OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 23, 2014, 07:05:08 AM *
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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: dating question  (Read 10576 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,317



« Reply #45 on: July 01, 2013, 10:45:28 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #46 on: July 01, 2013, 05:08:53 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.

Apparently, no one informed you of the purpose for "dating".  You can get to know someone without "dating" them.  But what do I know?  I have only been married almost 18 years to the woman who was my best friend before we started actually dating (and still is) and ruined a lot of good friendships doing what you apparently want to do prior to that.  
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 05:11:35 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #47 on: July 01, 2013, 05:17:13 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

Only you know what is a potential mate for you.  Everyone has different things they need in a mate.  What works for you may not work for anyone else.  Six years, thats all?  I have a good friend who didn’t marry until 35 after several of her boyfriends, including one fiancé, turned out to be real shmucks.  My advice to her was my advice to you.  Stop forcing it and wait for God.  She is extremely happy now with a daughter.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #48 on: July 01, 2013, 05:50:30 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 05:50:40 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,902


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #49 on: July 01, 2013, 06:35:42 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #50 on: July 01, 2013, 06:46:33 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?

Not just an opinion of mine, BTW.

Someone else said opposite sexes can't have close friendships.  False. 
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 06:48:48 PM by Kerdy » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,902


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #51 on: July 01, 2013, 07:36:20 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,059


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #52 on: July 01, 2013, 08:10:34 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.

« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 08:12:26 PM 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.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #53 on: July 01, 2013, 09:24:42 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #54 on: July 01, 2013, 09:52:39 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Sure they do.  I read it here everyday.

As for my response to her her reply, there is a difference between sincerely seeking the right answer and simply looking for confirmation of what one wants.  Of course, I can't read her mind, but from her reply it seems the latter may be the case.  Only she knows for certain.  In any event, when one asks for others advice, one must be prepared to hear (or read) that advice even if they do not like it.  They also should not cast disparaging judgment of that advice when it clearly has worked (and complies with what we are instructed to do) for so many people.  Bottom line is, it's her choice.  Now she has a different perspective outside of, "do ya wanna have sex with one of them?".
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 09:58:28 PM by Kerdy » Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,317



« Reply #55 on: July 02, 2013, 07:59:32 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,955



« Reply #56 on: July 02, 2013, 09:08:27 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #57 on: July 02, 2013, 09:15:39 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.

I have multiple female friends who are very attractive and I would not "shag" any of them.  I value the friendship more the desires of the flesh.  Friendships can last a lifetime.  Why destory the possibilities?

Besides, why worry what someone thought after they proclaimed the death of God? 
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 09:19:12 AM by Kerdy » Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,955



« Reply #58 on: July 02, 2013, 09:21:24 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.

I have multiple female friends who are very attractive and I would not "shag" any of them.  I value the friendship more the desires of the flesh.  Friendships can last a lifetime.  Why destory the possibilities?

Besides, why worry what someone thought after they proclaimed the death of God? 

Were these attractive goils before or after you were married?
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #59 on: July 02, 2013, 09:22:38 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.

I have multiple female friends who are very attractive and I would not "shag" any of them.  I value the friendship more the desires of the flesh.  Friendships can last a lifetime.  Why destory the possibilities?

Besides, why worry what someone thought after they proclaimed the death of God? 

Were these attractive goils before or after you were married?

Both.  Again, who cares what a man thinks after he has denied the existance of God?  Not me.
Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,317



« Reply #60 on: July 02, 2013, 09:24:06 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.
No, I had no desire to shag them, but that doesn't mean I found them revolting or distasteful on some level. If you think about it, Nietzsche's quote is kind of dumb. You could say the same thing about male friendship or any relationship really.  

"In order for my relationship to continue with my cat without it becoming romantic, it has to have a degree of physical antipathy."

Is it really just some underlying sense of revulsion that keeps my relationship with female friends, male friends, animals on a platonic level? I would like to think that humans have been given a level of control by God that enables us to form relational connections without feeling the need to bang it.  Of course, Nietzsche did consider that restraining factor, so perhaps he was open to explore his more animalistic urges...
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,955



« Reply #61 on: July 02, 2013, 10:06:55 AM »

T&K,

If Nietzsche said that the sky was blue on a sunny say I would find it hard to disagree with him.

Physical antipathy doesn't mean revulsion, per se, it is just a lack of sexual desire.  It is probably easy for you to maintain a platonic relationship with your cat.  Imagine screwing it for a second.  Do you feel revolted now?  There are plenty of people out there that I love but the thought of having sex with them is revolting.  If you are married and you deeply love your wife the thought of having sex with another woman, any woman from Janet Reno to Angelina Jolie, might cause a visceral reaction for you.

But any relationship between two people who are sexually attracted to one another will never be truly platonic.  That is why I say that a guy being stuck in the friendzone is only a temporary arrangement.  If the guy is unable to secure her attraction he will likely find a replacement, and I think the relationship between the two will last about 20 seconds give or take after finding the replacement.

Also, people overuse the word 'friend'.  Some of these friends of yours are more likely acquaintances.  It is easy to maintain an acquaintanceship with someone of the opposite sex that you would theoretically mount but would probably never act on the urge (or even give it much thought).   
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #62 on: July 02, 2013, 10:20:23 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

we can agree to disagree on this Trisagion. I will not go into discussing the particulars of such experience but the friendship I was talking about was not your average part of the gang, you are my buddy we hang out with the occasional shared life situation between us. no that is not the closeness I had in mind. the friendship I was talking about is , the kind where I know your darkest secrets, your deepest flaws, your dreams and hopes, the kind where it is me and you against the world in this century we live in. the kind where I know what you are thinking about a situation without you having to explain yourself every single time. the kind where I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way, the kind where you will tick me off and I will tick you off but we make each other lough and inspired also. in that kind of closeness especially between single and available men and women.. the romantic element naturally manifests if not from both side at least from one and that complicates things even if they are not acted upon.IMO unrequited romantic love finds its best thriving ground in such type of friendships.

like I said we can agree to disagree on this. and also there are always exceptions if not necessarily strictly due to what the philosopher said but for whatever reason it may be exceptions exist. if you are one of those who had such kind of special friendship and both of you are the exceptions then I am happy for you.



