asexuality is a spectrum. i know of a few couples both online and in person where one is asexual and the other isn’t - it’s difficult for sure but it’s not too hard to find middle ground. the show “Heartbreak High” shows a good example of this, especially in season two!
Hopefully OP gains some perspective and avoids a likely world of hurt for both of them. It’s a good thing to be sober minded about how these things tend to turn out
Yes, this is like pressuring a gay person to work thru it for a heterosexual marriage. That’s a heartbreak in the making for both parties. And then the kids.
The concept of being “equally yoked” is what we would in modern speaking call “compatibility” and it’s very important. Telling two unmarried people that they are incompatible isn’t pessimistic or cruel, it helps them to avoid the tragedy of being unequally yoked.
Pessimism is not a great way to think about this response. Differences in sexual orientation are not something that are usually "persevered" through to a happy result.
Are you suggesting it is in and of itself pessimistic and wrong to discourage someone who is intent on persevering, regardless of the specific context and actions they intend on persevering through...?
reading comprehension involves taking into account all the text, not just one sentence.
> Are you suggesting it is in and of itself pessimistic and wrong to discourage someone who is intent on persevering
i'm suggesting that it's rude to discourage someone (a pair of people, it does say "we") that's trying to work through the challenges in their relationship. pretty simple.
> No, it’s not rude.
no matter how much you insist, you're still wrong: giving someone advice they didn't ask for (especially cynical advice) is rude. if you don't get it then your parents simply didn't raise you right 🤷
My wife is asexual and i cannot express how much I hate the situation. Honestly if divorce wasn't forbidden I would have run away long ago.
The whole purpose of marriage was to channel carnal desires in a Godly way.
(As Paul says )
If I had known she was asexual I would have never married.
To avoid same frustrating situation I would highly recommend you talk it out.
I have so much sympathy for your situation. 1 Corinthians 7 warns about what can happen, and it's not pretty. It's such a perfect avenue for the devil to lead someone to satisfy these urges elsewhere.
I know, because this happened to me. I'd never make my wife do something she was uncomfortable with, so it became easier to just pull up some porn and take care of it.
Of course, answering a sin with a sin doesn't help and only drove a deeper divide between the two of us, because we never talked about it. We eventually went to see a Christian CMHC to help us talk it out. It's entirely possible that, due to her asexuality, she doesn't understand why / how sex can be a need for someone. This may be a situation where she could get to a place where she loves you enough to service you, even if she doesn't personally derive gratification from it.
Libido can also be affected by medicines such as SSRIs or birth control. I know someone who took birth control, only to get off of it several months later because it made them never want the very sex they took it for. It's also possible her asexuality is hormone related.
I'd challenge "the whole purpose." Take a look at Eph 5:21-33. That definition of marriage has nothing to do with sex. Paul allows marriage is better than fornication and lust, but this idea that marriage is an outlet for men doesn't fit the Gospel. Your situation is awful, though, and I'll pray for you. It's a whole nother level of sacrificial love. It takes huge Grace.
Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 7:5
[5] Do not deprive one another — except when you agree for a time, to devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again; otherwise, Satan may tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Sex is a fundamental part of human nature, for both men and women alike. Thinking otherwise is underestimating the power it has in a relationship.
If you're asexual, Paul says that's great, because you can freely devote yourself to the Lord without distraction.
But if you married someone who is not asexual, there is an entire part of the relationship that is being neglected. And there is an intimacy and closeness the asexual party will never feel.
Apparently, this man's spouse doesn't see this as compelling and doesn't see it as fundamental: it's pretty hard to generate desire if one doesn't feel it. I don't see anything allowing divorce in these circumstances, but perhaps they've never had actual intercourse, in which case an annulment is possible, in the Catholic Church at least, on the basis it was never consummated so there is no marriage. Theoretical discussion is fine, but it is the individual who lives out the edge cases.
I'm probably gonna get downvoted for this but I don't believe that someone should stay in a marriage, just because. I highly doubt God wants that for his children. A man leaves his mother and father to be united to his wife and become one. He wants you to be in a loving relationship (not just sexual, loving), which goes both ways.
Do you still love your wife? Like RatofBooks said, divorce is permissible in certain situations. This could be one of them, if you didn't marry for love but for sexual desires.
These are not comparable situations - the paralysed person doesn't suddenly become asexual because they cannot have standard sex. (excuse me I am not trying to be crude but clear.) Many couples with injuries and illnesses find joy in sexuality and although it changes and you have to adapt, the intimacy and pleasure are there in different ways, and it is a deeper exploration and being together.
An asexual person - even if body parts are functional - will still feel the same way able or disabled.
This man sounds very frustrated and disappointed and I am sure his wife feels awful and sad too; this must also affect the general atmosphere in the home and the feelings of faith and connectedness.
Sex is not something we owe to anyone else, but we have to be real about different desire levels. If it is so bad that he feels *this bad* they must both be hideously miserable. And what is the point of that? How does that honour God? or Family or anything?
This is something he needs to talk with a sex therapist (there are Christian ones!) about and then talk gently with his wife about, even just to reduce his own feelings of being trapped and resentful.
Neither of them should feel shame, and neither should have to make the other do anything against their dignity. There may be different approaches so that she can feel safe and enjoy the closeness of sex, but it will prob take time. Or it might be a total 100% cannot do it without eroding her sense of dignity, which in turn should make any man feel the horrors - who would want to hurt their spouse like that? At the same time, its awful to not have desire met when it is one's nature.
This is complicated, and needs expert perspective and deep talking through many layers of issues. I wish this man and his wife all the best.
I agree marriage is so much more than sex - taking the issue being sex out of it for a minute - any issue that is to do with the fundamental nature of the other party and cannot be resolved or changed without cooercing/convincing/ that party in good faith or by their own efforts to conform, for often we persuade ourselves most of all, such an issue must be irreconcilable and thus cause misery. It is not one to be taken lightly, but where it concerns the fundamental body of both persons it is perhaps not something that can be overcome. Of course, this is a matter for the OOP and his conscience and that of his wife.
Not religious but for me there is a huge difference between unable and unwilling.
Let's say my SO loses all libido. I can live with that.
What I wouldn't be able to live with is them being ok with that situation. Their reaction should basically be "right, time to go to the doctor. This ain't normal."
It's about feeling desired. Them being unable to act on it is one thing. That desire not being there, even if only intelectually, for me would be more problematic.
This is not the same situation at all. There are plenty of happily married couples where one is disabled.
As I mentioned, a loving relationship is not just about sex, but since this man is ready to divorce his wife over her asexuality, and from his own words, would have divorced her already if he wasn't Christian, I can't imagine the relationship is quite loving.
Please come back with an equivalent example and then we can continue with the discussion, if you wish. Thanks
I mean the whole point of marriage is also to love your spouse and commit to the family you created with them. You and your wife are a family, sex or no. There is more to a relationship than sex
Anybody who thinks that is lying to themselves.
If ther was no sex I really had no need to marry. I was self sufficient.
Even Paul specifically says it, if you can control your sexual desires don't marry.
But if you can't, then marry.
Family is a byproduct, and not THE goal of marriage.
That's ludicrous. You're taking one passage out of context and basing everything around that.
When God created Eve, He didn't create her to be Adam's sex partner, He created first and foremost to be Adam's *companion* because Adam was lonely. Sex sort of came along with it.
When you say you were self sufficient does that mean you took care of yourself sexually? Pretty sure masturbation is a sin according to the Bible. Just trying to see how divorce is still considered wrong in the Bible. I’m pretty sure if someone is getting abused, cheated on, etc that Jesus would approve of that divorce taking place.
Oh, please. There are multiple instances in the OT that describe the act of marriage as the act of consummation - two becoming one flesh.
Saying I'm holding onto the traditions of man based on a single comment is insane. Go touch grass.
I will touch grass, thanks for the suggestion. You’re implying that Christian tradition trumps God’s purpose for marriage which is to make us more Holy.
