Dating vs Courtship.

Okay, you are honestly scaring me, Sarah. I don't agree with the implications that Nathan is drawing from this, but what you're saying is very dangerous.

Are you saying that if you were in a situation where a family member was abusing you (verbally, emotionally, physically, or otherwise [see 2 Sam. 13]), you would make no effort to get yourself out of that situation? You wouldn't go to church members and explain the situation? You wouldn't consider contacting police if it got life-threatening or explicitly immoral?

Just because God is sovereign does not mean that everything is always done according to His revealed will. Family members sinning against you is not right, nor His will for you. Yes, we can and will be persecuted for faith in Christ. But an abusive family relationship does not fall into that category. And it wouldn't even be wrong in a persecution situation to contact authorities and determine if there is a way out of it. Daniel was persecuted under an immoral, heathen government. Early church Christians, as well as the persecuted church today, were/are persecuted in the same context. They had no way out, because the government wasn't on their side. But if you can get away from a sinful, abusive relationship, it is not wrong to do so.

This really isn't something we should agree to disagree on. If a kid comes on here, and he is in a family situation where his parents beat him incessantly, call him names, and maybe do worse things to him, and he reads what you say, he is going to think that God wants him to be treated that way. That is false and detestable. I want to say this with grace, but you need to be more careful about what you say here.

…or, try to force you into a marriage you don't want.

I totally agree with what Christian just said.

Do you think it is okay for slaves to try to escape their masters? After all, the Bible says they have to obey even the unjust masters.

@Christian - I see your point. Each situation is different. It should all be handled with prayer.

@Nathan - In a normal situation parents are willing to listen, and if they aren't the Bible doesn't support rebellion against them. Forced marriages isn't abuse or equal to it at all.

Slavery is way off the topic here. I am not in a slavery position so I haven't considered it much.

I really don't think that all the analogies Nathan has been giving here (i.e. slavery, an abusive relationship) are really relevant to the issue. If you don't want to agree to betrothal (your parents choosing your spouse), then don't. Why all the bringing up of force? None of us, I hope, are in that situation. All our parents love us. None of our parents would want to make us marry someone we didn't want to.
And besides, even if our parents did make us do that, they are so much wiser and more experienced in making decisions that we'd probably thank them later!

I really don't think that all the analogies Nathan has been giving here (i.e. slavery, an abusive relationship) are really relevant to the issue. If _you_ don't want to agree to betrothal (your parents choosing your spouse), then don't. Why all the bringing up of force? None of us, I hope, are in that situation. All our parents love us. None of our parents would want to make us marry someone we didn't want to. And besides, even if our parents did make us do that, they are so much wiser and more experienced in making decisions that we'd probably thank them later!

Good idea, Courtney. Take it on a case-by-case basis (each person making their own decision) and listen to the Holy Spirit.

My dad also said that "cruel" isn't the right word to use at all, if you think it is that. Betrothal people could call courtship and dating cruel. Courtship people could call betrothal and dating cruel. Dating people would REALLY call courtship and betrothal cruel. It depends on your point of view.

"The guy: God provided an answer for this question in the very beginning. He said, “…a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife.” The basic idea here is that he is ready to be on his own and begin the cycle of human life once again just as his parents did.
So he leaves his parents and holds fast to his wife. This involves jurisdictional change: he is no longer under the responsibility of his parents, and is now responsible for his own family.
[As this is the case, is it not only logical that he should be the one making the choice of a spouse? Is it not right that he choose the woman over whom and for whom he will have ultimate responsibility before God? Ultimately, the man is the only one responsible for the wife, so he is the only one responsible to make the choice of a wife in the first place. He should not abdicate this God-given responsibility to anyone, parents or not. He is responsible to choose his spouse. Others can counsel (indeed, should counsel him), but they cannot and should never choose for him, even if he is willing that his parents do the choosing. It is his God-given responsibility and none other’s.]"

I don't understand why you are saying that it is the man's responsibility to find his own wife. Could you please give some more examples of verses supporting that view? I don't believe that the verse "…a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife." is talking about HOW he finds his wife. It just describes the action of coming out from dependency on his parents.

​​Forcing your child into a marriage they don't want is cruel. Agree or don't agree, but it's a fact. ​If I really didn't want to be married to someone, I'd rather be beaten to death. Courtney, I am not saying that betrothal is cruel. It's not. Sarah, you're right about the other issues I was bringing up; sorry. That needs to be saved for a different topic.

