OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 05:56:35 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthonorm's Dating and Relationship Advice Column  (Read 62122 times) Average Rating: 3
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,491


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #1035 on: March 29, 2013, 06:51:24 AM »

Am I a William?
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
TheMathematician
Banished and Disgraced
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 1,495


Formerly known as Montalo


« Reply #1036 on: March 29, 2013, 07:37:25 AM »

Am I a William?

No, rather, you are acrylic :-P
Logged

SCREW BON JOVI!
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,491


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #1037 on: March 30, 2013, 09:14:46 AM »

-
« Last Edit: August 07, 2013, 01:34:11 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1038 on: March 30, 2013, 09:53:44 AM »

I find this discrimination outrageous. The Williams and JamesRs of the world are just inexperienced and lacking in confidence. I'm a true loser! So I can hook up with desperate women I meet on the internet, so what does that prove? Why am I excluded from being helped?  Grin
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1039 on: April 04, 2013, 11:36:16 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,447


WWW
« Reply #1040 on: April 05, 2013, 12:09:59 AM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

How much is left on the lease?
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,820



« Reply #1041 on: April 05, 2013, 09:06:12 AM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1042 on: April 05, 2013, 11:44:46 AM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.
Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,687



« Reply #1043 on: April 05, 2013, 02:33:23 PM »

Stop paying the rent.  She will then either pay it for you or leave.  Either way, you win.  Tongue
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1044 on: April 05, 2013, 03:09:49 PM »

She pays no rent as it is. If I move out she will end up homeless. If I make her move out she will end up homeless. If I let her stay it's a crappy relational situation.
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,820



« Reply #1045 on: April 05, 2013, 03:10:46 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.

If speaking, probably either way depending on the mood.  More likely I would have slurred it to the point that all you'd get out of it would be the "dn't".

If writing, Kipling would have used 'hadn't' so that must be correct.  (Ref: Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun and they have not.)
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,820



« Reply #1046 on: April 05, 2013, 03:11:19 PM »

She pays no rent as it is. If I move out she will end up homeless. If I make her move out she will end up homeless. If I let her stay it's a crappy relational situation.

Tell her to be more relationshipally pleasant or she can become homeless.
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,447


WWW
« Reply #1047 on: April 05, 2013, 03:15:39 PM »

She pays no rent as it is. If I move out she will end up homeless. If I make her move out she will end up homeless. If I let her stay it's a crappy relational situation.

Let her become homeless.  She'll go back to the library and find someone else on her internet dating portal.
Logged
tuesdayschild
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 967



« Reply #1048 on: April 05, 2013, 03:21:23 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

Suddenly develop a LOT of annoying habits and/or hobbies.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1049 on: April 05, 2013, 03:25:23 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.

If speaking, probably either way depending on the mood.  More likely I would have slurred it to the point that all you'd get out of it would be the "dn't".

If writing, Kipling would have used 'hadn't' so that must be correct.  (Ref: Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun and they have not.)

Smiley

Actually it's interesting for syntactic reasons. "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (a job)". You deleted "a job" because it can be understood from context, and linguists call this "ellipsis". The interesting thing is that I'm sure you wouldn't say "she hadn't a job" but rather "she didn't have a job", so the elided phrase makes me expect "didn't": "I reminded her who had a job and who didn't (have a job)".

Maybe I should have read it as "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (had a job)" though that doesn't seem right in context.

Anyway, I have a friend who's working on just these kinds of constructions. I might tell him about this one. Wink

OK enough linguistics geekery.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1050 on: April 05, 2013, 03:51:27 PM »

Ok, back to regular programming then...
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1051 on: April 05, 2013, 04:51:40 PM »

Creepy pick up line #45: "You might as well kiss me, because I'm going to tell everybody we did it anyway."
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 04:51:48 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #1052 on: April 05, 2013, 05:01:06 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.

If speaking, probably either way depending on the mood.  More likely I would have slurred it to the point that all you'd get out of it would be the "dn't".

If writing, Kipling would have used 'hadn't' so that must be correct.  (Ref: Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun and they have not.)

Smiley

Actually it's interesting for syntactic reasons. "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (a job)". You deleted "a job" because it can be understood from context, and linguists call this "ellipsis". The interesting thing is that I'm sure you wouldn't say "she hadn't a job" but rather "she didn't have a job", so the elided phrase makes me expect "didn't": "I reminded her who had a job and who didn't (have a job)".

Maybe I should have read it as "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (had a job)" though that doesn't seem right in context.

Anyway, I have a friend who's working on just these kinds of constructions. I might tell him about this one. Wink

OK enough linguistics geekery.

I absolutely would say she hadn't a job.

This is not uncommon in certain registers in American. I don't know about the other versions of American they speak in other countries.