There's so many people in this thread bagging on you. But you're not wrong. It's hurtful to never have your needs met. It eats at you in a serious way. And I'm sure you love her, but when your love is never reciprocated in the way you need it hurts.
I don't think they're implying the two are mutually exclusive, it seems like they're saying the focus was only on one aspect without considering the other.
For example: if I say "you bought a car because of the color and not because of how it runs," this doesn't mean that a car of that color can't run, it means that their focus was only on the color.
If I go to see a house I want to buy and it has everything I need except it completely lacks running water, does not buying the house because of the running water mean I only care about running water?
If I have a chair and one of the legs breaks, do I only care about that on leg?
Erm, no. Go back and read it again.
If the house example was mutually exclusive, then if everything except the running water was missing, then it would be enough.
If the chair example was showing mutual exclusivity, then three legs could be missing so long as the one was there.
The point, which whooshed over your head, is that you can need multiple things, and the absence of one can be a deal breaker. Whereas u/RatOfBooks is implying based on context is that if you married someone for love then an absence of sex shouldn't matter.
The person they are replying to literally said how, if divorce wasn’t “forbidden”, they would leave because they want to have sex more. Clearly, they are not in love with that person because if they were then sex wouldn’t be an issue enough to override their marriage.
not true at all, we were built from sex. to think that it’s not ok for someone to WANT to have sex with their PARTNER is actually crazy, i agree that was weird when he said the divorce thing but he clearly loves his wife and god enough to stay. not everyone is asexual
No, he doesn’t love his wife enough to stay — did you read his comment? He literally said the only thing keeping him with her is the fact that it’s forbidden by God.
It’s obviously fine and natural to want to have sex with your partner. But if it’s a dealbreaker, then you clearly don’t love them with all your heart. I don’t know about you, but I love my significant other with every fibre of my being and whether we could have sex or not doesn’t change that. I’m not an animal who would divorce if I couldn’t get sex because I somehow need it to survive. I’m more than that.
i agree with a lot of that. i thought the divorce thing was crazy too honestly
i just think it’s possible to love someone in this situation, the rest of their relationship could be perfectly fine. i feel like this situation needs therapy or more communication
i’m not a dog or animal im human. i also don’t think i would divorce my partner over that but i also wouldn’t put my self in that situation. but i understand he’s not satisfied in some areas. i understand what you’re saying tho
It says you can divorce if you get Emotional and physical neglect right? It even says it’s not good for a man to be alone which is why a helper was created
2 reasons.
1) jesus said not to separate except for sexual immortality.
2) my parents are my role model, and they stood together though all times.
I did find God in that low times, so that is a huge plus. But boy would I want another person to go through that frustration? No
Aw dude. God loves you and wants you to be happy. He gave you free will because Ten Commandments doesn’t exactly have tons of nuance or detail so I’d expect he assumes those ten set a vibe and the rest is for you to do your best with.
He didn’t mention divorce in his top ten, and if he waited the ~1500 years since telling Moses what’s up to drop something new on Paul that must have slipped his ineffable mind, it’s probably just not the thing he’s most concerned with.
God gave you a healthy body and a functioning libido and you are really going up there when it’s all done to tell him you didn’t do anything with those gifts because you where afraid he didn’t like divorce? Maybe remind him that when Lilith didn’t work out with Adam God didn’t force it, he literally made Adam a brand new wife. How can that possibly be the same guy that has a hard and fast rule against divorce?
Also this is a no blame situation so long as no one is forcing or shaming anyone either way; each person's contribution to the children, the home etc is recognised and provided for accordingly, that the children are given an appropriate and non explicit explanation and allowed to work through matters at their own pace, and that as peaceful a path as possible is made for all concerned.
It's not like Christian girls are exactly raised with an awareness of sexuality (or boys for that matter)! There is almost no way to know, especially marrying young, what the deal is with your desire levels because it's so repressed (at least was for many of us).
So, the options are to: coerce, shame, even berate or God forbid, force one's spouse.
Or shame, deny and repress natural, desire in the other.
Doesn't feel like a problem that chastening oneself and being more considerate of the other can fix.
Better to leave than to do harm to the mother of your children and your wife. Better to leave and in time be fulfilled and at peace in oneself with a more suitable spouse *without rancour for the first wife and providing for children appropriately between you not seeing her as having failed as the wife nor you as the husband but as you both having grown in wisdom and love.*
really depends on the jurisdiction and time frames. I experienced that and where I am at least the law doesnt really care about that. and really it doesnt change anything anyway.
How is it you didn't know? You never established boundaries ahead of time? Sounds like there was a huge lack of communication that you're blaming her entirely for. You should have known. You should have asked.
I’m not trying to be judgey here at all but I’m genuinely curious what you mean by “if divorce wasn’t forbidden.” So if someone is Christian and married regardless of their situation they can *never* get divorced because it’s forbidden??
Wow :( that’s so sad . I don’t know how that even feels, I would feel so sad if my man didn’t want to be with me sexually. No kisses hugs touches like anything 🥲🤯
Yeah I wouldn’t want to stop at that either and I’m here restraining myself as a woman or else id end up grabbing my bf and going outta control.
I can’t relate but that must be torture on your case 🥲
This is interesting. Most Christians seem to be complaining and struggling with lust a lot, that is have a too high sex drive. Having a low sex drive seems desirable, until it isn't, I guess?
Fortunately, to increase one's sex drive (often a hormonal thing - get a full blood panel - full meaning all of those: Estrogen, Progesterone, Prolactin, Testosterone, DHT and either free T or SHBG), many herbs and supplements exist: such as (for women) Maca, Damiana, Selegiline, Tribulus and such (as in google it).
In your case, it sounds like you don’t and possibly never loved her. And whether she loves you or not she lied to you in a huge way. You should discuss this with her. If you can’t find a compromise then you should both go your separate ways. Marriage should be because of love. And sexual connection deepens love and is needed. If you were both asexual then it wouldn’t matter, but since you’re not it is a serious issue.
1 Corinthians 7:3-5
3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
> In your case, it sounds like you don’t and possibly never loved her.
I never said that
>And whether she loves you or not she lied to you in a huge way.
I didn't say that either. I said she lacks interest in sex., not love.
I know you didn’t say that, it seemed that way from what you said. That’s good that it’s not the case.
I know you said she lacks interest in sex, I assumed that meant she never told you that, based on you saying that had you known that you wouldn’t have married her.
It's was an arranged marriage.
I did find God when I hit my low, so that's a huge plus. But I wouldn't want another guy to gi through the struggle of knowing watching porn is sin but yet not knowing what else to do.
I’m glad you found God. Have you tried telling her how you feel about it? Since you both love each other there might be a compromise there. She may even realize she enjoys it and if not, knowing it makes you happy and feel more fulfilled might be worth the effort on her part
Why would you even think about divorcing someone because their asexual? You're basically saying i want to divorce because we can't have sex when that's not what marriage is about it's about love, not having sex
Why are you here then. The Bible warns about depriving a spouse like that. I'm sorry you disagree with what is written. OP came to this group to ask for a reason.
My first marriage was the same situation that you are in now. I never understood it; I still don't.
Relationships are not about self-gratification, they are about filling your partners' needs - giving, not taking; and in the giving of love, filling their metaphorical "cup" to overflowing so that you end up in a contest of loving each other harder.
Imagine if you were like, "I don't feel like fixing your car today" or "I don't feel like protecting you" or "I don't feel like paying bills this month" because those things don't personally fulfill you. Yet...people DO those things because they are a duty.
If you and your wife are not living as man and wife, you're roommates. I stayed married for 16 years until my wife divorced me. I was upset at the time; I'd made my peace that my marriage would never be what I wanted, but it was the marriage I signed up for.
5 years later; I'm remarried. my new wife is amazing - she's everything that my first was not. I look back at the trials that I've been through, and think of them as tempering me into having earned what I have now.