Sort of changing the subject, but what do you guys think the correct process should be if a girl (or the guy) has no parents/guardians. By that I mean, what if one or both is an orphan who is completely independent (yes, it does happen)? For dating and courtship people (who are very different, I know!), do you think the process would stay relatively the same with several adjustments made for the lack of a guardian? For the betrothal people, would you say that if a man comes to a girl, and the girl knows by hearsay that he holds the non-negotiables, she should accept and marry at once, or do you think more time to know (as with courtship) would be necessary due to the lack of a father?

Sorry if that was a bit complicated. :)

Forcing your child into a marriage they don't want is cruel. Agreed. BUT, I don't think any of our parents would do that to us, so it doesn't matter that much.
I don't really think that you'd rather be beaten to death if you didn't want to be married to someone, but okay. If you say so. :P Again, it doesn't really matter, since I don't think any of our parents would do that to us.
I'm thinking that it is about time for me to exit this discussion. I've said about all I have to say.

I haven't really thought about it, since I'm not in that situation. :) But I think that probably what happened in Bible times is that a grandfather or uncle took over the job.
For dating and courtship I think the process would stay comparatively the same, especially with dating.
I think it would be better to know by something more than hearsay that he holds the non-negotiables. I don't think she should accept and marry at once, I think the man should probably go to a guardian or something close to it, maybe a church authority like a pastor. I also think a little more time would be necessary.

Alright! That was a fantastic discussion!

"And though I'm not a great romancer,
I know I'm bound to answer
When you propose:
"Anything goes.'"
~Cole Porter

Yes! And thank you and everyone else for challenging me so I could figure out what I think about it. :)

Yes! And thank you and everyone else for challenging me so I could figure out what I think about it. :)

The same to you! I did enjoy it!!

Glad to see I have at least one TD that hasn't devolved into fruitless arguing over nothing. Awesome job you guys. High fives all around. :)

High fives all around. :)

That's the way it should always be. :) That's the only fun way.

That's the way it should always be. :) That's the only fun way.

Glad to see I have at least one TD that hasn't devolved into fruitless arguing over nothing. Awesome job you guys. High fives all around. :)

Swhat happens when i'm not there to troll. But i'll fix that! Noah hath returned, and he has better TD bombs than ever before!

Looks like the conversation ended just in time!

Time to resurrect this topic! I was thinking about all the fun we had here some months ago, and the more I thought, the more I learned. So I decided to write this article. I tried to make it interesting with humor.

+Why Courtship is Not Bad+
Nathan A. Wright

I got inspired to write this when thinking about a long and singularly interesting debate I had with a friend a while ago. I still think of it often. The debate was about courtship vs. betrothal. In the end, we were both convinced that both methods are good; but I prefer courtship and she prefers betrothal. I’m perfectly satisfied with that. I’m in no way offended if someone’s personal preference is different than mine, as long as they’re not judging me for doing things differently. And the girl I debated is not—but there are some people who do judge other Christians who do not follow the method of betrothal. So my reason for writing this is not to explain why I prefer courtship, but simply to show that it is not in any way inappropriate.

Let me start by saying that I am not one bit offended that these people want to explain why they think betrothal is better than courtship. What does offend me is when they throw fallacious attacks, hasty assumptions, twisted accusations, and outright slander, at courtship. They say it’s “defrauding by definition”. They say it causes lust. They say it keeps parents from their responsibilities. They say it doesn’t work. Clearly, these people have no idea what they’re talking about. To do a quick debunk of all the lies I just mentioned: it doesn’t steal anyone’s rights; it only causes lust if abused; parents maintain authority and guidance in it; and it usually does work out. Signed: someone who has seen it happen this way several times. Now of course, all this only applies if it is being done properly. I’m sure there are some people out there who allow these things to be true of their courtship—but that is not what courtship is in general. Perhaps it is true that courtship does not happen as often as it should, but there are ways to fix that besides betrothal (not that betrothal is bad). So I at least hope they don’t know what they’re talking about—because if they do, then they are lying.

So let’s look deeper into this statement “courtship is defrauding, by definition.” What rights are involved in courtship? The parents’ rights to guide and govern the big decision in the lives of their children, and the children’s rights to have a say in who they get stuck with for the rest of their life. How can I prove these things? The Bible says that parents have authority, and it says that children are not to be abused (e.g. heartbroken horribly and possibly forever without reason). In courtship, both of these things happen. If the daughter is not interested in the man who wants to court her, she should definitely at least pray about him and give him consideration, but will not need to go into a deep relationship with the man if she feels that God does not have him for her. You may argue that if things don’t work out, the friendship will then be awkward—but I actually know someone to whom that happened, and he told me they were still good friends just as before. So it doesn’t have to be awkward.