Profanity replaced with something more acceptable  -PtA
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 12:02:13 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,317



« Reply #63 on: July 02, 2013, 10:23:34 AM »

Here is the Nietzsche quote:
"A woman may very well form a friendship with a man, but for this to endure, it must be assisted by a little physical antipathy."

I agree with you that I can maintain a friendship with a woman as long as there is no sexual desire, but that is not what Nietzsche is saying. Obviously, if I started having sexual desires towards my female friends, I would need to take a step away from those friendships as I am a married man. Nietzsche is saying, however, that there has to be some level of physical revulsion towards that person in order for the friendship to be maintained which I do not agree with. In other words, men can only be friends with ugly women.  Pretty women cannot have platonic male friends unless the man is gay.

an·tip·a·thy  
/anˈtipəTHē/Noun
A deep-seated feeling of dislike; aversion.
 
 
Synonyms
aversion - dislike - repugnance - distaste - repulsion
 
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,955



« Reply #64 on: July 02, 2013, 10:29:17 AM »

He might have been using a bit of exaggeration to make a point.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,317



« Reply #65 on: July 02, 2013, 10:32:12 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

we can agree to disagree on this Trisagion. I will not go into discussing the particulars of such experience but the friendship I was talking about was not your average part of the gang, you are my buddy we hang out with the occasional shared life situation between us. no that is not the closeness I had in mind. the friendship I was talking about is , the kind where I know your darkest secrets, your deepest flaws, your dreams and hopes, the kind where it is me and you against the world in this century we live in. the kind where I know what you are thinking about a situation without you having to explain yourself every single time. the kind where I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way, the kind where you will piss me off and I will piss you off but we make each other lough and inspired also. in that kind of closeness especially between single and available men and women.. the romantic element naturally manifests if not from both side at least from one and that complicates things even if they are not acted upon.IMO unrequited romantic love finds its best thriving ground in such type of friendships.

like I said we can agree to disagree on this. and also there are always exceptions if not necessarily strictly due to what the philosopher said but for whatever reason it may be exceptions exist. if you are one of those who had such kind of special friendship and both of you are the exceptions then I am happy for you.
I suppose the perspective that I come from would be female friends that were also friends of my now-wife.  Several of them I was very close to and I would talk about my frustrations regarding my now-wife's rebuffing of my overtures towards her (which is a whole other story Tongue). I did not find them to be unattractive, but there was someone else (my wife) that I was attracted to and that superceded any thoughts that I would possibly have of dating them. I was/am also very good friends with my college friend's girlfriend and we continue to be close friends to this day.  I have never considered the prospect of any romantic involvement with her, but I would have no problems having very personal conversations with her. In my mind, it is all just a matter of making sure you know what is and what is not permissible and not entertaining thoughts that could compromise that.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #66 on: July 02, 2013, 10:44:00 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

we can agree to disagree on this Trisagion. I will not go into discussing the particulars of such experience but the friendship I was talking about was not your average part of the gang, you are my buddy we hang out with the occasional shared life situation between us. no that is not the closeness I had in mind. the friendship I was talking about is , the kind where I know your darkest secrets, your deepest flaws, your dreams and hopes, the kind where it is me and you against the world in this century we live in. the kind where I know what you are thinking about a situation without you having to explain yourself every single time. the kind where I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way, the kind where you will piss me off and I will piss you off but we make each other lough and inspired also. in that kind of closeness especially between single and available men and women.. the romantic element naturally manifests if not from both side at least from one and that complicates things even if they are not acted upon.IMO unrequited romantic love finds its best thriving ground in such type of friendships.

like I said we can agree to disagree on this. and also there are always exceptions if not necessarily strictly due to what the philosopher said but for whatever reason it may be exceptions exist. if you are one of those who had such kind of special friendship and both of you are the exceptions then I am happy for you.
I suppose the perspective that I come from would be female friends that were also friends of my now-wife.  Several of them I was very close to and I would talk about my frustrations regarding my now-wife's rebuffing of my overtures towards her (which is a whole other story Tongue). I did not find them to be unattractive, but there was someone else (my wife) that I was attracted to and that superceded any thoughts that I would possibly have of dating them. I was/am also very good friends with my college friend's girlfriend and we continue to be close friends to this day.  I have never considered the prospect of any romantic involvement with her, but I would have no problems having very personal conversations with her. In my mind, it is all just a matter of making sure you know what is and what is not permissible and not entertaining thoughts that could compromise that.

when you say you did not find them unattractive, you might be describing in a generic sense, but we are talking about a situation where there is a potential to be actively romantically attracted to someone you already love and trust on a different level. besides it does not necessarily mean both will feel the attraction, one might and the other will not, still that element of romantic attraction thrives in such a situation because of the conducive environment it finds itself to manifest.

 
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,902


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #67 on: July 02, 2013, 11:57:15 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Sure they do.  I read it here everyday.
Yes, I've found that the forum is an excellent mirror of whatever you bring to it. Wink Do note, though, that I didn't ask you to share your thoughts on others' posting styles. I asked you about yours.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 11:58:38 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,382



WWW
« Reply #68 on: July 02, 2013, 12:05:43 PM »

I wouldn't advise anyone you don't know well and also, don't date someone you already know to want a different lifestyle. Marriage is more than living together, it's sharing a life. Noone can share a life with a person who has a different understanding of what life is. You may be next to the person and doing things in a harmonic way, but won't really be together.