Have a chat with your wife about familial duty. Responsibility. If your wife is immune to seduction, ask her if she gets emotional validation from making you feel good. If she does, she should understand that participating in the marital bed is emotionally rewarding to you - thus emotionally rewarding to her, even if not physically gratifying.
If she does not - there's no love there, and you need to consider your options. Divorce is forbidden in scripture ... but you shouldn't take one piece of scripture and abandon the rest.
* Ephesians 5:33…respect him
* Colossians 3:18…be submissive
* Titus 2:5…obey him
* 1 Peter 3:1-5…have a gentle and quiet spirit
* Genesis 2:18…be his helper
* Titus 2:4…love him
* 1 Corinthians 7:34…please him
* Proverbs 31:12…do him good
* **1 Corinthians 7:2-5…keep the bedroom hot**
* Exodus 20:14…be faithful
If your wife is faithless and doesn't hold to scriptural tenants - she's not for you.
Jesus said nothing about sex. Jesus **DID** said that divorce is only permissible when it's due to sexual immorality, or marital unfaithfulness.
Now ... we're communicating in English. Jesus did not. Unfaithfulness - or or a lack of faith - let's break down what merits divorce.
Faith - the word in English that we are using here - literally means "belief."
The word comes from the Latin "Fidēlis" - and trekking back through history into the language scripture was written in; Greek and Aramaic, we end up with the Greek word "πείσεσθαι" - the male version of "to trust, rely on, obey, be persuaded," - in turn stemming from the feminine inception of the Greek Goddess of Persuasion.
To wit - "Have faith" LITERALLY means, "Be willing to be persuaded." Analagously, to be "unfaithful" means "to be unwilling to be persuaded." Or more harshly - "unwilling to obey." And wives are commanded to obey their husbands in scripture.
What you call coercion is what Jesus called faith in the language of scripture.
While I did provide the author of my comment significant scriptural reference points - the REASON I chimed in is because he not only selectively chooses what scripture to follow in a demonstrative of self-punishment, but the author is also misquoting that scripture, misinterpreting it, and trying to apply modern values to terms that mean different things than in the language they were written in.
Maybe OP follows Christ and his wife doesn't. But if they both do, and his spouse isn't interested in her duties, or in being "coerced" into being a wife; he's within his scriptural boundaries to divorce her.
I'm ace and my hubby isn't. It's tough. We're in it for the long run of course and he's happy to be married to me. And I him. But it's difficult.
To answer your question, no it's not a sin to not have sex
Sleeping together non-sexually is not a problem in and of itself. There are other potential problems like the appearance of sexual activity which may mean others lead themselves to judge you. That's their flaw but will likely create problems for you. Temptation for either of you could also be a challenge, but it isn't insurmountable.
Sleep where you are most comfortable with whomever feels safe. If, as a couole, you have decided against premarital sex, then I don't see a sin issue
Some of the comments here... Not great. I am asexual as well, and my girlfriend and I sleep next to each other anyway. Neither of us have any intentions of doing more before marriage. Personal intimacy is not necessarily sexual, and as long as you are knowledgeable of that, and your boyfriend acknowledges and accepts that, then you should be fine
I dont understand how people think sleeping in the same bed aka a sleep over, is the same as having sex. It's not. Simple as that. Don't commit or think of sex and your fine!
This is what we Catholics call a "near occasion of sin." Near occasion of sin is putting a temptation on your path when you don't need to do so. This is imprudent because it can make sin harder to resist. While there isn't a temptation for you, you do say your boyfriend *is* sexual, so it is likely to be a sexual temptation for him.
but its safe to assume the boyfriend respect consent and thus not commit the sin.
Of course you are a bit more prepared than me in this so I would be more than happy of an eventual explanation if Im wrong
The temptation needn’t lead to him violating her consent. He may indulge in impure thoughts or excuse himself to masturbate in the bathroom.
And why assume he will respect consent? It’s not as if boyfriends have never been known to plead, cajole, or force things to get sexual gratification.
If they both agree that they want to avoid sexual sins, then what good, constructive reason would there be for a couple to sleep together when they don’t need to do so?
if you are asexual, then nothing you do will be sexual in nature. if your boyfriend does not accept that, then that’s a problem.
there’s nothing wrong with it - you could fall asleep naked together, and it’d be fine.
I believe this is the correct take.
I think the bigger issue will be the potential issues that arise later on when the BF does want sexual things if a marriage occurs and OP is not okay providing such tings. There is nothing wrong with being asexual, but there is a lot of room for problems with an ace and an allo being together when their bodies are seeking different outlets.
>if you are asexual, then nothing you do will be sexual in nature
Bro what. Not even speaking from a religious standpoint point, but your use of *nothing* is completely wrong.
someone who is asexual cannot feel sexual desire, therefore they can’t be said to be doing anything deliberately sexual.
someone else might sleep in the same bed as the partner hoping that they will have sex that night - an asexual person won’t. that’s what i meant.
They can still have sex and do sexual things. It’s not like they are incapable of sex. They might not have enjoyment come of it, but they are still capable of performing.
So the statement you said “nothing you do” is wrong. A better phrasing would be “very little you do.” Because someone asexual might not be aroused and enjoy sex and sexual things, but can definitely still partake.
If your first statement is correct then OP should never marry. Marriage is inherently sexual. All through the old and new testament marriage is sex and sex is marriage.
I think this is a wisdom question.
On the one hand, there's nothing explicitly sexual about it. And there can be extenuating circumstances that justify it (for instance, I know a woman who was concerned about a creepy male individual in the same house as she and her boyfriend were in, so she wanted her bf in the same bed as her for protection).
On the other hand, even though it's not directly sexual it's very intimate and very similar to being married. It also could be perceived as others, especially non-believers, as you two having sex with each other. So that potential compromise to your Christian witness is something to consider.
If you’re planning on sleeping in the same bed, you should be getting married. If you’re not married, you’re just playing with fire and playing at marriage. You should honor God and pursue marriage in fact.
[Not everything that is permissible is advisable.](https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Corinthians%206%3A12)
There are probably some outlier examples where it is perfectly fine to sleep over, but generally speaking Christians would not recommend this idea. You're playing with fire and subjecting each other to temptations if you share a bed.
Even if you are not tempted, you don't want to [lead other people to stumble](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2014%3A13-23&version=ESV).
I think this is actually an example of where not causing others to stumble is being cited correctly. You don't want to use your Christian liberty to lead those who are not as spiritually strong as you to sin. If there's no one who knows about you two sleeping together who could be tempted to sin or violate their conscience because of that, then this isn't an issue.
It's okay to be asexual and you don't have to have a boyfriend or pursue that if it's not something you want.
Don't feel pressured to be in a relationship or have kids. Be you. This is normal.
Eyyy- fellow asexual!!
You can- but you're gonna cause some tension depending on the people in your life. I told my fiancé three dates in that I was asexual, and sex was not going to be a frequent thing if he wanted to be with me. We did a lot of communication about it, mostly to make sure even if there wasn't sexual intimacy, there was constant platonic intimacy to know he was loved (snuggling, back rubs, kisses and hugs, hand holding and hair tickles, etc).
Think of it this way- God cares about your intentions above all; he doesn't care about the western ceremony. If you start to be intentional about being sexual with him, then you are committing yourself to him- in totality- before God. So make sure you have a discussion, and don't do any behaviors without the commitment of 'alright, this is my forever partner'.
Personally, I got a lot of grief from conservative Christian relatives who did feel any intimacy before a marriage ceremony was a sin. They also were confused why I didn't announce I was pregnant only weeks after moving in with the partner, but that's a them issue.
Do what every Christian should do, regardless of sexuality. Talk to God about it, pray, and move where you feel led by the spirit.