Blaming courtship for lust is like blaming guns for murder. For one thing, courtship is not likely to cause lust, especially if you’re in love with the person at the start. I’ve talked to people who once had pornography addictions and still have difficult struggles with lust—and they are in love, and they tell me that they are basically never tempted to lust after the object of their love. Why? Because true love is Godly devotion. But if courtship is causing you to lust, the problem is not with the courtship. The problem is with you. If owning a gun makes you want to go murder someone, it’s not the gun that’s murderous! So don’t get rid of the gun; just pray and fight against the temptation. However, if you find that you cannot seem to stop using courtship for lust, then it might be best to stop doing it—for you. But for most people, I can safely say, there next to zero risk of lust. If you want to use a method that will almost guarantee no lust whatsoever, go with arranged marriage.

Does it keep parents from their responsibilities? Before we can answer that question, we must first answer another. What are the parents’ responsibilities? Biblically, the parents’ responsibilities—besides providing—are to guide and govern their children in a Christ-like way. This does not mean they have to be the first ones to think of a particular person for their child to marry. In fact, there’s nothing in Scripture that even hints that. Generally, as long as the child doesn’t marry without the parents’ permission/blessing, the parents’ authority is still being perfectly respected.
Does it usually fail? Almost all courtships I have ever heard of have worked out. Now, I will admit that it does not happen—that is, begin and then end in marriage—as often as would be best. Betrothal is a way of fixing this, but not the only way—not even necessarily the best way. Another way would be for parents to encourage their children to consider marriage—even about a specific person—but without trying to push them into anything. And there are several other wise ways to make it happen more often.

Some people also say that there should be no romantic love between the couple until they are married. Again, this is found in Scripture nowhere. Romantic love should be moderated, of course, but if it is not there at all, there is likely some presumption going on. The couple is assuming that they will fall in love with each other after they marry. And if two Godly people are living together, it probably will happen—but there may be all kinds of messy complications and disasters to work out before it happens. While God will use this for good, it is still best to try to avoid it. Some will argue that romantic love before marriage is a risk of losing bits of your heart with someone—because, they say, what if you don’t marry that person? Well, if you’re careful, none of your heart has to be stuck with your first love if you marry someone else. I’ve seen this happen, too! Jacob and Rachel are often used as examples of betrothal among these people (even though Jacob did choose Rachel, for the record; all Isaac did was tell him where to find his wife)—and I say this in all serious—since they respect him so much, I will use him as an example here. He loved Rachel for seven years before marrying her. That’s a long time. And why did he marry her? Because he loved her—not the other way around. (And don’t talk about that disgraceful scam Uncle Laban pulled—I’d hope you don’t look to that as an example!) So having such feelings in moderation can provide a good foundation for a relationship.

People who believe in betroth also believe that it is important to marry young. Again, I have no problem with this. But there’s always that one group of people, isn’t there? Yes, some people will say that it is inappropriate or even sinful not to look for a relationship the split second you’re ready for marriage—or to simply remain single unless you’re devoting yourself to God as a eunuch. If you’ve ever read 1 Corinthians 7 for what it actually says, you know that this is nonsense. Of course, these people have excuses that twist that chapter into something else, saying it’s the worst passage to defend singleness. But the Bible is not Silly Putty—we must take it for what it says—without equivocation, misapplication, or mingling with other Scriptures that are not directly related. God calls some people to marry at a young age, and He calls others to wait. It’s a reality. If it was actually sinful to do this, God would have said it specifically in His Word.

Now, is the method of betrothal itself commanded in Scripture? Some people will say that it is the method God teaches and that nothing else is Biblical or appropriate. But where do we find this in Scripture? The people who claim to see it are treating the Bible like a scavenger hunt. They’ll defend it by pointing out that it’s mentioned in the Old Covenant laws and the teachings in the epistles, that many Godly people did it, and that the word “betrothal” is mentioned several times in the Bible.

Okay. It is mentioned in the Old Covenant laws. True! But the laws do not imply that betrothal must be done; they are simply laws regarding it. There are also laws regarding oxen, but that does not mean that everyone is Biblically required to own an ox. The reason there were laws regarding betrothal is because people did things differently back then. There were different traditions. And even if none of these things were true, the Old Covenant law is outdated by Christ. As for the teachings in the epistles: same thing (they're not outdated, though).

