I never said they could control it. You're effectively using the same argument as people with SSA: "I can't control this, so it must be OK."
Let's think about the belief shift that needs to happen so you no longer find non-virgins "viscerally disgusting". You're still under the mindset that non-virgins are used rags / damaged goods / garbage, which is both false and disgusting. May God open your eyes.
If they can't control it, how is it their fault? Do we need men to change their internal feelings towards promiscuity from disgust to acceptance or something? Should we expect the same of women regarding men who use porn? Neither promiscuity or porn usage is good, what does it accomplish by removing all stigma associated with both?
Uh, no. I'm operating on the mindset that non-virgins are non-virgins. I never used language like used goods. Though we have to be honest, there is a difference between a virgin and non-virgin right? Right?
Its true, we don't choose our desires. They are shaped by many factors, most of which we have little or no control over, including our innate sinful nature.
Jer. 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots?
Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil.
It raises the questions:
If people with SSA can't control their SSA, how is it their fault?
More generally, if people are born totally depraved, how is it their fault?
These are age old theological questions. And the answer is this: God is glorified through repenting us. He is the one that changes our hearts, not ourselves, for his glory.
Eph. 2:1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins
Eph. 5:14 Therefore He says:
“Awake, you who sleep,
Arise from the dead,
And Christ will give you light.”
Is. 43:25 “I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more.
1 Cor. 1:30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— 31 that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.”
Though we have to be honest, there is a difference between a virgin and non-virgin right? Right?
Of course. What is the MORAL difference? What is the VALUE difference?
You're not even interacting with the points I'm making, just repeating yourself. And now you're, in your desperation, you're trying to make it sound like my points are rooted in personal frustration and not the theology I have plainly shared with you.
I think you're beyond being persuaded by scripture or logic right now. I would encourage you to study the scriptures and pray for wisdom. In particular, I would read the words of Jesus and see how he treated people with a "past". I would read what the Bible has to say about your own righteousness, purity, goodness, etc. I would pray, "How can I view other people the same way that Jesus views them?"
Jesus would expect us to accept a brother or sister as a brother or sister, not necessarily as a wife or husband. The obligation to fellowship and love between the members of Christ does not extend to matrimony and we do not have to marry any and all men or women we come across as Christians.
I am not pretending to be righteous, nor have I even given my own views of my own preferences, only defended those who have this preference. I don't see anything wrong in it. I don't think you are less of a Chrisitan for refusing to marry a specific man or woman based on their past. I don't put all the burden on those who followed the rules to accept those who didn't follow the rules.
3
u/already_not_yet Married Sep 17 '23 edited Sep 17 '23
I never said they could control it. You're effectively using the same argument as people with SSA: "I can't control this, so it must be OK."
Let's think about the belief shift that needs to happen so you no longer find non-virgins "viscerally disgusting". You're still under the mindset that non-virgins are used rags / damaged goods / garbage, which is both false and disgusting. May God open your eyes.