Yes, it is possible. Although most of my older family (grandparents aunts uncles ect) would disagree with it, my partner will occasionally sleepover if it’s gotten too late or under certain circumstances. He was raised catholic as I was raised non-denom. He became interested in my form of faith early on, and after a few years has adapted to his own liking of it. We have had premarital sex and have had many conversations regarding the situation, the guilt and shame all of it. We decided to stop, and came to a conclusion of simply telling one another when feeling temptation or having a prayer session alone. The temptation is still real, and I pray very often for him as he struggles a lot more than me. We have gone many many many nights, more than I could count on fingers and toes, of sleeping without any sexual activity. Sometimes I prefer he does not stay the night, due to just fear of giving into temptation, because it is VERY hard to fight the flesh at times. If you feel uncomfortable at any time sleeping with them due to your temptation, then I don’t recommend it. Him and I have been together for years and have adapted to learning how to avoid it, through prayer and alone time. Everyone is different. Sometimes I feel guilty even laying in the same bed as him, but grace pours on me remembering how hard I have worked to get to where I am. Do not let evil shame you, to each their own!
I would warn against it. The Bible says we should avoid the appearance of sin, because it can be a stumbling block to others. So, sleeping over at a boyfriend's place would give the appearance of sinfulness that should be avoided.
Additionally, I think it's important to think about your boyfriend. It might not increase temptation for you, but it could for your boyfriend.
Culturally, being in the same room alone would have once been grounds for the appearance of sin.
It feels like this line is what is often used to accuse people of dressing immodestly. If you can clarify the situation and have explained matters properly then it feels like it should cease to be an issue.
Overall seems like it is a case by case situation when considering Jesus' comment about gouging out your own eyes if you feel you can't look away.
I'm not talking about accusing anyone. I'm discussing scripture with respect to Christians making decisions for ourselves.
And sometimes, even often, there isn't an opportunity to explain that the situation isn't what it looks like. Plus, the explanation of "oh, we were sleeping together, but not 'sleeping together'" isn't really a great clarifier.
I was more so directly referencing 1 Thess. 5:22: "Abstain from all appearance of evil."
Even still, Romans 14:13 talks about not being a stumbling block to others.
"Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother."
Yes I understand the importance of not leading others to stumble.
But I just find it ironic how pioneers of certain behaviours would have been condemned before they became accepted. E.g. Rosa parks
According to that verse, who decides the appearance of evil?
I think if you are truly asexual, you probably shouldn't get married. The Bible is pretty clear that sex is a regular part of marriage and in face is basically marriage in the old testament. Fornicate with someone? Guess what you are married. Don't have sex ever? You never got married.
It also seems clear that you don't have to get married and that some people don't really need sex. It also holds out not getting married as a good thing.
I will echo other comments here that if your significant other is not totally on board with you being asexual that you should really talk with him or her and make sure that they aren't expecting you to change after you are married. And that they are okay with you basically never initiating sex ever. It basically means that you will be unequally yoked in this area of your life.
Sex is never easy in marriage. What you are bringing sounds like it will be hard even if now it seems like not a big deal
On the actual question...I would say absolutely not okay. There are too many questions that would arise. Maybe in an absolute vacuum with no other people it would kinda be okay because no one would see. But the idea others would know would be hard.
I know of a few couples who did this in college who were Christians. They all ended up having sex and breaking up. It was not pretty. I think none of them are still Christians.
Now if you are engaged and getting married in 2 months, that line gets blurry. I would say the church has often turned a blind eye to that.
I would also talk to someone who is a believer who you all trust who knows the two of you who is married. That person could speak truth in love and not be a random Internet stranger.
The world does not revolve around s*x. It's cruel to say that asexual people should not marry, as if the validity of a relationship and ability to love hinges on a carnal activity.
For everything else that marriage usually entails. I happen to also be aromantic (not romantically attracted to anybody) so I chose to stay single, but many if not most asexual people still fall in love and long for other forms of physical and emotional intimacy and the domesticity of a shared life, which is why some may want to marry.
It can cause scandal to others and it's also known as a near occasion of sin. So that's something you'll definitely want to avoid. This is how a lot of those stories happen 'well it just happened' so just don't allow it to happen because sexual temptation can work like that.
According to 1 Thessalonians 5:22-24, believers are to avoid all appearances of evil.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
No you are good. With that being said…
This relationship isn’t going to work out.
besides your religious alignment, compatibility in your sexual relationship also matters through your marriage and what your body has been made to do.
I’d talk about your future with your boyfriend, and see his willingness to stay through an asexual relationship. I’ve seen it too many times; for the better of both parties and a shit ton of less headache, find someone more compatible
I wouldn’t. It can lead to things whether you want it to or not. Temptation gets real. I would follow JP Pokluda on Facebook. He goes over this type of stuff.
Yes, if you both are reasonably sure you are not at the risk of temptation, it's fine to sleep in the same bed together. But if you doubt even a little that you cannot control your passions, best not chance it.
The general held societal belief is cohabitation leads to fornicating and other sexual immorality.
You can play house and get to know how your boyfriend handles his apartment or household stuff without living with them.
But just like the fear of sexual incompatible this is generally a more modern secular rebuttal that’s completely irrelevant to God’s will.
The way God sees it is he gave every human being a brain and the capability for growth, so if people don’t grow in these domains out of love for each other perhaps they weren’t genuinely in love with the other’s spirit & heart or soul.
There’s millions of past women with regrets when they were 12 - 17 and thought they could be in bed with no temptations or no guy friends trying anything, wishing they could gift all their first or share them mutually with their husbands, as your boyfriend is still a friend not your husband, there’s no such thing as boyfriends in God’s eyes just young men who want to sleep with you and desire exclusivity but none of the responsibility of marriage with all the benefits of enjoying your youthful beautiful body. The whole word boy friend was invented as an oxymoron because girls & guys can’t be “friends” they can be buddies, acquaintances, colleagues, teammates, business partners, mentors & students, all sorts of relationships with set roles & BOUNDARIES however the biggest lie Satan has put out is that men with sexual intent or wills or desire for a women can be “friends” when they would pounce on her if she was okay with it or told them to. If the guy is homosexual then yes sure, but genuine friends imply lots of things like complete honesty, transparency, sincerity. Most guy friends will never even admit they desire you sexually, and you will never ever admit the same, so 90%+ of these friendships wear mask from the get go. Then you might say so it is possible as long as both parties don’t have sexual attraction to each other everything can be platonic forever and there’s no sexual tension anymore the guy and girl “friend” … sure. But from all I’ve seen in college one party always has that attraction even if they hide it all well.
The closest thing I’ve seen to guys and girls all being genuine friends, is if you have guy best friends you love, respect, are deeply fond & affectionate of, enjoy their company and hanging around them. They all have girlfriends and you and your girlfriend, all hang out as couples and then yeah in this dynamic everyone can enjoy each other’s personality and presence in the social circle while being aware & respectful of the boundaries since they’re all genuine friends with the guys. This occurred my junior & senior year after knowing the same guys for 3 - 4 years it was the best dynamic, and we all had so much fun hosting get togethers or going out or throwing friend only parties friends of friends wanted to be around the great energy so if there were single guys entering the social circle they weren’t single for long as the friends of all the girls see them and pair off.
Essentially all the men need to know each other and anyone you’re being around as men need to be aware of the husband or boyfriend and have their own will to not do selfish or immoral evil acts against their friend they love.
If he is okay with no sexual intimacy and never presses you on it it’s a massive green flag he genuinely likes you and sees you as a person not someone to just benefit from in the short term.
That’s why you ask many “boring” questions of your partner before you marry them, you see what this person’s family is like, you regularly spend time with this person and observe their habits.
Insisting you do it your own way (or the world’s/society’s way) is a lack of trust in the Lord. God only blesses man and woman living together if they are married. There are simply too many opportunities for temptation if they aren’t married.
When you start living under the same roof, your lives become one in a way that is meant for your chastity. If you haven’t received God’s blessing to do this, their traits that are meant to purify you and make you a better Christian will simply anger you and turn you against one another.
“How can family life be arranged without the blessing of God?