Many Godly people did it. Well, the Bible says that many Godly people did betrothal, but it does not define what betrothal is—but we’ll get to that in a minute. Just because many Godly people did something doesn’t mean it’s the only appropriate method, or even that it’s right. Many Godly people had multiple wives in the Bible, too. Now don’t get me wrong: I’m not comparing betrothal to polygamy; I’m just pointing out that Godly people can be—actually, that Godly people are—imperfect. But as I have said, I do not think betrothal is bad or even unwise (if done properly, of course). God does not expect all generations and cultures to abide by the traditions of the Godly people in the Bible—He only expects the world to abide by His Word. Perhaps those traditions may be good to consider as potential examples, but they may have fit that particular culture better, too. Regardless, if some Christians think they have a wiser way, they are at liberty to do it if it does not go against Biblical standards.

The word “betrothal” is used several times in the Bible. Indeed it is. But this is the most sadly pathetic argument. The Bible never defines the method of “betrothal.” These people are taking their definition of betrothal as a relationship and applying it to the word used in Scripture. No doubt, they have studied the cultures and traditions and time periods to come up with this definition—but all we really know is that they did things differently than modern methods, such as courtship. And the method may have changed over time, too, as the Bible was written. It is obvious what betrothal means: that two people have agreed to get married—engagement. No specific method is implied to be connected with it in the Bible. Using the same logic as these people, I could say that I believe the Bible implies that “Sabbath” means “slumber party”, and that we should always have a slumber party on the LORD’s Day—and that if you don’t, you are behaving inappropriately.

In light of all this, the people who say that betrothal is the only appropriate way to get married are putting words in God’s mouth. They are using—or, rather, misusing—Scripture as a weapon against courtship. They are also imposing their own standards on other people, which is low-grade legalism.

But it gets even worse, and even amusing, to be honest. An organization which I believe I do wisely to leave unnamed did an experiment on some people who were courting. Their level of so-called “sexual” attraction was measured as they courted. Now, for one thing, I really hope that the “sexual” meter was misnamed. If it was technically measured their level of sexual attraction, that would mean that instruments are hooked up to—you know—down there, in their area. That would be obscene. I think it more likely that their attraction to the person was measured—somehow or other—but that it had nothing to do with sexual stuff or lust. Anyway, when these children were just talking to their parents about their POI, and the pseudoscientist that was reading the meter kept making amazed comments about how the sexual meter was going up. This all played up courtship to look like an erotic ritual that had the same effects as worldly dating. Whenever you’re thinking about someone for marriage, unless you have an aversion to them, you’re going to think of them in with an attracted mindset. If you’ve agreed to marry whoever your parents pick for you, then you will likely have an automatic attraction when they tell you who they’ve picked. And that is entirely appropriate; just because it’s attraction doesn’t mean it’s lust, which is adultery (I’m attracted to cool-looking cars; figure out my purpose in mentioning that). But the most ridiculous part is that they were doing this whole sexual meter thing on these children while they were doing nothing but talking to their parents about the person they wanted to court. The same thing happens with betrothal!

I will reiterate that if you want to tell people why you think betrothal is better than courtship, have at it! Even if you think there are some dangers in courtship, then feel free to point them out. But there are two things you must not do. First, do not call courtship all kinds of negative terms. Do not pick any one thing that could go wrong with courtship and blow it up into a big deal. Secondly, do not act like your definition of betrothal is the epic rescue, and the only Biblical path to marriage. Of course, I have reasons for preferring courtship over betrothal, although honestly, I’d rather do something in-between—but that’s a different issue. This is an issue on which we must each do our conscience without judging others. If someone wants to debate, fine; but don’t try to be everyone’s boss. And above all, don’t treat Bible verses like Legos. Read the Bible for what it is. The method of finding a spouse is something that God has left up to our consciences, and if God has left something there, it is best kept there.

thumbs up

thumbs up

Thanks! :-D

I know someone who thinks things should be done the "Biblical way", and he refers to Isaac and Rebecca. But not all "love stories" from the Bible are examples from God – Amnon and Tamar for example. And some are unique situations that were not intended to be role models, like Ruth and Esther.