The solution, then, is: get to know the guy with similar lifestyle better. Maybe, getting to know him closely will show that it's not as similar as it looked from afar, maybe you'll find out his the one.

Also, don't look at just lifestyle. People with certain vices may reinforce them in each other. What we must seek is someone who will share a life of mutual character and spiritual growth, along with the more prosaic aspects of attraction, fun, similar interests and so on, which are all important and necessary but secondary.

Is it better to date the guy who you are good friends with but wants a little more different life than you do or the guy you don't know well but who has similar life-style/life-style aspirations to what you want?
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #69 on: July 02, 2013, 01:54:31 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

I don't know much about dating since I only ever dated one person and that was my now wife.  The only thing I can say is focus on making friendships and getting to know people of the opposite sex. The most healthy marriages that I have ever seen came from the two people having a close friendship that developed into something more.  If that is the approach you take, Kerdy's point makes sense. Otherwise, if you just randomly go on dates with the intention of marrying the person, you are going to make yourself neurotic.

Heterosexuals of the opposite sex don't have close friendships outside of a romantic framework, unless there is, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.


I would have loved to disagree with him on this. I would be lying. no matter how sanitized one tries to make such friendships if they are really close that element creeps in and things get complicated. making purely platonic a false claim. situation acknowledged and managed ? yeah, but purely platonic? no.  it took me years to concede to this fact.
Huh?  I have numerous female friends that I have never considered to be even remotely romantic. My wife has several male friends that she is not interested in from a romantic context. Before I was married, I had a lot of female friends that I didn't consider as potential mates.

But would you have shagged them?  If they did not arouse you then, what did Neech say led to the exception to the rule, physical antipathy I believe it is.

I have multiple female friends who are very attractive and I would not "shag" any of them.  I value the friendship more the desires of the flesh.  Friendships can last a lifetime.  Why destory the possibilities?

Besides, why worry what someone thought after they proclaimed the death of God?  

You are assuming you know what friendship is.

The most persons someone can have as a friend is about three, if you are single.

Two maybe, if you married other than your spouse.

Good luck having any if you are being a parent.

All of the above assume having to spend the majority of your time working (wage slavery kills most of the wonderful things in life, hence the negative view of it by those who offered us the first notions of friendship). I would strongly suggest reading classical literature on friendship. I knew I was fighting a battle before anyone thought of facebook against the American notions of friendship.

Post facebook, forget about it.

If you would like to argue, I will if I find the time during my limited access here. I won't offer a proper definition but I will pose situations which friendship must include or allow the possiblity for having, then you tell me if you can engage in those behaviors or could with your "female friends".

Most Americans here are talking about close acquaintances or former friends removed by circumstance, time, or place.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 01:56:39 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #70 on: July 02, 2013, 02:02:17 PM »

He might have been using a bit of exaggeration to make a point.

Not only have we lost the art of writing an aphorism, but reading one as well.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #71 on: July 02, 2013, 02:07:29 PM »

the friendship I was talking about is , the kind where I know your darkest secrets, your deepest flaws, your dreams and hopes, the kind where it is me and you against the world in this century we live in. the kind where I know what you are thinking about a situation without you having to explain yourself every single time. the kind where I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way, the kind where you will tick me off and I will tick you off but we make each other lough and inspired also. in that kind of closeness especially between single and available men and women.. the romantic element naturally manifests if not from both side at least from one and that complicates things even if they are not acted upon.IMO unrequited romantic love finds its best thriving ground in such type of friendships.

Here you go, I don't have to do any work. Hiwot and I are pretty much on the same page.

Have I had such relations with women? Yes. I would say I am even more capable of do so than most men, the wy wherefores of that capacity belong within the confines of the therapists office. However, no matter how explicit nor upfront I've been about my intentions and how I understand friendship . . .

It.
Has.
Never.
Worked.

Never.

Much to my grave disappointment. As the pain from the loss of a friend stings greater than any other loss I can image, save perhaps that of one's child. The latter being a loss I've been spared.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,382



WWW
« Reply #72 on: July 02, 2013, 02:22:32 PM »

Quote
I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way,

That is what makes it never work. God, who is our model of love does *not* love us in that way. He sees our flaws and He desires these flaws end. He hates them in fact, although He loves us.

I know where you guys are coming from, because I felt that need as well, and that never worked as well. And it doesn't work because it simply is not love. It is beeing needy and with low self-steem, to accept that other people abuse us with their sins just so we can have permission to abuse them with ours.

True love understands that we will not be perfect but is not lenient with our limitations nor finds them "cute" or "charming" or "humane". If it's a sin, it's gotta go, to the best of our strength. We have to love growing and to see the beloved grow as well.
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,382



WWW
« Reply #73 on: July 02, 2013, 02:36:04 PM »

Romantic love falls in the second part of "Love God above everything else, and your neighbor like yourself", since the espouse is one of the kinds of neighbor.

That means that we have to love God *more* than the romantic interest and that we will love the romantic interest only if we know what loving ourselves is.

And to learn what loving ourselves is, we have to understand how is it that God loves. It's not unconditional, it's not something that allows the other part to act in whichever way he/she is. God accept us as we are as a first step (He loved us even when we hated Him). Then He demands repenting, and then at least struggle against our limitations and sins so we get as close as possible to purity.

