Need Advice: I met a guy I really liked online, we met in person but he is not sure anymore about me. I feel devastated.

TheosisSeeker

Woodpecker
Orthodox Catechumen
I don't see why dating/relationship advice threads are a problem. They appear often in the men's sections.

Finding a suitable mate for mutual support in working toward salvation is one of the most important things most of us do in life - very worthy of discussion.

I'm fine with these threads, the posters should just keep in mind that it's difficult to see from the male perspective if you're a female and vice versa. Also, if they specify they only want male or female advice that would be helpful.
 

Starlight

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
Leading by example is sometimes giving the unpopular truth to the redundant basic stuff stated. Sorry.

The Ladies Forum content / purpose is becoming devalued with the same basic stuff asked by new women, and the same advice given over and over by men.

Perhaps women seeking secular online dating advice on a Christian forum should not continuously create new threads over and over with similar requested advice. Either

A) search and review the current thread topics on secular dating, and ask the question in that thread; or
B) use the "had to have" Ladies Lounge (Women Only) thread to request advice from women only

When truth is given and one does not like the answer be assured the same request for advice with be asked in a different manner in hope to receive different / accepted advice.


Thanks Hen Pecky… very informative :rolleyes:
 

christie2

Woodpecker
Woman
Non-Christian
They had mistresses because they were powerful people, and they were not true Christians. Because of their power they could make laws and do anything they wanted. Did you see the movie Braveheart with Mel Gibson? It is based on a true story. Women in the movie did not go willingly with the men of higher status.
Yes, they were not true Christians....breaking the Ten Commandments. Why do some ignore that following the Ten Commandments makes you Christian?
 

Optimus Princeps

Woodpecker
Orthodox Catechumen
Thanks Hen Pecky… very informative :rolleyes:
It doesn't seem very appropriate to resort to name-calling and socially shaming for a lady who put out a pretty reasonable suggestion. It seems to be contributing to some kind of idea that all the women on here are all in it together against the men and must not deviate on thought. Lack of freedom of thought and ideas caused most of what's wrong today in the first place.
Yes, they were not true Christians....breaking the Ten Commandments. Why do some ignore that following the Ten Commandments makes you Christian?
What @get2choppaaa was saying is that it is not for us to say who is or is not a "true christian". That is a very self-righteous thing to claim to know about someone, and you cannot ever know somebody's inner heart, let alone somebody from history who you have never even met before. That is absolutely not for us to say, but for only God to know and decide.
 

Starlight

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
It doesn't seem very appropriate to resort to name-calling and socially shaming for a lady who put out a pretty reasonable suggestion. It seems to be contributing to some kind of idea that all the women on here are all in it together against the men and must not deviate on thought. Lack of freedom of thought and ideas caused most of what's wrong today in the first place.

What @get2choppaaa was saying is that it is not for us to say who is or is not a "true christian". That is a very self-righteous thing to claim to know about someone, and you cannot ever know somebody's inner heart, let alone somebody from history who you have never even met before. That is absolutely not for us to say, but for only God to know and decide.
You haven’t been nit-picked… yet
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
Yes, they were not true Christians....breaking the Ten Commandments. Why do some ignore that following the Ten Commandments makes you Christian?
Christ came to teach us, and gave his life for us, precisely because none of use can make it through life without breaking them to some degree, on account of our fallen nature.

Someone who claims to keep all of the commandments perfectly, such that repentance is "unnecessary," would more arguably be "not a true Christian."

Sin alone does not make one less of a Christian.
 

TheosisSeeker

Woodpecker
Orthodox Catechumen
Christ came to teach us, and gave his life for us, precisely because none of use can make it through life without breaking them to some degree, on account of our fallen nature.

Someone who claims to keep all of the commandments perfectly, such that repentance is "unnecessary," would more arguably be "not a true Christian."

Sin alone does not make one less of a Christian.

Wanted to make a quick post since in a different thread I made a similar comment about a person not being a true Christian and was 'called out' so I'll clarify.

Yes, we are fallen and everybody sins. However, effort must be made to uproot the passions and repent. It is only within this framework of suffering and hard work, that I believe real progress is made.

I've witnessed over and over again people using the 'we're fallen, it's impossible to follow the teachings' as a cop out to putting real effort in their spiritual life.

A guy who kept cheating on his wife over and over and over again. "But I'm fallen bro, I tried to stop cheating on her but I just can't!"

Drug addiction. "Hey, because we're fallen we get addicted to substances in this case coke, and it happened, can't stop."

These are not easy problems by any means and I'm not suggesting the solutions are simple or easy, but it's clear if someone is on drugs for decades, something has gone wrong.

The people who aren't trying should not be beyond reproach, or beyond given tough words to get their act together.