I could even probably give the conditions under which such a construction would be used and what is connotes over and against she didn't have a job.

I would say plenty of Americans could as well, well not as well as I could, but as well, even if they are not aware of their use of it. Heck, it makes up a folksy turned whimsical idiom.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 05:01:47 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,820



« Reply #1053 on: April 05, 2013, 05:56:46 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.

If speaking, probably either way depending on the mood.  More likely I would have slurred it to the point that all you'd get out of it would be the "dn't".

If writing, Kipling would have used 'hadn't' so that must be correct.  (Ref: Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun and they have not.)

Smiley

Actually it's interesting for syntactic reasons. "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (a job)". You deleted "a job" because it can be understood from context, and linguists call this "ellipsis". The interesting thing is that I'm sure you wouldn't say "she hadn't a job" but rather "she didn't have a job", so the elided phrase makes me expect "didn't": "I reminded her who had a job and who didn't (have a job)".

Maybe I should have read it as "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (had a job)" though that doesn't seem right in context.

Anyway, I have a friend who's working on just these kinds of constructions. I might tell him about this one. Wink

OK enough linguistics geekery.

From a self-analysis point of view (take it for what it's worth), I did drop the second "a job" because it seemed useless (all in the back of my mind with no conscious forethought) but wanted the had/had not to agree.  Saying "who had a job and who didn't" just seems komisch to me.  I would have used didn't if I'd said "who did have a job and who didn't" because then the dids would agree, but I would typically only say "who did have a job" if I wanted to emphasize the point.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #1054 on: April 05, 2013, 06:04:09 PM »

How do you get a girl to leave once you've made the moronic decision to put her on the lease?  Huh

I just waited for the lease to be up and reminded her who had a job and who hadn't.  I then said "Meep Meep" and skedaddled roadrunner style.

Interesting that you said "hadn't" not "didn't". Was that just a slip or do you normally say this? I'm not trying to judge your grammar, I'm just professionally interested as a linguist.

If speaking, probably either way depending on the mood.  More likely I would have slurred it to the point that all you'd get out of it would be the "dn't".

If writing, Kipling would have used 'hadn't' so that must be correct.  (Ref: Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun and they have not.)

Smiley

Actually it's interesting for syntactic reasons. "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (a job)". You deleted "a job" because it can be understood from context, and linguists call this "ellipsis". The interesting thing is that I'm sure you wouldn't say "she hadn't a job" but rather "she didn't have a job", so the elided phrase makes me expect "didn't": "I reminded her who had a job and who didn't (have a job)".

Maybe I should have read it as "I reminded her who had a job and who hadn't (had a job)" though that doesn't seem right in context.

Anyway, I have a friend who's working on just these kinds of constructions. I might tell him about this one. Wink

OK enough linguistics geekery.

From a self-analysis point of view (take it for what it's worth), I did drop the second "a job" because it seemed useless (all in the back of my mind with no conscious forethought) but wanted the had/had not to agree.  Saying "who had a job and who didn't" just seems komisch to me.  I would have used didn't if I'd said "who did have a job and who didn't" because then the dids would agree, but I would typically only say "who did have a job" if I wanted to emphasize the point.

I used to love non-American speaking people correcting my American abroad. Negation they had a terrible time with. The English were some of the worst.

You'd've thunk they'd've long learnt the tongue of their betters.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Anastasia1
My warrior name is Beyoncé Pad Thai
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Occasionally traveling, Armenian.
Posts: 1,193



« Reply #1055 on: April 06, 2013, 03:37:23 AM »

[deleted]
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 03:42:49 AM by Anastasia1 » Logged

Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation. (2 Cor 2:6)
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1056 on: April 06, 2013, 07:40:39 PM »

I have a question that may be inappropriate, but, if as Orthodox Christians we are only allowed to have sex when we are married, how do we know if a woman will be "good" in bed when we marry? I mean, what if you marry someone who does not satisfy you and has no intention of working with you to satisfy each other, and you go forever sexually dissatisfied?
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1057 on: April 06, 2013, 09:33:17 PM »

I have a question that may be inappropriate, but, if as Orthodox Christians we are only allowed to have sex when we are married, how do we know if a woman will be "good" in bed when we marry? I mean, what if you marry someone who does not satisfy you and has no intention of working with you to satisfy each other, and you go forever sexually dissatisfied?

What do you mean by "sexually dissatisfied"?
Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #1058 on: April 06, 2013, 09:50:08 PM »

I have a question that may be inappropriate, but, if as Orthodox Christians we are only allowed to have sex when we are married, how do we know if a woman will be "good" in bed when we marry? I mean, what if you marry someone who does not satisfy you and has no intention of working with you to satisfy each other, and you go forever sexually dissatisfied?

