employers don't like to hire people with no recent relevant experience. That only works when you first graduate. Which means all that time and debt were a waste. This is especially true with STEM degrees, which are some of the few that still make financial sense in the first place.
Skipping higher ed isn't synonymous with sequestration. Nor do we need to send children into minefields for them to learn to live in but not of the world. Nor does focusing on family in your 20's mean you can't get an education later. Not to mention college is no longer the sure fire, and only, path to success (financial or otherwise).
All of that sounds very generically good Rockfox, and yet blanket statements like that, which may be generically true, too often give rise to conclusions that are not true.
For example, if a young person goes to a college, its really not their fault if they are promiscuous because . . . . . . . They just cant help it! False
If a young person goes to college, she’ll miss her chance to have babies because she’s only 80% as fertile as she was at 18.
Or, a woman after college will typically only have a small number of children due to infertility.
From what I’ve seen, small family sizes are much more predominantly due to cultural conditioning or feminism than anything having to do with fertility or career. I personally have several friends who are still popping out kids at a regular rate in their late 30’s /early 40’s. All of them with degrees for both parents. For me the fertility issue is a non starter next to cultural conditioning or feminism.
On the sequestering issue, what is the difference between an education postponing marriage and children, and an overzealous sequestering father postponing marriage and children? Under your premise, both could be equally culpable in a young woman not being allowed to marry until fertility is an issue.
As far as the mine field analogy, a minefield is dangerous, but primarily for the unprepared. I was brought up this way, I’ve lived it and done it. I have also been privileged to observe other families prepare their children for it, and seen their results. IMO there is no comparison. You can cite all the statistics you like from families who failed or refused to prepare their children for the world we live in. Those statistics will never counter the example of prepared children who have excelled in their Christianity because they walked prepared thru the fire, versus the children whose parents thought it best to keep them ignorant and unprepared for the fire that we all must walk thru at some point.
For example, if a young person goes to a college, its really not their fault if they are promiscuous because . . . . . . . They just cant help it! False
If a young person goes to college, she’ll miss her chance to have babies because she’s only 80% as fertile as she was at 18.
Or, a woman after college will typically only have a small number of children due to infertility.
From what I’ve seen, small family sizes are much more predominantly due to cultural conditioning or feminism than anything having to do with fertility or career. I personally have several friends who are still popping out kids at a regular rate in their late 30’s /early 40’s. All of them with degrees for both parents. For me the fertility issue is a non starter next to cultural conditioning or feminism.
On the sequestering issue, what is the difference between an education postponing marriage and children, and an overzealous sequestering father postponing marriage and children? Under your premise, both could be equally culpable in a young woman not being allowed to marry until fertility is an issue.
As far as the mine field analogy, a minefield is dangerous, but primarily for the unprepared. I was brought up this way, I’ve lived it and done it. I have also been privileged to observe other families prepare their children for it, and seen their results. IMO there is no comparison. You can cite all the statistics you like from families who failed or refused to prepare their children for the world we live in. Those statistics will never counter the example of prepared children who have excelled in their Christianity because they walked prepared thru the fire, versus the children whose parents thought it best to keep them ignorant and unprepared for the fire that we all must walk thru at some point.
This particular dilemma is one I can see with fury from both sides. You're right on the mark, @Verifyveritas76, when you say that statistical probability doesn't remove responsibility from individual young people. I regularly repeat to my daughters (as I did to my sons) the thing I first heard on Rush Limbaugh: "Abstinence works every time it's tried." And your point that the training parents give their children ultimately has to be tested out in the world, anyway.
On the other hand, there is this: testing that training in today's nearly-ubiquitous college environment is the biggest trial by fire into which one can throw one's child. There will likely never be such a test as that. Living in the world itself doesn't come close to preparing one for what it's like on college campuses. So then I also agree with @rockfox, because even though the rule doesn't eliminate exceptions, it is still the case that @rockfox is correct as far as what happens statistically. Abortions are rampant among college students (among white people, the majority of abortions are conducted on pregnant college coeds; I have counseled several students who had had 5 or more of them before graduating), and those abortions have life-long consequences, including decreased fertility when being fertile eventually becomes less 'inconvenient.' At more than one university, I attended training sessions during which it was asserted that our primary responsibility as student affairs professionals was to reverse the "backwards indoctrination" that had been inflicted by our students' parents. The propaganda and programming is unrelenting.
@Verifyveritas76, there is no question that you are a VERY strong leader, and I have no doubt that your daughter has been thoroughly prepared to run the gauntlet of college life, as well as that you will provide her the unrelenting support she will need as she swims in a sea of insanity.
Keep in mind, though, that @rockfox is not really addressing you or your family in particular. He's addressing the typical Christian who just assumes that good upbringing will protect against the onslaught their children will be confronted by in higher education (especially outside the classroom). Most of those young adults will be chewed up and spat out by the typical environment (again, even at the vast majority of so-called Christian colleges), and it's worth questioning whether any educational sophistication or career is worth setting aside the clear biological and spiritual purposes for which God created young women?
In the end, I suspect that, had our Father intended for women to attend college and begin careers before becoming mothers, He would have scheduled puberty for one's late 20's or early 30's.