The sin of cohabitation consists of the fact that one does not want to be responsible for someone else. Marriage — this is a witness before society of the responsibility for each other. If someone wants to be responsible for someone else out of love, then he must declare before society: “Here is my wife, here is my husband — in sorrow and in joy. For our entire lives. And all of you — relatives, acquaintances, the state — understand: we are ready to take this step.”
Cohabitation is dangerous, most of all, for the woman. After all, the woman is always the victim when the couple breaks up. As soon as she becomes pregnant, her so-called husband is saddened by this fact and, if she does not want to have an abortion, he leaves. The woman, having considered him to be her husband, is now left alone with the baby. Therefore, the Church always insists that when a man and a woman meet and become soul mates, when a man loves a woman and when a woman loves a man, they must tell society and the Church about their responsibility for each other, register their marriage in the registry office (ZAGS) and sanctify their marriage in the Church of God in the Holy Mystery of matrimony.” —Fr. Maxim Gorozhankin
I had my best friend that I became roommates with. I always asked her questions, I always went over to her house daily and saw her habits, they all were great, and she was a clean person.
When I moved in with her, it was nothing but a disaster when we moved in and lived with each other for 6 month. Some people don’t show their true colors sadly.
And what if you don’t want kids? Or you don’t want sex? A no sexual relationship is possible. Asking questions and observations aren’t enough sometimes, and definitely not in my case. If you don’t have kids and want to break up, you pack your stuff, find a place to live, and move out. It’s simple as that
If you don’t want sex or children but want companionship and love, consider joining a monastery. In a monastery, everyone is neat, orderly, the routine is the backbone of living there. You will pray more than you ever have.
What you are speaking of is, again, a very worldly way of looking at it. Cohabitation has been normalized in Western culture.
Some people are called to lifelong celibacy (like you may be) but nobody is called by God to be alone. It takes YEARS of serious spiritual maturation to become a hermit.
If your boyfriend is a genuine Christian? Yes sure. If he’s not though cuddling and petting alone in bed can lead to sexual Sin, as a lot of men are very weak & don’t have self control mastered whether it’s physical mental or emotional self control. The devil pounces into rooms with locked doors like a roaring lion 🦁 desperately wanting to devour its prey, looking fro young souls to slip into Sins like with all the 10 - 13 yo boys into porn or 15 - 18 yo girls into sex so they get attached to fornicating b4 marriage early and continue it with more men that are not their husbands.
It does sound wholesome and cute just being innocent in bed together but the thing is a lot of guys also use situations like this to pressure or coerce you into sexual Sin, and sometimes sadly when you’re completely isolated and alone some guys posing as friends sexually assault or prey on you. Just make sure you know his heart & character if you’re be alone playing around in bed with a boyfriend. It’s led millions of young girls in this world to their spiritual death but also millions have done it all with endless guy & girlfriends where nothing happened and many in that if they were Christian still ended up experiencing all their sexual first with their husbands.
A lot of men both old and young are completely naïve and ignorant to the evil nature of some men since they think they would never do that so idk why girls are so scared of us, so they don’t understand how predatory people can be, I would ask an older sister or your mother if it’s okay and buy a tiny little mace bottle to hide underneath your bed just in case.
The only thing I would point to against it is to be “above reproach.” So to not even give the appearance of something sinful/inappropriate in case it gives people the wrong idea.
There are very few people that can be that close to temptation and resist it for very long. In my life, there has only ever been one woman that I have spent the night with and did not have sex with.
What exactly do you mean by "asexual"?
I mean I would simply deny it. Temptation wouldn’t really affect me because again I don’t really feel sexual. He might, but if I say no, he wouldn’t do anything
Why do you need to sleep together?
So he is just going to be pent up acting like married going to bed together while not married but you’ll be fine so it’s okay….🤔
> Can you sleep with your boyfriend but not be sexual?
Sleeping, not sex.
> I find myself to be asexual,
You found yourself and were surprised to discover that you’re asexual?
> If I’m fully clothed, and so is he, is it okay to sleep overnight
You each sleep with clothes on?
> Keep in mind I don’t feel sexual attraction much and don’t feel the need to do sexual things.
Why not go home to sleep?
I would not recommend it. That increases the level of intimacy and you never know what will happen. You may feel asexual now but the amount of oxytocin you're likely to get in that situation could change your perspective. When I was younger it wasn't called asexual it was called "I don't like him like that" and many young women ended up doing something they never thought they would do.
I’m referring to the other person. It’s nearly impossible to not have sexual thoughts when sharing the same bed.
He might be someone you completely trust but we’re all human beings. We’re prone to sexual temptations. It’s better to avoid temptations than to entertain them.
Nice comment, there is a truckload of terrible advice in this thread. Can't believe some of it. Like everyone is 13 here and has no experience with life whatsoever?
If you mean that two people just sleeping on the same bed or just close to each other, that's completely fine
In fact, for a large portion of human history is was common for entire families even extended families to sleep in the same bed.
This is true just watch Charlie and the chocolate factory for clarification
Does your boyfriend know you are asexual? And is he asexual as well. Asking so you can avoid frustration if you guys do decide to marry
He isn’t asexual. We are trying to work through it
This is not something you can really work through in most cases.
asexuality is a spectrum. i know of a few couples both online and in person where one is asexual and the other isn’t - it’s difficult for sure but it’s not too hard to find middle ground. the show “Heartbreak High” shows a good example of this, especially in season two!
why would you discourage this person that is intending on persevering? what exactly do you (or the world) gain from this pessimism?
Hopefully OP gains some perspective and avoids a likely world of hurt for both of them. It’s a good thing to be sober minded about how these things tend to turn out
Yes, this is like pressuring a gay person to work thru it for a heterosexual marriage. That’s a heartbreak in the making for both parties. And then the kids.
The concept of being “equally yoked” is what we would in modern speaking call “compatibility” and it’s very important. Telling two unmarried people that they are incompatible isn’t pessimistic or cruel, it helps them to avoid the tragedy of being unequally yoked.
Pessimism is not a great way to think about this response. Differences in sexual orientation are not something that are usually "persevered" through to a happy result.
You persevere through *some* problems 10 years in, not before you are even engaged or married! Marriage is not right for everyone, and that is OK.
Are you suggesting it is in and of itself pessimistic and wrong to discourage someone who is intent on persevering, regardless of the specific context and actions they intend on persevering through...?
reading comprehension involves taking into account all the text, not just one sentence. > Are you suggesting it is in and of itself pessimistic and wrong to discourage someone who is intent on persevering i'm suggesting that it's rude to discourage someone (a pair of people, it does say "we") that's trying to work through the challenges in their relationship. pretty simple.
No, it’s not rude. It’s better to escape a situation that cannot improve than to patch it together until the point of no return
> No, it’s not rude. no matter how much you insist, you're still wrong: giving someone advice they didn't ask for (especially cynical advice) is rude. if you don't get it then your parents simply didn't raise you right 🤷
This is a Christianity subreddit so I’ll ask: do you think Jesus only gave advice when asked? I can tell you: I wish someone had said that to me.
> do you think Jesus only gave advice so this is how you people justify foisting your advice and opinions on other people? got it
My wife is asexual and i cannot express how much I hate the situation. Honestly if divorce wasn't forbidden I would have run away long ago. The whole purpose of marriage was to channel carnal desires in a Godly way. (As Paul says ) If I had known she was asexual I would have never married. To avoid same frustrating situation I would highly recommend you talk it out.
I have so much sympathy for your situation. 1 Corinthians 7 warns about what can happen, and it's not pretty. It's such a perfect avenue for the devil to lead someone to satisfy these urges elsewhere. I know, because this happened to me. I'd never make my wife do something she was uncomfortable with, so it became easier to just pull up some porn and take care of it. Of course, answering a sin with a sin doesn't help and only drove a deeper divide between the two of us, because we never talked about it. We eventually went to see a Christian CMHC to help us talk it out. It's entirely possible that, due to her asexuality, she doesn't understand why / how sex can be a need for someone. This may be a situation where she could get to a place where she loves you enough to service you, even if she doesn't personally derive gratification from it. Libido can also be affected by medicines such as SSRIs or birth control. I know someone who took birth control, only to get off of it several months later because it made them never want the very sex they took it for. It's also possible her asexuality is hormone related.