You treat your wife like a wife, not like a car.
Logged

Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1059 on: April 06, 2013, 10:49:43 PM »

If you go into marriage thinking that you are meant to "perform" for her, and she for you, then you have the wrong idea.

Forget what our culture is saying about "sexual compatibility", your "sexual needs", the need for "sexual fulfillment". It's just a particularly pernicious form of consumerism; the media is making you want things you don't need (again). For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Just don't go there. Stay away from dating advice sites, the "manosphere", pick-up artists, and all that nonsense.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1060 on: April 06, 2013, 10:57:46 PM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1061 on: April 06, 2013, 11:11:12 PM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for fornication. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 11:11:58 PM by Jonathan Gress » Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1062 on: April 06, 2013, 11:13:47 PM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for adultery. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #1063 on: April 06, 2013, 11:14:25 PM »

Paging LBK on the original Greek for fornication.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1064 on: April 06, 2013, 11:22:02 PM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for adultery. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.

If you want to be a smart-ass about this, go ahead; it's your conscience. I think you know perfectly well how inappropriate you're being.

Your wife is not an object whose purpose is to provide you with sensual pleasure. Being "good in bed" is not a criterion for choosing a spouse in Orthodoxy. That should be the end of it.

And the Greek is porneia, which can mean sexual immorality of various kinds. Obviously, in the context of divorce, it means sleeping with another's husband. You can call it fornication (the traditional KJV translation), you can call it adultery. It means the same thing. You're not smart for nit-picking over irrelevant semantic distinctions.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1065 on: April 06, 2013, 11:36:50 PM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for adultery. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.

If you want to be a smart-ass about this, go ahead; it's your conscience. I think you know perfectly well how inappropriate you're being.

Your wife is not an object whose purpose is to provide you with sensual pleasure. Being "good in bed" is not a criterion for choosing a spouse in Orthodoxy. That should be the end of it.

And the Greek is porneia, which can mean sexual immorality of various kinds. Obviously, in the context of divorce, it means sleeping with another's husband. You can call it fornication (the traditional KJV translation), you can call it adultery. It means the same thing. You're not smart for nit-picking over irrelevant semantic distinctions.

But it is a big distinction. It's not "irrelevant." What if we've got it wrong the entire time? Adultery means to have sex with a married person, fornication usually means with an unmarried person. The Bible speaks very clearly about the former, but never really about the latter.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #1066 on: April 06, 2013, 11:40:47 PM »

The Bible says lots of things about sexual relations that you probably don't want to get into if you're looking for a loophole to commit sexual sins...
Logged

Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,567



« Reply #1067 on: April 07, 2013, 01:04:33 AM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for adultery. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.

If you want to be a smart-ass about this, go ahead; it's your conscience. I think you know perfectly well how inappropriate you're being.

Your wife is not an object whose purpose is to provide you with sensual pleasure. Being "good in bed" is not a criterion for choosing a spouse in Orthodoxy. That should be the end of it.

And the Greek is porneia, which can mean sexual immorality of various kinds. Obviously, in the context of divorce, it means sleeping with another's husband. You can call it fornication (the traditional KJV translation), you can call it adultery. It means the same thing. You're not smart for nit-picking over irrelevant semantic distinctions.

But it is a big distinction. It's not "irrelevant." What if we've got it wrong the entire time? Adultery means to have sex with a married person, fornication usually means with an unmarried person. The Bible speaks very clearly about the former, but never really about the latter.

You know, what you really need to do is go to a farm supply store and purchase an automatic milking machine.  Then go lock yourself in a closet with it until you reach 50 years old.  THEN go look for a wife.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,968


When in doubt, you lack the proper φρόνημα


« Reply #1068 on: April 07, 2013, 01:35:56 AM »

I have a question that may be inappropriate, but, if as Orthodox Christians we are only allowed to have sex when we are married, how do we know if a woman will be "good" in bed when we marry? I mean, what if you marry someone who does not satisfy you and has no intention of working with you to satisfy each other, and you go forever sexually dissatisfied?
James,

That's not really how sex works.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.
Fornication is a translation of porneia.

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history
James. For the umpteenth time...

It wasn't.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2013, 01:37:36 AM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,458


« Reply #1069 on: April 07, 2013, 09:51:33 AM »

...For thousands of years people have managed to live and reproduce successfully without worrying about these notions.

Oh really?

Then how come most of the world was polygamous for most of human history and even the Torah allowed a man to give his wife a permit and divorce her for whatever reason--which certainly could have included not being good in bed.

When you first broached the topic, you wondered if it was inappropriate. What made you ask that? There may be a clue in there.