Have you watched the show 19 kids and counting? Their way of courtship is a near ideal in my way of thinking

People who argue in favor of betrothal do mention Isaac and Rebekah, but they forget one important detail: God specifically showed the servant who "the one" was in a semi-supernatural way. I think that in our culture, arranged marriages are a bad idea.

Yes; I have watched that show! I remember seeing the ones about Josh's courtship… so when I met him at Nationals, I decided to ask his opinion on teenage love. He said "It's not about age; it's about maturity"–something I had already said! I think that teenagers should not have relationships, but that if they want to pray about a specific person they think God has laid on their heart, that's fine–as long as they keep their love moderated. Basically, I think the best way to summarize the standards for teenage love is: don't love in such a way that any of your heart will be stuck with the person if you don't end up marrying him/her.

Basically, I think the best way to summarize the standards for teenage love is: don't love in such a way that any of your heart will be stuck with the person if you don't end up marrying him/her.

Then, what is the point? If you commit to not loving them in such a way that your heart would be stuck with the person if you don't end up marrying him/her, then what is the point of it?
I'd be grateful if you could answer this, as I am confused.

Okay. Well, for one thing, I am not saying it is necessary to be in love at all. You probably didn't think I was saying that, but I just want to make sure it is known. Teenage love is not something I discourage or encourage in general. It depends on the person. Also, I believe this is what such love should always be like before engagement–not just in the teenage years. One purpose of courting as opposed to dating is to avoid letting any of your heart be stuck with the person if it doesn't work out. But of course, it just makes sense that you'd be in love before courting, so it doesn't really matter how long you've been praying about the person before that. And there is also one other thing that needs to be understood: you should never be in love with someone unless you want to marry them. If you think it's not God's will for you to marry them or have no interest in marrying them, then you should never be in love with them.

So, to directly answer your question: If a teenager is in love, they're hoping and praying to marry that person because they believes it might be God's will. But they need to make sure they don't permanently give any of their heart to that person, just in case it doesn't happen. And again, this goes for adults, too–I've heard of adults who thought they knew who "the one" was, and turned out to be wrong. So I guess I shouldn't say it's my standard for teenage love; rather, it's my standard for love at all before you know who you're going to marry. (Humanly speaking, I consider engagement the point at which you know who you're going to marry.)

Some benefits of teenage love include motivation to mature, prepare, and keep oneself pure, better reliance on God, development in self-control, opportunity for a better prayer life, and I could go on! But all this will only come if it is done properly. If teenagers expect their love to benefit them so, they need to be careful and responsible!

Lastly, with all that said, I'm not saying that not being in love has a bad effect on teens–not at all. Both ways of doing it have their own unique pros and cons, and both will be worth it.

Okay, thanks for explaining.

Okay, thanks for explaining.

Anytime! =)

Exactly my thoughts, Nathan: Maturity is more important than age - in most circumstances. Now I'm not saying that if you're really mature at age 12 you can get married then - of course not, but if God has shown you who He has planned for you at age 18, and you are mature enough for the responsibility, I would consider that acceptable, but I would rather someone wait until they're thirty to marry than to do it when they are not ready for the responsibility.

I was referring to love, not marriage. What determines when you can be in love is dependent on maturity, not age. But what determines when you can get married is dependent on not only maturity, but responsibility, abilities, competence, and I could go on.

Another note about love being about maturity is that the age at which you are mature will vary from person to person. Of course, at 7 years old, you just won't be mature enough. So it's still not about age; the problem is simply that no one is mature enough when they're that young. Rachel knows a man who was in love at 11 and is married to that girl today. But when I was 11, I was definitely not mature enough. Some people won't be mature enough till they're in their later teens, or maybe even until they're out of their teens–for whatever reason. So I only consider teenage love acceptable if it is true love, not crush.

Exactly my thoughts, only spelled out more :)

Aaaaah! I haven't trolled this in awhile!

Here's an article I found today by Dr. Snelling on the problems with modern dating methods.

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/dating-techniques/

Here's an article I found today by Dr. Snelling on the problems with modern dating methods. https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/dating-techniques/

I think carbon dating is okay as long as you aren't giving your heart away rashly.

Here's an article I found today by Dr. Snelling on the problems with modern dating methods. https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/dating-techniques/

I think carbon dating is okay as long as you aren't giving your heart away rashly.

But, it is proof that you have a stony heart. Perhaps you aren't ready for a relationship..?

Huh?

Huh?

Carbon dating? Fossils? "Stony heart"? Are you seriously telling me you didn't get it? :P

Huh?