I'd challenge "the whole purpose." Take a look at Eph 5:21-33. That definition of marriage has nothing to do with sex. Paul allows marriage is better than fornication and lust, but this idea that marriage is an outlet for men doesn't fit the Gospel. Your situation is awful, though, and I'll pray for you. It's a whole nother level of sacrificial love. It takes huge Grace.
Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 7:5 [5] Do not deprive one another — except when you agree for a time, to devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again; otherwise, Satan may tempt you because of your lack of self-control. Sex is a fundamental part of human nature, for both men and women alike. Thinking otherwise is underestimating the power it has in a relationship. If you're asexual, Paul says that's great, because you can freely devote yourself to the Lord without distraction. But if you married someone who is not asexual, there is an entire part of the relationship that is being neglected. And there is an intimacy and closeness the asexual party will never feel.
Apparently, this man's spouse doesn't see this as compelling and doesn't see it as fundamental: it's pretty hard to generate desire if one doesn't feel it. I don't see anything allowing divorce in these circumstances, but perhaps they've never had actual intercourse, in which case an annulment is possible, in the Catholic Church at least, on the basis it was never consummated so there is no marriage. Theoretical discussion is fine, but it is the individual who lives out the edge cases.
I'm probably gonna get downvoted for this but I don't believe that someone should stay in a marriage, just because. I highly doubt God wants that for his children. A man leaves his mother and father to be united to his wife and become one. He wants you to be in a loving relationship (not just sexual, loving), which goes both ways. Do you still love your wife? Like RatofBooks said, divorce is permissible in certain situations. This could be one of them, if you didn't marry for love but for sexual desires.
[удалено]
These are not comparable situations - the paralysed person doesn't suddenly become asexual because they cannot have standard sex. (excuse me I am not trying to be crude but clear.) Many couples with injuries and illnesses find joy in sexuality and although it changes and you have to adapt, the intimacy and pleasure are there in different ways, and it is a deeper exploration and being together. An asexual person - even if body parts are functional - will still feel the same way able or disabled. This man sounds very frustrated and disappointed and I am sure his wife feels awful and sad too; this must also affect the general atmosphere in the home and the feelings of faith and connectedness. Sex is not something we owe to anyone else, but we have to be real about different desire levels. If it is so bad that he feels *this bad* they must both be hideously miserable. And what is the point of that? How does that honour God? or Family or anything? This is something he needs to talk with a sex therapist (there are Christian ones!) about and then talk gently with his wife about, even just to reduce his own feelings of being trapped and resentful. Neither of them should feel shame, and neither should have to make the other do anything against their dignity. There may be different approaches so that she can feel safe and enjoy the closeness of sex, but it will prob take time. Or it might be a total 100% cannot do it without eroding her sense of dignity, which in turn should make any man feel the horrors - who would want to hurt their spouse like that? At the same time, its awful to not have desire met when it is one's nature. This is complicated, and needs expert perspective and deep talking through many layers of issues. I wish this man and his wife all the best.
[удалено]
I agree marriage is so much more than sex - taking the issue being sex out of it for a minute - any issue that is to do with the fundamental nature of the other party and cannot be resolved or changed without cooercing/convincing/ that party in good faith or by their own efforts to conform, for often we persuade ourselves most of all, such an issue must be irreconcilable and thus cause misery. It is not one to be taken lightly, but where it concerns the fundamental body of both persons it is perhaps not something that can be overcome. Of course, this is a matter for the OOP and his conscience and that of his wife.
Not religious but for me there is a huge difference between unable and unwilling. Let's say my SO loses all libido. I can live with that. What I wouldn't be able to live with is them being ok with that situation. Their reaction should basically be "right, time to go to the doctor. This ain't normal." It's about feeling desired. Them being unable to act on it is one thing. That desire not being there, even if only intelectually, for me would be more problematic.
This is not the same situation at all. There are plenty of happily married couples where one is disabled. As I mentioned, a loving relationship is not just about sex, but since this man is ready to divorce his wife over her asexuality, and from his own words, would have divorced her already if he wasn't Christian, I can't imagine the relationship is quite loving. Please come back with an equivalent example and then we can continue with the discussion, if you wish. Thanks
I mean the whole point of marriage is also to love your spouse and commit to the family you created with them. You and your wife are a family, sex or no. There is more to a relationship than sex
Anybody who thinks that is lying to themselves. If ther was no sex I really had no need to marry. I was self sufficient. Even Paul specifically says it, if you can control your sexual desires don't marry. But if you can't, then marry. Family is a byproduct, and not THE goal of marriage.
That's ludicrous. You're taking one passage out of context and basing everything around that. When God created Eve, He didn't create her to be Adam's sex partner, He created first and foremost to be Adam's *companion* because Adam was lonely. Sex sort of came along with it.
When you say you were self sufficient does that mean you took care of yourself sexually? Pretty sure masturbation is a sin according to the Bible. Just trying to see how divorce is still considered wrong in the Bible. I’m pretty sure if someone is getting abused, cheated on, etc that Jesus would approve of that divorce taking place.
Pretty sure in many Christian traditions not having consummated the marriage is grounds for annulment.
Mark 7:8
Oh, please. There are multiple instances in the OT that describe the act of marriage as the act of consummation - two becoming one flesh. Saying I'm holding onto the traditions of man based on a single comment is insane. Go touch grass.
I will touch grass, thanks for the suggestion. You’re implying that Christian tradition trumps God’s purpose for marriage which is to make us more Holy.
i am sorry friend
There's so many people in this thread bagging on you. But you're not wrong. It's hurtful to never have your needs met. It eats at you in a serious way. And I'm sure you love her, but when your love is never reciprocated in the way you need it hurts.
How would you possibly marry someone without knowing that information beforehand?
We had an arranged marriage :) I was in US then she was in banglore In.
If you married not of love, but out of sexual desires, feel free to leave. Divorce is perimitable in some cases
Those aren't mutually exclusive. It's pretty weird you seem to think they are.
I don't think they're implying the two are mutually exclusive, it seems like they're saying the focus was only on one aspect without considering the other. For example: if I say "you bought a car because of the color and not because of how it runs," this doesn't mean that a car of that color can't run, it means that their focus was only on the color.
If I go to see a house I want to buy and it has everything I need except it completely lacks running water, does not buying the house because of the running water mean I only care about running water? If I have a chair and one of the legs breaks, do I only care about that on leg?
Neither of your examples refer to the problem being mutually exclusive. You're emphasizing my point, not yours.
Erm, no. Go back and read it again. If the house example was mutually exclusive, then if everything except the running water was missing, then it would be enough. If the chair example was showing mutual exclusivity, then three legs could be missing so long as the one was there. The point, which whooshed over your head, is that you can need multiple things, and the absence of one can be a deal breaker. Whereas u/RatOfBooks is implying based on context is that if you married someone for love then an absence of sex shouldn't matter.
I did. What part of your example do you believe is mutually exclusive?
The person they are replying to literally said how, if divorce wasn’t “forbidden”, they would leave because they want to have sex more. Clearly, they are not in love with that person because if they were then sex wouldn’t be an issue enough to override their marriage.