Hint: Christ specifically forbade us from divorcing our wives, except for adultery. I.e. Moses' divorce law is no longer valid.

Fix'd Smiley The Bible NEVER condemned fornication.

If you want to be a smart-ass about this, go ahead; it's your conscience. I think you know perfectly well how inappropriate you're being.

Your wife is not an object whose purpose is to provide you with sensual pleasure. Being "good in bed" is not a criterion for choosing a spouse in Orthodoxy. That should be the end of it.

And the Greek is porneia, which can mean sexual immorality of various kinds. Obviously, in the context of divorce, it means sleeping with another's husband. You can call it fornication (the traditional KJV translation), you can call it adultery. It means the same thing. You're not smart for nit-picking over irrelevant semantic distinctions.

But it is a big distinction. It's not "irrelevant." What if we've got it wrong the entire time? Adultery means to have sex with a married person, fornication usually means with an unmarried person. The Bible speaks very clearly about the former, but never really about the latter.

Forgive me, James, I should not have used that tone with you. I understand that our culture puts so much emphasis on this nebulous concept of "sexual compatibility", so it's understandable that you would ask this question. But rest assured that this is not something we are supposed to be concerned about as Orthodox Christians. We should be very careful about taking our cues for life from our surrounding secular culture.

"sexual compatibility" implies "trying out" different partners to find the one that "meets your needs". But don't you think this is completely unnecessary? Sex is something you will be able to work out in time with your wife. If you both truly love each other, this is not going to be an issue. It's not like you're going into the adult industry where you have to "perform" from the start. You don't need to "practice" on other people.
Logged
Anastasia1
My warrior name is Beyoncé Pad Thai
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Occasionally traveling, Armenian.
Posts: 1,193



« Reply #1070 on: April 07, 2013, 02:15:29 PM »

From what little I know from others/sources, being good in bed can be learned.
Logged

Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation. (2 Cor 2:6)
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #1071 on: April 07, 2013, 03:02:52 PM »

From what little I know from others/sources, being good in bed can be learned.
lol I would say no.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,968


When in doubt, you lack the proper φρόνημα


« Reply #1072 on: April 07, 2013, 03:28:27 PM »

From what little I know from others/sources, being good in bed can be learned.
lol I would say no.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,687



« Reply #1073 on: April 08, 2013, 09:30:07 AM »

From what little I know from others/sources, being good in bed can be learned.
lol I would say no.

Being married for 10 yrs now and both my wife and I were virgins when we were married, I would say yes.  It is like anything else, you practice and get better at it.  Both my wife and I are much more satisfied with "marital relations" now than we were at the beginning.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2013, 09:31:45 AM by TheTrisagion » Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,491


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #1074 on: April 11, 2013, 02:30:35 PM »

Orthonorm, what would you have done if you would have been asked out by two different girls?
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1075 on: April 11, 2013, 02:36:32 PM »

Orthonorm, what would you have done if you would have been asked out by two different girls?

Try to have them both come with me on a date and brag to all my friends about it  Wink
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,567


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #1076 on: April 11, 2013, 02:48:24 PM »

actually that's the best advice!
you should all go out and become friends, maybe invite some other people too.
then once you all know each other well, you can see if either of the 2 ladies is someone you would like to persue a romantic relationship with.

is orthonorm around?
 Cool
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #1077 on: April 11, 2013, 02:55:40 PM »

nvm
« Last Edit: April 11, 2013, 03:12:31 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
ironchapman
A bull of truth in the china shop of falsehoods.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Serious inquirer into Orthodoxy.
Posts: 782



« Reply #1078 on: May 16, 2013, 03:19:00 AM »

Bump, because my dating/romantic life is still nonexistent, and I need to commiserate with people/rectify this.
Logged

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell
adampjr
Karamazov
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 89


Penguin


« Reply #1079 on: May 16, 2013, 03:38:44 AM »

I have a question that may be inappropriate, but, if as Orthodox Christians we are only allowed to have sex when we are married, how do we know if a woman will be "good" in bed when we marry? I mean, what if you marry someone who does not satisfy you and has no intention of working with you to satisfy each other, and you go forever sexually dissatisfied?

I know I'm just catachumen here, but that is not exactly an 'if' for Orthodox Christians, unless I am woefully misinformed.

As to your question, it is very easy to know a if a woman will be 'good' in bed when you marry. If she's following the same moral as you, she emphatically won't be, and neither will you. Nonetheless you will both very likely be satisfied in spite of that, and like any other activity, 'skill' (if we want to look at it this way) increases with time and even remotely regular performance.

I only had sex when I was married, and I promise that such concerns that you raise are not really an issue.
Logged
Tags: orthonorm 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.155 seconds with 71 queries.