There is no real love of ourselves in the comfort zone. Love is struggle to become better, hate toward what puts us away from that. If we love ourselves like that, then we can love our neighbor (among whom our wife/husband) like ourselves: the person will not demand that we accept vices and sins and limitations as "just how I am". And we will not do that to the person. We will not cultivate and support each other limitations and vices under the excuse that "I love you just they way you are, I don't want you to change". On the contrary, love wants change passionately, just like God wants to turn to Him with fiery love. Real love is never unconditional.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 02:37:12 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,902


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #74 on: July 02, 2013, 07:45:06 PM »

Romantic love falls in the second part of "Love God above everything else, and your neighbor like yourself", since the espouse is one of the kinds of neighbor.
Actually, the second commandment is "love your neighbor AS yourself." NOT "love your neighbor as you love yourself" or "love your neighbor like yourself". This difference in how you quote the commandment and how it's actually written is a very important distinction. You are not to love your neighbor because you love yourself. You are not taught that you must love yourself first so you can know how to love your neighbor. Rather, the Gospel teaches you that you are to love your neighbor because your neighbor IS yourself.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #75 on: July 02, 2013, 08:32:59 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Sure they do.  I read it here everyday.
Yes, I've found that the forum is an excellent mirror of whatever you bring to it. Wink Do note, though, that I didn't ask you to share your thoughts on others' posting styles. I asked you about yours.
To which I answered.  If your mirror comment was a sort of attempt to suggest I explore myself, rest assured I do, probably more than most.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 08:34:09 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #76 on: July 02, 2013, 08:55:38 PM »

Quote
I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way,

That is what makes it never work. God, who is our model of love does *not* love us in that way. He sees our flaws and He desires these flaws end. He hates them in fact, although He loves us.

I know where you guys are coming from, because I felt that need as well, and that never worked as well. And it doesn't work because it simply is not love. It is beeing needy and with low self-steem, to accept that other people abuse us with their sins just so we can have permission to abuse them with ours.

True love understands that we will not be perfect but is not lenient with our limitations nor finds them "cute" or "charming" or "humane". If it's a sin, it's gotta go, to the best of our strength. We have to love growing and to see the beloved grow as well.

Fabio, I dont know how you read sin into being human or how that is described as a codependent relationship encouraging a a downright cycle of abuse and complacency. but in case you went by the common saying of people when they describe what sometimes is a sin as being human then all that explains your explanation although even in your explanation there is the truth that God loves the person even if that person is flawed and God desires that flaw to be healed.i am a sinner it is a fact,the one i will call a friend would love me the person regardless of the state of brokenness i find myself. that does not necessarily mean my friend thinks my sins are cute or humane, it simply means my friend loves me.even if my friend hates my sins and desires for me to abandon them because they will harm me.my perfection is not the condition for my friend's love for me. furthermore let me point out what i had in mind when i said utterly human in addition to what i have said already.

there are friendships that are only about having fun, putting up a front that you got it all figured out, that you do not go through times of emotional, physical,psychological or economic trials. i lose someone who means the world to me i go into a deep sadness and behave like the world has come to an end, would you be my friend then and with your love guide me into the light and sooth my pain? i loose my health and strength  that would also make me loose my dignity would you be there as my friend. my dreams are foiled and i feel lost and in pain, and in that pain i am not as nice as i used to be would you have the strength to love me then? can you be the one who i do not have to hide my wounds from?.....

living life in this fallen world is not easy, love accepts the person,corrects what can be corrected,strengthens the weakened, inspires and elevates into the sublime. only love can do such things because love is the only one that braves the fires of hell to rescue and embrace in its light, the person trapped in them.
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,902


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #77 on: July 02, 2013, 09:58:03 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Sure they do.  I read it here everyday.
Yes, I've found that the forum is an excellent mirror of whatever you bring to it. Wink Do note, though, that I didn't ask you to share your thoughts on others' posting styles. I asked you about yours.
To which I answered.
No, you just told me about why other people post here.

If your mirror comment was a sort of attempt to suggest I explore myself, rest assured I do, probably more than most.
Getting boastful now, are we?
Logged
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,382



WWW
« Reply #78 on: July 02, 2013, 10:10:25 PM »

I think we need more punctuation there. Not trying to be mean or anything, it just really made it more difficult to read.

To address this, I have to go back to the discussion above about loving yourself. There lies the whole problem. I was retranslating from Portuguese, where the same preposition "como" is used for the prepositions "like" and "as". I don't know what the Greek original is.

But, even if it is the exact same meaning in "as yourself", I think it is forcing a strict distinction that is pointless here. To love the other you still have to know "yourself" and you don't really know something you don't love. I see a very clear distinction between selfishness and egotism and a person loving him/herself. The first is idolatry. But if you don't know who you are - and again, knowing requires love first - if you don't understand what being a person is in the very specific and concrete context of you, I doubt you will be able to know or love anyone. I always doubt "spiritual" people who show a lack of self-knowledge, of perception of who they are, their place in society and their impact on other people.

An analogy is very clarifying here. It is well established that the person who chooses a monastic life out of despise for marriage is in sin - not unlike those who live married and despise monastic life. The sacrifice the monk does only has value if he understands the high value of what he is sacrificing, just like married people should understand what it is that they are missing by not having a monastic life.

We are called to sacrifice our lives for love of God. Just like in the situation above, it only has value if we understand the value of that which we are sacrificing, something that you...love. Love is not possessive, so real love of oneself is not possessive, egotistical. You don't want to be the master of yourself because in your love for you, you understand that God's sovereignity is what is best for you. If you don't understand that you need a hug sometimes, or kind words, and if you never desired this to yourself out of love, how will you understand that this must be given to those who need it? That's the difference between throwing some coins in a tin and going to the supermarket and buying not only a bread and some water, but some cookies, some hygene items, maybe ham and sausages. If you never wanted it for yourself you'll hardly notice that those in need also want it. Compassion is not only feelling the pain of others, but also feelling the love that God has for you.