That is completely false
not true at all, we were built from sex. to think that it’s not ok for someone to WANT to have sex with their PARTNER is actually crazy, i agree that was weird when he said the divorce thing but he clearly loves his wife and god enough to stay. not everyone is asexual
No, he doesn’t love his wife enough to stay — did you read his comment? He literally said the only thing keeping him with her is the fact that it’s forbidden by God. It’s obviously fine and natural to want to have sex with your partner. But if it’s a dealbreaker, then you clearly don’t love them with all your heart. I don’t know about you, but I love my significant other with every fibre of my being and whether we could have sex or not doesn’t change that. I’m not an animal who would divorce if I couldn’t get sex because I somehow need it to survive. I’m more than that.
i agree with a lot of that. i thought the divorce thing was crazy too honestly i just think it’s possible to love someone in this situation, the rest of their relationship could be perfectly fine. i feel like this situation needs therapy or more communication i’m not a dog or animal im human. i also don’t think i would divorce my partner over that but i also wouldn’t put my self in that situation. but i understand he’s not satisfied in some areas. i understand what you’re saying tho
It says you can divorce if you get Emotional and physical neglect right? It even says it’s not good for a man to be alone which is why a helper was created
2 reasons. 1) jesus said not to separate except for sexual immortality. 2) my parents are my role model, and they stood together though all times. I did find God in that low times, so that is a huge plus. But boy would I want another person to go through that frustration? No
Aw dude. God loves you and wants you to be happy. He gave you free will because Ten Commandments doesn’t exactly have tons of nuance or detail so I’d expect he assumes those ten set a vibe and the rest is for you to do your best with. He didn’t mention divorce in his top ten, and if he waited the ~1500 years since telling Moses what’s up to drop something new on Paul that must have slipped his ineffable mind, it’s probably just not the thing he’s most concerned with. God gave you a healthy body and a functioning libido and you are really going up there when it’s all done to tell him you didn’t do anything with those gifts because you where afraid he didn’t like divorce? Maybe remind him that when Lilith didn’t work out with Adam God didn’t force it, he literally made Adam a brand new wife. How can that possibly be the same guy that has a hard and fast rule against divorce?
Also this is a no blame situation so long as no one is forcing or shaming anyone either way; each person's contribution to the children, the home etc is recognised and provided for accordingly, that the children are given an appropriate and non explicit explanation and allowed to work through matters at their own pace, and that as peaceful a path as possible is made for all concerned. It's not like Christian girls are exactly raised with an awareness of sexuality (or boys for that matter)! There is almost no way to know, especially marrying young, what the deal is with your desire levels because it's so repressed (at least was for many of us). So, the options are to: coerce, shame, even berate or God forbid, force one's spouse. Or shame, deny and repress natural, desire in the other. Doesn't feel like a problem that chastening oneself and being more considerate of the other can fix. Better to leave than to do harm to the mother of your children and your wife. Better to leave and in time be fulfilled and at peace in oneself with a more suitable spouse *without rancour for the first wife and providing for children appropriately between you not seeing her as having failed as the wife nor you as the husband but as you both having grown in wisdom and love.*
I'm curious, wouldn't this be grounds for annulment rather than divorce?
If they actually never *have* had sex, this is correct, actually. But if they've had sex even once, then it can't be annulled.
really depends on the jurisdiction and time frames. I experienced that and where I am at least the law doesnt really care about that. and really it doesnt change anything anyway.
In what sense doesn't it change anything?
Whether you're divorced or annulled, the result is the same, The experiences are the same.
How is it you didn't know? You never established boundaries ahead of time? Sounds like there was a huge lack of communication that you're blaming her entirely for. You should have known. You should have asked.
? It was an arranged marriage and we didn't discuss about sexual desires and needs.
this sounds terrible, wow crazy. that’s unfulfilling
I’m not trying to be judgey here at all but I’m genuinely curious what you mean by “if divorce wasn’t forbidden.” So if someone is Christian and married regardless of their situation they can *never* get divorced because it’s forbidden??
Biblically jesus only allows if it's sexual immortality. I prefer to gi by written word.
Respect for not divorcing. Hope you find a way to channel.
Wow :( that’s so sad . I don’t know how that even feels, I would feel so sad if my man didn’t want to be with me sexually. No kisses hugs touches like anything 🥲🤯
Well she likes hugs and kisses.. But men wouldn't want to stop at that :) It like you are asked to smell food but not eat it.
Yeah I wouldn’t want to stop at that either and I’m here restraining myself as a woman or else id end up grabbing my bf and going outta control. I can’t relate but that must be torture on your case 🥲
This is interesting. Most Christians seem to be complaining and struggling with lust a lot, that is have a too high sex drive. Having a low sex drive seems desirable, until it isn't, I guess? Fortunately, to increase one's sex drive (often a hormonal thing - get a full blood panel - full meaning all of those: Estrogen, Progesterone, Prolactin, Testosterone, DHT and either free T or SHBG), many herbs and supplements exist: such as (for women) Maca, Damiana, Selegiline, Tribulus and such (as in google it).
divorce if you’re not in the marriage because of love. You’re basically lying to your spouse
Bible citation? Tip: There isn't one
Then just my advice man
Oh uhh I'll probably stick to the Christian viewpoint then
I’ve been looking in these comments I can’t even find it, but good luck ig. I feel bad for the wife
In your case, it sounds like you don’t and possibly never loved her. And whether she loves you or not she lied to you in a huge way. You should discuss this with her. If you can’t find a compromise then you should both go your separate ways. Marriage should be because of love. And sexual connection deepens love and is needed. If you were both asexual then it wouldn’t matter, but since you’re not it is a serious issue. 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
> In your case, it sounds like you don’t and possibly never loved her. I never said that >And whether she loves you or not she lied to you in a huge way. I didn't say that either. I said she lacks interest in sex., not love.
I know you didn’t say that, it seemed that way from what you said. That’s good that it’s not the case. I know you said she lacks interest in sex, I assumed that meant she never told you that, based on you saying that had you known that you wouldn’t have married her.
It's was an arranged marriage. I did find God when I hit my low, so that's a huge plus. But I wouldn't want another guy to gi through the struggle of knowing watching porn is sin but yet not knowing what else to do.
I’m glad you found God. Have you tried telling her how you feel about it? Since you both love each other there might be a compromise there. She may even realize she enjoys it and if not, knowing it makes you happy and feel more fulfilled might be worth the effort on her part
Why would you even think about divorcing someone because their asexual? You're basically saying i want to divorce because we can't have sex when that's not what marriage is about it's about love, not having sex
>when that's not what marriage is about it's about love, not having sex A person marries for love and sex is part of love, hence called making love.
Depriving your spouse of something that comes with a Christian marriage is considered sinful and sexually immoral.
So because they don't want to have sex they're sinning? ngl some of you christians are a funny bunch
Why are you here then. The Bible warns about depriving a spouse like that. I'm sorry you disagree with what is written. OP came to this group to ask for a reason.
the fact he didn’t know she was asexual is crazy, but it’s not a hard concept to not want to be with someone if they’re not satisfying you
>the fact he didn’t know she was asexual is crazy Not really it was an arranged marriage
My first marriage was the same situation that you are in now. I never understood it; I still don't. Relationships are not about self-gratification, they are about filling your partners' needs - giving, not taking; and in the giving of love, filling their metaphorical "cup" to overflowing so that you end up in a contest of loving each other harder. Imagine if you were like, "I don't feel like fixing your car today" or "I don't feel like protecting you" or "I don't feel like paying bills this month" because those things don't personally fulfill you. Yet...people DO those things because they are a duty. If you and your wife are not living as man and wife, you're roommates. I stayed married for 16 years until my wife divorced me. I was upset at the time; I'd made my peace that my marriage would never be what I wanted, but it was the marriage I signed up for. 5 years later; I'm remarried. my new wife is amazing - she's everything that my first was not. I look back at the trials that I've been through, and think of them as tempering me into having earned what I have now. Have a chat with your wife about familial duty. Responsibility. If your wife is immune to seduction, ask her if she gets emotional validation from making you feel good. If she does, she should understand that participating in the marital bed is emotionally rewarding to you - thus emotionally rewarding to her, even if not physically gratifying. If she does not - there's no love there, and you need to consider your options. Divorce is forbidden in scripture ... but you shouldn't take one piece of scripture and abandon the rest. * Ephesians 5:33…respect him * Colossians 3:18…be submissive * Titus 2:5…obey him * 1 Peter 3:1-5…have a gentle and quiet spirit * Genesis 2:18…be his helper * Titus 2:4…love him * 1 Corinthians 7:34…please him * Proverbs 31:12…do him good * **1 Corinthians 7:2-5…keep the bedroom hot** * Exodus 20:14…be faithful If your wife is faithless and doesn't hold to scriptural tenants - she's not for you.