Carbon dating? Fossils? "Stony heart"? Are you seriously telling me you didn't get it? :P

Its okay, I got it :p

Huh?

Carbon dating? Fossils? "Stony heart"? Are you seriously telling me you didn't get it? :P

The heart rots before it can fossilized! (Of course, I guess that would mean I have a rotten heart…)

Huh?

Carbon dating? Fossils? "Stony heart"? Are you seriously telling me you didn't get it? :P

The heart rots before it can fossilized! (Of course, I guess that would mean I have a rotten heart...)

So does skin…but oh wait, there are fossils of dinosaur skin. It all depends on how…catastrophic the disaster is…

Okay; you're right–I've just never heard of a heart being fossilized.

XD Thank y'all!! That was funny!

Okay; you're right--I've just never heard of a heart being fossilized.

No… Finding just a fossilized heart is not as common as finding some of the other organs like skin. Probably because the heart, while quite strong, is made of much softer tissue than many type of skin or scales.

I believe we all agree that we should strive for purity and reserve ourselves for one, but where do we draw the line in our friendships? Many teenagers seem to want to get as close to "the line" as possible and still remain pure. But is the question really how little we can save for our future spouse and still be pure, or how much we can save for him/her? And this is not just physically, but emotionally as well.
What do you think about serious or ongoing correspondence with a young man/lady? Or what about words of affection ("Love you", "Miss you", etc.)? Or even special/affectionate nicknames? Discuss! :)

Oooh, good topic to bring this forum back to life! :-D

I know guys who say "Love you" to all their close female friends, and vice versa–and everyone understands that it's in a brotherly way, not a romantic way. As you can see, Christian's profile picture shows him sidehugging Bethany and Carissa, which is fine, as they are just good friends. I might say "love you all" to a mixed group. I'd say "Miss you" to anyone; that's not awkward. If you are in love with someone, maybe you should not say "Love you" even if you both understand it's brotherly; I think that's just a prudent step to avoid unexpected risks.

Here's what I think about teenage relationships…

I've talked to a lot of people who have experience teenage love. Of course, it works out plenty of times. But in cases in which it did not work out, I've noticed that in every single instance in which the person was in love but did not have a relationship, zero of their heart is stuck with their first love (purity); and in every single instance in which the person did have a relationship, they admit that piece of their heart will always be stuck with that person (not purity).

Now, of course, keeping yourself pure in your love doesn't only mean you can't have foolish relationships; it also means you have to moderate your emotions.

However, if a teenage relationship is strictly monitered, but approved of and granted, by the parents, then I would not consider that unacceptable. Still, I think it's wiser not to have a relationship before you're ready or almost ready to be married, because your hearts are actively involved with each other.

We also need to make sure our definition of "purity" is correct. Emotional purity does not mean you've never been in love with anyone; it means that none of your heart is stuck with anyone inappropriately. But if a widow/er remarries, I don't see how he/she couldn't still have feelings for his/her former spouse. But that doesn't mean they're not emotionally pure.

I think a better example of this is sexual purity; I'll show you how it relates in a minute. Read the entirety of the following sentence before you freak out. Sexual purity does not mean you've never known anyone (in the KJV sense); it means you've never committed adultery. Again, look at our widow/er. When they remarry, they've already known their previous spouse–but that does not make them impure.

However, there is a difference between love and sex: love before marriage is acceptable; sex before marriage is not. So we can't look at those two types of purity as the same. Sexual purity means you've never committed adultery; emotional purity means you don't inappropriately have any of your heart stuck with anyone.

Oooh, good topic to bring this forum back to life! :-D I know guys who say "Love you" to all their close female friends, and vice versa--and everyone understands that it's in a brotherly way, not a romantic way. As you can see, Christian's profile picture shows him sidehugging Bethany and Carissa, which is fine, as they are just good friends. I might say "love you all" to a mixed group. I'd say "Miss you" to anyone; that's not awkward. If you are in love with someone, maybe you should not say "Love you" even if you both understand it's brotherly; I think that's just a prudent step to avoid unexpected risks.

Just wondering, wouldn't it make it less meaningful to be able to say "I love you" to your future spouse one day, when you've said that many times to other girls? It just seems like, the more you allow, the less "firsts" you have to give to your future spouse. I could just be entirely confused by your meaning.
Of course, this is the kind of stuff I'm wanting to see discussed: What people's opinions are on this subject, and where we each draw the line in regards to saving certain things.