Quote
I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way,

That is what makes it never work. God, who is our model of love does *not* love us in that way. He sees our flaws and He desires these flaws end. He hates them in fact, although He loves us.

I know where you guys are coming from, because I felt that need as well, and that never worked as well. And it doesn't work because it simply is not love. It is beeing needy and with low self-steem, to accept that other people abuse us with their sins just so we can have permission to abuse them with ours.

True love understands that we will not be perfect but is not lenient with our limitations nor finds them "cute" or "charming" or "humane". If it's a sin, it's gotta go, to the best of our strength. We have to love growing and to see the beloved grow as well.

Fabio, I dont know how you read sin into being human or how that is described as a codependent relationship encouraging a a downright cycle of abuse and complacency. but in case you went by the common saying of people when they describe what sometimes is a sin as being human then all that explains your explanation although even in your explanation there is the truth that God loves the person even if that person is flawed and God desires that flaw to be healed.i am a sinner it is a fact,the one i will call a friend would love me the person regardless of the state of brokenness i find myself. that does not necessarily mean my friend thinks my sins are cute or humane, it simply means my friend loves me.even if my friend hates my sins and desires for me to abandon them because they will harm me.my perfection is not the condition for my friend's love for me. furthermore let me point out what i had in mind when i said utterly human in addition to what i have said already.

there are friendships that are only about having fun, putting up a front that you got it all figured out, that you do not go through times of emotional, physical,psychological or economic trials. i lose someone who means the world to me i go into a deep sadness and behave like the world has come to an end, would you be my friend then and with your love guide me into the light and sooth my pain? i loose my health and strength  that would also make me loose my dignity would you be there as my friend. my dreams are foiled and i feel lost and in pain, and in that pain i am not as nice as i used to be would you have the strength to love me then? can you be the one who i do not have to hide my wounds from?.....

living life in this fallen world is not easy, love accepts the person,corrects what can be corrected,strengthens the weakened, inspires and elevates into the sublime. only love can do such things because love is the only one that braves the fires of hell to rescue and embrace in its light, the person trapped in them.
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #79 on: July 03, 2013, 12:33:11 AM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?
Doesn't everyone?
No, but you seem to.
Sure they do.  I read it here everyday.
Yes, I've found that the forum is an excellent mirror of whatever you bring to it. Wink Do note, though, that I didn't ask you to share your thoughts on others' posting styles. I asked you about yours.
To which I answered.
No, you just told me about why other people post here.

If your mirror comment was a sort of attempt to suggest I explore myself, rest assured I do, probably more than most.
Getting boastful now, are we?

 Roll Eyes
Logged
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #80 on: July 03, 2013, 09:51:44 AM »

I think we need more punctuation there. Not trying to be mean or anything, it just really made it more difficult to read.

To address this, I have to go back to the discussion above about loving yourself. There lies the whole problem. I was retranslating from Portuguese, where the same preposition "como" is used for the prepositions "like" and "as". I don't know what the Greek original is.

But, even if it is the exact same meaning in "as yourself", I think it is forcing a strict distinction that is pointless here. To love the other you still have to know "yourself" and you don't really know something you don't love. I see a very clear distinction between selfishness and egotism and a person loving him/herself. The first is idolatry. But if you don't know who you are - and again, knowing requires love first - if you don't understand what being a person is in the very specific and concrete context of you, I doubt you will be able to know or love anyone. I always doubt "spiritual" people who show a lack of self-knowledge, of perception of who they are, their place in society and their impact on other people.

An analogy is very clarifying here. It is well established that the person who chooses a monastic life out of despise for marriage is in sin - not unlike those who live married and despise monastic life. The sacrifice the monk does only has value if he understands the high value of what he is sacrificing, just like married people should understand what it is that they are missing by not having a monastic life.

We are called to sacrifice our lives for love of God. Just like in the situation above, it only has value if we understand the value of that which we are sacrificing, something that you...love. Love is not possessive, so real love of oneself is not possessive, egotistical. You don't want to be the master of yourself because in your love for you, you understand that God's sovereignity is what is best for you. If you don't understand that you need a hug sometimes, or kind words, and if you never desired this to yourself out of love, how will you understand that this must be given to those who need it? That's the difference between throwing some coins in a tin and going to the supermarket and buying not only a bread and some water, but some cookies, some hygene items, maybe ham and sausages. If you never wanted it for yourself you'll hardly notice that those in need also want it. Compassion is not only feelling the pain of others, but also feelling the love that God has for you.

Quote
I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way,

That is what makes it never work. God, who is our model of love does *not* love us in that way. He sees our flaws and He desires these flaws end. He hates them in fact, although He loves us.

I know where you guys are coming from, because I felt that need as well, and that never worked as well. And it doesn't work because it simply is not love. It is beeing needy and with low self-steem, to accept that other people abuse us with their sins just so we can have permission to abuse them with ours.

True love understands that we will not be perfect but is not lenient with our limitations nor finds them "cute" or "charming" or "humane". If it's a sin, it's gotta go, to the best of our strength. We have to love growing and to see the beloved grow as well.