I never believed in the you can sin your whole life and then repent on your deathbed method of salvation.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
If a women can not find a good men in her own country, this is a red flagg to me.
If a man can't find a good woman in his own country, that's a red flag too? If someone doesn't want to stick their arm down a barrel of 95% soupy-rotten apples to find one of the few non-rotten ones, they just don't want an apple?

When I was a girl (12 or so) I often pondered the potential wisdom of looking for a husband in a third-world country where the men aren't so soft.

Couldn't have actually done it for MANY reasons, but 20+ years later it's even MORE obvious that my own country re-tooled their production line decades ago to churn out as many garbage people (of both sexes) as possible.

Very few soft women. Very few properly hardened men.

It makes me sad when people "have to" leave their homeland (not just country - but also state, county, town/village) to find a suitable spouse, but I can't find much fault in them for it.

convey to parents the genuine desire for a Christian husband, and would prefer her parents to approve of that person, so thusly is requesting that they facilitate.
This is something I wish I could have done. I thought about it a LOT when I was growing up. But I had New-Agey-hippie-Hindu-convert parents who would have inevitably pushed me toward a man of that religion/culture. I wanted a Christian husband, and basically had to wait until my parents' opinions didn't matter to me.

I believe the practice (parents/family helping young people find spouses) needs to make a comeback. It has been abandoned and disparaged for all of the stupidest non-reasons.

@doveofthesun96 - it seems to me like you might be in a better position than most women to ask your father for help finding a husband. Don't discount the idea just because it's "old-fashioned."

The people who aren't trying should not be beyond rebuke, reproach, and given tough words to get their act together.
Agree, but in the case of criticizing historical figures as "not real Christians" because their sins are public record and their repentance is not (or often people point to the record of sin and just IGNORE recorded evidence of later repentance)... not quite the same.

Yes, call out bad behavior when it can help someone learn better.

"That person isn't a True Christian because they broke a commandment" is poor behavior to be called out.
 

TMarie

Sparrow
Woman
Catholic
Agree, but in the case of criticizing historical figures as "not real Christians" because their sins are public record and their repentance is not (or often people point to the record of sin and just IGNORE recorded evidence of later repentance)... not quite the same.

Yes, call out bad behavior when it can help someone learn better.

"That person isn't a True Christian because they broke a commandment" is poor behavior to be called out.
I was wondering how a person can be a Christian if they don’t follow the teachings of Christ? King Edward I showed no compassion or love for the Scottish people and that is why they went against him and fought for their independence from England. They called Wallace a traitor and traitors were drawn and quartered, this was a tortured death. How could that be considered a Christian thing to do? I think some historical people proclaimed to be Christian but in their heart they were cruel rulers and that is not what Christ taught us.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
I think some historical people proclaimed to be Christian but in their heart they were cruel rulers and that is not what Christ taught us.
Can we even know that the published history of these events is accurate? No, we cannot.

Is the published history an EXHAUSTIVE account of those people's lives? No, it is not.

Should we assume that because historians never mentioned an individual's change of heart/repentance - that they never had a change of heart and never repented? We really should not.

It is obviously fine to say that an action or behavior is abhorrent or not in-line with Christ's teachings - but to judge an individual as "not a Christian" based on our limited perspective seems... well... kinda un-Christian.

"That person did some really awful and un-Christlike things. I hope they had a chance to repent before they died. I will pray for the salvation of their soul knowing that God can transcend time."

vs.

"That person did some really awful and un-Christlike things, therefore they are not Christian."

Pretty big difference.
 

TMarie

Sparrow
Woman
Catholic
Can we even know that the published history of these events is accurate? No, we cannot.

Is the published history an EXHAUSTIVE account of those people's lives? No, it is not.

Should we assume that because historians never mentioned an individual's change of heart/repentance - that they never had a change of heart and never repented? We really should not.

It is obviously fine to say that an action or behavior is abhorrent or not in-line with Christ's teachings - but to judge an individual as "not a Christian" based on our limited perspective seems... well... kinda un-Christian.

"That person did some really awful and un-Christlike things. I hope they had a chance to repent before they died. I will pray for the salvation of their soul knowing that God can transcend time."

vs.

"That person did some really awful and un-Christlike things, therefore they are not Christian."

Pretty big difference.
I hope King Edward I of England repented of what he did to the Scottish people, and that he was sorry for what he did. Joseph Stalin committed many atrocities in Russia to his people, Stalin did not personally torture anyone; however, he did direct his secret police to arrest and torture them. Assuming the history was correct, and King Edward I of England did have Willaim Wallace tortured to death for being a traitor to the king, how is that different than what Stalin did?
 
Last edited:
Top