Fabio, I dont know how you read sin into being human or how that is described as a codependent relationship encouraging a a downright cycle of abuse and complacency. but in case you went by the common saying of people when they describe what sometimes is a sin as being human then all that explains your explanation although even in your explanation there is the truth that God loves the person even if that person is flawed and God desires that flaw to be healed.i am a sinner it is a fact,the one i will call a friend would love me the person regardless of the state of brokenness i find myself. that does not necessarily mean my friend thinks my sins are cute or humane, it simply means my friend loves me.even if my friend hates my sins and desires for me to abandon them because they will harm me.my perfection is not the condition for my friend's love for me. furthermore let me point out what i had in mind when i said utterly human in addition to what i have said already.

there are friendships that are only about having fun, putting up a front that you got it all figured out, that you do not go through times of emotional, physical,psychological or economic trials. i lose someone who means the world to me i go into a deep sadness and behave like the world has come to an end, would you be my friend then and with your love guide me into the light and sooth my pain? i loose my health and strength  that would also make me loose my dignity would you be there as my friend. my dreams are foiled and i feel lost and in pain, and in that pain i am not as nice as i used to be would you have the strength to love me then? can you be the one who i do not have to hide my wounds from?.....

living life in this fallen world is not easy, love accepts the person,corrects what can be corrected,strengthens the weakened, inspires and elevates into the sublime. only love can do such things because love is the only one that braves the fires of hell to rescue and embrace in its light, the person trapped in them.


Fabio, I am sorry for the way I wrote, I was in quite a hurry, but even if I was not in a hurry, my punctuation skills are very little to none. and let us not mention the rest of my grammatical , vocabulary, syntax blunders. i can only imagine the pain some of you must be experiencing reading my posts. i sincerely apologize, I will try to be coherent the best I can , which isn't much i know but that's all I have.

Fabio I read what you wrote more than twice, and I think it is the result of my bad writing skills that lead to your difficulty of reading my post because I found no specific correlation between the point I was making in my post and your reply.Therefore, I will leave that post alone.

So instead I read the discussion about loving yourself. In that post Peter makes a very crucial point, you argue it is forcing a distinction when there is none. but that is not true because there is a clear fundamental distinction, read what he wrote again and reflect. if we are talking about Divine Love, and its manifestation in us.. then Loving our neighbor as ourselves holds in it the kind of love God has for us. Our Lord when he comes back in Glory, he will say...I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was sick.... thus the Commandment given says love your neighbor as yourself because your neighbor IS yourself. the giver of the Law, Christ Loves like that. He identifies himself  even with the least among us.

Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,955



« Reply #81 on: July 03, 2013, 11:01:58 AM »



Fabio, I am sorry for the way I wrote, I was in quite a hurry, but even if I was not in a hurry, my punctuation skills are very little to none. and let us not mention the rest of my grammatical , vocabulary, syntax blunders. i can only imagine the pain some of you must be experiencing reading my posts. i sincerely apologize, I will try to be coherent the best I can , which isn't much i know but that's all I have.

Fabio I read what you wrote more than twice, and I think it is the result of my bad writing skills that lead to your difficulty of reading my post because I found no specific correlation between the point I was making in my post and your reply.Therefore, I will leave that post alone.

So instead I read the discussion about loving yourself. In that post Peter makes a very crucial point, you argue it is forcing a distinction when there is none. but that is not true because there is a clear fundamental distinction, read what he wrote again and reflect. if we are talking about Divine Love, and its manifestation in us.. then Loving our neighbor as ourselves holds in it the kind of love God has for us. Our Lord when he comes back in Glory, he will say...I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was sick.... thus the Commandment given says love your neighbor as yourself because your neighbor IS yourself. the giver of the Law, Christ Loves like that. He identifies himself  even with the least among us.



English isn't your first language.  You write better than many Americans I know, and you have an excuse for any errors.  I think Fabio should be able to understand this as it is not his first language either, or at least I thought it wasn't.  Then again, that may be some of the disagreement between you as you are translating it in your head from Amharic (?) into English which he then translates into Portuguese when he reads it!

Keep writing.  I always find it worthwhile reading it.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #82 on: July 03, 2013, 11:54:46 AM »



Fabio, I am sorry for the way I wrote, I was in quite a hurry, but even if I was not in a hurry, my punctuation skills are very little to none. and let us not mention the rest of my grammatical , vocabulary, syntax blunders. i can only imagine the pain some of you must be experiencing reading my posts. i sincerely apologize, I will try to be coherent the best I can , which isn't much i know but that's all I have.

Fabio I read what you wrote more than twice, and I think it is the result of my bad writing skills that lead to your difficulty of reading my post because I found no specific correlation between the point I was making in my post and your reply.Therefore, I will leave that post alone.

So instead I read the discussion about loving yourself. In that post Peter makes a very crucial point, you argue it is forcing a distinction when there is none. but that is not true because there is a clear fundamental distinction, read what he wrote again and reflect. if we are talking about Divine Love, and its manifestation in us.. then Loving our neighbor as ourselves holds in it the kind of love God has for us. Our Lord when he comes back in Glory, he will say...I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was sick.... thus the Commandment given says love your neighbor as yourself because your neighbor IS yourself. the giver of the Law, Christ Loves like that. He identifies himself  even with the least among us.



English isn't your first language.  You write better than many Americans I know, and you have an excuse for any errors.  I think Fabio should be able to understand this as it is not his first language either, or at least I thought it wasn't.  Then again, that may be some of the disagreement between you as you are translating it in your head from Amharic (?) into English which he then translates into Portuguese when he reads it!

Keep writing.  I always find it worthwhile reading it.

how kind you are! gentle and sweet my dear Vamrat. my gratitude for the encouragement. means a lot coming from you.
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,382



WWW
« Reply #83 on: July 03, 2013, 12:30:58 PM »

Well, I did not want to make this an linguistic discussion but since it seems important for you guys, let's go there.

It's true that in my first language, Portuguese, the preposition used ("como") can be translated into English as both "like" and "as".

So, let's address this from a mere philosophical point of view, from the English point of view and from the Greek point of view.

My main point is that *loving yourself* is the reference to which we know if we love others. Can we agree that loving means wishing Good to the beloved? That is of foremost importance.

The preposition "as" in English can be used in several different ways.

I believe it is used in the English Bible with these meanings:

Quote
4. used for referring to what someone or something does or how they appear
As managing director, I am expected to provide effective leadership.

a portrait of the princess as a child

An electric drill can also be used as a screwdriver.

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/as


"As" is used as a comparative both in the examples above and in "love your neighbor as yourself". Comparisons are used because you attribute to the unknown part, traits that exist in the known part.

Let's get some of the examples

"a portrait of the princess as a child".
You really can't have an idea of how the princess is being portrayed unless you know what a child is.

"An electric drill can also be used as a screwdriver."
Again, you are not informed of this new way of using an electric dill if you do not know what screwdriver is.

So, in "love your neighbor as yourself" if you don't know "yourself", if you don't know what's good for you, in other words, if you have no love for yourself, then you'll never know your neighbor (maybe just a character whom you impose over your neighbor), you'll never know what's good for him (maybe just impose on him what *you* feel he should find good), you'll never truly love him.

What Hiwot is reading there is not the preposition "as" itself, but a phrase that is not there by any means "as if he were", which is a completely different thing.

In fact, in Greek we have  Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. where "ós" is translated as... "like" or "as". (http://www.greekbible.com/index.php ), meaning the Portuguese preposition "como" keeps the ambiguity that the English translation is forced to ommit. Even if "as" had the sense of "as if he were" that Hiwot implies, and it does not, the original has that ambiguous meaning of both like and as.


I think we need more punctuation there. Not trying to be mean or anything, it just really made it more difficult to read.

To address this, I have to go back to the discussion above about loving yourself. There lies the whole problem. I was retranslating from Portuguese, where the same preposition "como" is used for the prepositions "like" and "as". I don't know what the Greek original is.

But, even if it is the exact same meaning in "as yourself", I think it is forcing a strict distinction that is pointless here. To love the other you still have to know "yourself" and you don't really know something you don't love. I see a very clear distinction between selfishness and egotism and a person loving him/herself. The first is idolatry. But if you don't know who you are - and again, knowing requires love first - if you don't understand what being a person is in the very specific and concrete context of you, I doubt you will be able to know or love anyone. I always doubt "spiritual" people who show a lack of self-knowledge, of perception of who they are, their place in society and their impact on other people.

An analogy is very clarifying here. It is well established that the person who chooses a monastic life out of despise for marriage is in sin - not unlike those who live married and despise monastic life. The sacrifice the monk does only has value if he understands the high value of what he is sacrificing, just like married people should understand what it is that they are missing by not having a monastic life.

We are called to sacrifice our lives for love of God. Just like in the situation above, it only has value if we understand the value of that which we are sacrificing, something that you...love. Love is not possessive, so real love of oneself is not possessive, egotistical. You don't want to be the master of yourself because in your love for you, you understand that God's sovereignity is what is best for you. If you don't understand that you need a hug sometimes, or kind words, and if you never desired this to yourself out of love, how will you understand that this must be given to those who need it? That's the difference between throwing some coins in a tin and going to the supermarket and buying not only a bread and some water, but some cookies, some hygene items, maybe ham and sausages. If you never wanted it for yourself you'll hardly notice that those in need also want it. Compassion is not only feelling the pain of others, but also feelling the love that God has for you.

Quote
I trust you to be completely utterly human and know you will love me any way,

That is what makes it never work. God, who is our model of love does *not* love us in that way. He sees our flaws and He desires these flaws end. He hates them in fact, although He loves us.

I know where you guys are coming from, because I felt that need as well, and that never worked as well. And it doesn't work because it simply is not love. It is beeing needy and with low self-steem, to accept that other people abuse us with their sins just so we can have permission to abuse them with ours.

True love understands that we will not be perfect but is not lenient with our limitations nor finds them "cute" or "charming" or "humane". If it's a sin, it's gotta go, to the best of our strength. We have to love growing and to see the beloved grow as well.

Fabio, I dont know how you read sin into being human or how that is described as a codependent relationship encouraging a a downright cycle of abuse and complacency. but in case you went by the common saying of people when they describe what sometimes is a sin as being human then all that explains your explanation although even in your explanation there is the truth that God loves the person even if that person is flawed and God desires that flaw to be healed.i am a sinner it is a fact,the one i will call a friend would love me the person regardless of the state of brokenness i find myself. that does not necessarily mean my friend thinks my sins are cute or humane, it simply means my friend loves me.even if my friend hates my sins and desires for me to abandon them because they will harm me.my perfection is not the condition for my friend's love for me. furthermore let me point out what i had in mind when i said utterly human in addition to what i have said already.

there are friendships that are only about having fun, putting up a front that you got it all figured out, that you do not go through times of emotional, physical,psychological or economic trials. i lose someone who means the world to me i go into a deep sadness and behave like the world has come to an end, would you be my friend then and with your love guide me into the light and sooth my pain? i loose my health and strength  that would also make me loose my dignity would you be there as my friend. my dreams are foiled and i feel lost and in pain, and in that pain i am not as nice as i used to be would you have the strength to love me then? can you be the one who i do not have to hide my wounds from?.....

living life in this fallen world is not easy, love accepts the person,corrects what can be corrected,strengthens the weakened, inspires and elevates into the sublime. only love can do such things because love is the only one that braves the fires of hell to rescue and embrace in its light, the person trapped in them.


Fabio, I am sorry for the way I wrote, I was in quite a hurry, but even if I was not in a hurry, my punctuation skills are very little to none. and let us not mention the rest of my grammatical , vocabulary, syntax blunders. i can only imagine the pain some of you must be experiencing reading my posts. i sincerely apologize, I will try to be coherent the best I can , which isn't much i know but that's all I have.

Fabio I read what you wrote more than twice, and I think it is the result of my bad writing skills that lead to your difficulty of reading my post because I found no specific correlation between the point I was making in my post and your reply.Therefore, I will leave that post alone.

So instead I read the discussion about loving yourself. In that post Peter makes a very crucial point, you argue it is forcing a distinction when there is none. but that is not true because there is a clear fundamental distinction, read what he wrote again and reflect. if we are talking about Divine Love, and its manifestation in us.. then Loving our neighbor as ourselves holds in it the kind of love God has for us. Our Lord when he comes back in Glory, he will say...I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was sick.... thus the Commandment given says love your neighbor as yourself because your neighbor IS yourself. the giver of the Law, Christ Loves like that. He identifies himself  even with the least among us.


« Last Edit: July 03, 2013, 12:33:30 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #84 on: July 03, 2013, 12:48:03 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever. Spat out by Christians and the like to sounds wise but never really answers what could be a good mate. (i.e. heard that one 40 times and followed it since 6 years before I had an opportunity to have a first date.)

Why is this bad advice?  What is your mission in dating?  Is it not to find a spouse?  I wouldn't waste my time, efforts, not to mention emotions on someone whom I didn't see as a future husband.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #85 on: July 03, 2013, 12:49:33 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?

I'm confused.  Are you suggesting she date men whom she has no intention of marrying?
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #86 on: July 03, 2013, 01:03:58 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?

I'm confused.  Are you suggesting she date men whom she has no intention of marrying?


Absolutely, I would suggest that. And furthermore I would suggest not dating anyone she has the intention of marrying.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #87 on: July 03, 2013, 01:05:34 PM »

Advice List:

1) Don’t take advice from those too young to give it out.

I agree.  It's best to ask advice of those who have a bit of experience, and are not stuck in the "puppy love" phase.  Wink

2) Don’t take advice from someone who immediately asks sexual or sensual questions.  That isn't what it's all about.

VERY true.  Don't repeat a date with someone who does this, as well.


3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?

I've agreed to this in a previous post.  It's a waste of time and pointless to be "dating" if you aren't potentially going to marry the individual.  If you are, it's not dating, but, hanging out with your friends.  Or, you aren't looking for marriage, only a good time.  You have to define your personal reasons for dating.

4) Pray about it.  God may have neither of them planned for you.  For instance, are they Orthodox?

This is great advice.  Don't be heartbroken if your dream date turns out to be a nightmare.  It is true that God has a plan for each one of us.  Don't hurry up and accept the person who is not the one God has chosen for you.

5) Don’t rush into anything.

There's no need to rush.  You are young, and if you wish to have children, you've got time.  This is a lifelong decision.  Take your time.  Think about it.  Pray about it.  

6) Follow your heart as God provides.

I agree.  Give thanks to God at all times and in all situations.  If the current "date" doesn't work, it only means there's a better one waiting for you.  Smiley

Mostly, before you invest your heart, be sure this man fits your criteria.  Granted nobody is perfect, neither he, nor she...however, everyone has something they are "looking" for.  I would think first on the list would his Faith.  He must be Orthodox.   Then whatever you find pleasing - sense of humor, romantic, laughs with you, not at you....doesn't put you down.  Doesn't put down your family, your heritage, etc.  Doesn't put down anything you find valuable.  Doesn't belittle others.

Do you miss him, when you aren't with him?  That alone, says a lot.

Finally, my mom gave me a piece of advice when I came "of age".  When I finally am thinking about getting serious, I need to sit down to a card game with the fella.  LOL!  I laughed when she said that.  She was serious.  She said that in playing the "game" of cards, he will show his true self.  Will he be overly competitive, combative, throw a hissy fit when he loses, try to cheat, etc.  Or will he be mild mannered in the game, even be willing to lose, so, you could win.  It works like a charm.  Wink

Wishing you the best of luck in finding the spouse, not only of your dreams, but, the one God has chosen to be the best fit for you.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #88 on: July 03, 2013, 01:07:22 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?

I'm confused.  Are you suggesting she date men whom she has no intention of marrying?


Absolutely, I would suggest that. And furthermore I would suggest not dating anyone she has the intention of marrying.

Then why date, at all?  No?  In olden times, she would simply be married to the man her family chose for her.  But, as this is 2013, that practice has become outdated in most places.

So, if not to find a spouse, what reason would there be for dating? 

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,610



« Reply #89 on: July 03, 2013, 01:14:37 PM »

3) Date only those you feel are potential mates, no one else. That is sort of the point of dating, yes?
No offense intended, but worst dating advice ever.

Then do as you like/want, stop asking for others advice, and live with the penalties.  If you want the easy way rather than the correct way, you can do that all by yourself without the influence of others.
Is that what you think, that the way you present here is always the correct way?

I'm confused.  Are you suggesting she date men whom she has no intention of marrying?


Absolutely, I would suggest that. And furthermore I would suggest not dating anyone she has the intention of marrying.

Then why date, at all?  No?  In olden times, she would simply be married to the man her family chose for her.  But, as this is 2013, that practice has become outdated in most places.

So, if not to find a spouse, what reason would there be for dating? 



Yes, those olden times women were baggage to be disposed of. To cross thread, as I said elsewhere recently, many Christians elevate their own cultural backward ways or those they wish they could live over the true love which is Romantic love.

I know many girls who want to marry their father and boys who want to marry their mother. Should they date them?

No.

Of course, this is a stupidity, but if you think such childish whims end with childhood, then I can only say someone is gravely naive.

If you intend on marrying someone without having dated, that is madness. Perhaps a wonderful madness occasionally, but madness all the same.

So go pick a man based on a CV or an online dating site or based on the matching making of your Priests and commit to marrying them before you get to know them.

Really, people around here pathologize spirituality and spiritualize pathology.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   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 0.242 seconds with 72 queries.