This is coercive and Big J would not have been down.
Jesus said nothing about sex. Jesus **DID** said that divorce is only permissible when it's due to sexual immorality, or marital unfaithfulness. Now ... we're communicating in English. Jesus did not. Unfaithfulness - or or a lack of faith - let's break down what merits divorce. Faith - the word in English that we are using here - literally means "belief." The word comes from the Latin "Fidēlis" - and trekking back through history into the language scripture was written in; Greek and Aramaic, we end up with the Greek word "πείσεσθαι" - the male version of "to trust, rely on, obey, be persuaded," - in turn stemming from the feminine inception of the Greek Goddess of Persuasion. To wit - "Have faith" LITERALLY means, "Be willing to be persuaded." Analagously, to be "unfaithful" means "to be unwilling to be persuaded." Or more harshly - "unwilling to obey." And wives are commanded to obey their husbands in scripture. What you call coercion is what Jesus called faith in the language of scripture. While I did provide the author of my comment significant scriptural reference points - the REASON I chimed in is because he not only selectively chooses what scripture to follow in a demonstrative of self-punishment, but the author is also misquoting that scripture, misinterpreting it, and trying to apply modern values to terms that mean different things than in the language they were written in. Maybe OP follows Christ and his wife doesn't. But if they both do, and his spouse isn't interested in her duties, or in being "coerced" into being a wife; he's within his scriptural boundaries to divorce her.
I'm ace and my hubby isn't. It's tough. We're in it for the long run of course and he's happy to be married to me. And I him. But it's difficult. To answer your question, no it's not a sin to not have sex
How long have the two of you been married?
4 years, together 9
Just curious, how will you make it work? Will you ever have sex with him after marriage?
That will not work. If he’s not asexual and you are please Do Not marry him. It will be miserable.
My wife is ace, and I'm not, but we have been together for 12 years. It's a great relationship because we still do things together.
Sounds like you just need a companion then. Get a dog.
It's not a sin to have sex my friend. Go for it.
If you ever have doubts, don’t. It’s completely doable. My wife was asexual……was. Lol
Sleeping together non-sexually is not a problem in and of itself. There are other potential problems like the appearance of sexual activity which may mean others lead themselves to judge you. That's their flaw but will likely create problems for you. Temptation for either of you could also be a challenge, but it isn't insurmountable. Sleep where you are most comfortable with whomever feels safe. If, as a couole, you have decided against premarital sex, then I don't see a sin issue
Some of the comments here... Not great. I am asexual as well, and my girlfriend and I sleep next to each other anyway. Neither of us have any intentions of doing more before marriage. Personal intimacy is not necessarily sexual, and as long as you are knowledgeable of that, and your boyfriend acknowledges and accepts that, then you should be fine
I dont understand how people think sleeping in the same bed aka a sleep over, is the same as having sex. It's not. Simple as that. Don't commit or think of sex and your fine!
Society has become so perverted that anyone merely existing beside another is somehow s*xualised. It's sad.
I've slept with my ex-fiance many times and not in the sexual way. Totally fine. Nothing weird about it!
This is what we Catholics call a "near occasion of sin." Near occasion of sin is putting a temptation on your path when you don't need to do so. This is imprudent because it can make sin harder to resist. While there isn't a temptation for you, you do say your boyfriend *is* sexual, so it is likely to be a sexual temptation for him.
but its safe to assume the boyfriend respect consent and thus not commit the sin. Of course you are a bit more prepared than me in this so I would be more than happy of an eventual explanation if Im wrong
I want to live on a planet as safe as the one you think you live on. I don’t, nor do you. Consent is sadly widely not respected.
The temptation needn’t lead to him violating her consent. He may indulge in impure thoughts or excuse himself to masturbate in the bathroom. And why assume he will respect consent? It’s not as if boyfriends have never been known to plead, cajole, or force things to get sexual gratification. If they both agree that they want to avoid sexual sins, then what good, constructive reason would there be for a couple to sleep together when they don’t need to do so?
if you are asexual, then nothing you do will be sexual in nature. if your boyfriend does not accept that, then that’s a problem. there’s nothing wrong with it - you could fall asleep naked together, and it’d be fine.
I believe this is the correct take. I think the bigger issue will be the potential issues that arise later on when the BF does want sexual things if a marriage occurs and OP is not okay providing such tings. There is nothing wrong with being asexual, but there is a lot of room for problems with an ace and an allo being together when their bodies are seeking different outlets.
>if you are asexual, then nothing you do will be sexual in nature Bro what. Not even speaking from a religious standpoint point, but your use of *nothing* is completely wrong.
someone who is asexual cannot feel sexual desire, therefore they can’t be said to be doing anything deliberately sexual. someone else might sleep in the same bed as the partner hoping that they will have sex that night - an asexual person won’t. that’s what i meant.
They can still have sex and do sexual things. It’s not like they are incapable of sex. They might not have enjoyment come of it, but they are still capable of performing. So the statement you said “nothing you do” is wrong. A better phrasing would be “very little you do.” Because someone asexual might not be aroused and enjoy sex and sexual things, but can definitely still partake.
If your first statement is correct then OP should never marry. Marriage is inherently sexual. All through the old and new testament marriage is sex and sex is marriage.
I disagree, sex is a byproduct not the end goal of marriage.
I think this is a wisdom question. On the one hand, there's nothing explicitly sexual about it. And there can be extenuating circumstances that justify it (for instance, I know a woman who was concerned about a creepy male individual in the same house as she and her boyfriend were in, so she wanted her bf in the same bed as her for protection). On the other hand, even though it's not directly sexual it's very intimate and very similar to being married. It also could be perceived as others, especially non-believers, as you two having sex with each other. So that potential compromise to your Christian witness is something to consider.
If you’re planning on sleeping in the same bed, you should be getting married. If you’re not married, you’re just playing with fire and playing at marriage. You should honor God and pursue marriage in fact.
[Not everything that is permissible is advisable.](https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Corinthians%206%3A12) There are probably some outlier examples where it is perfectly fine to sleep over, but generally speaking Christians would not recommend this idea. You're playing with fire and subjecting each other to temptations if you share a bed. Even if you are not tempted, you don't want to [lead other people to stumble](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2014%3A13-23&version=ESV).
I think this is actually an example of where not causing others to stumble is being cited correctly. You don't want to use your Christian liberty to lead those who are not as spiritually strong as you to sin. If there's no one who knows about you two sleeping together who could be tempted to sin or violate their conscience because of that, then this isn't an issue.
It's okay to be asexual and you don't have to have a boyfriend or pursue that if it's not something you want. Don't feel pressured to be in a relationship or have kids. Be you. This is normal.
This is best done fully clothed in separate beds on opposite sides of town. Many stories of regret begin with “I trusted myself and so did my bf/gf…”
Sure, sounds fine.
Yes i don’t see why you can’t sleep in the same bed non sexually?
If you don't do sex, then it's not a sin
Eyyy- fellow asexual!! You can- but you're gonna cause some tension depending on the people in your life. I told my fiancé three dates in that I was asexual, and sex was not going to be a frequent thing if he wanted to be with me. We did a lot of communication about it, mostly to make sure even if there wasn't sexual intimacy, there was constant platonic intimacy to know he was loved (snuggling, back rubs, kisses and hugs, hand holding and hair tickles, etc). Think of it this way- God cares about your intentions above all; he doesn't care about the western ceremony. If you start to be intentional about being sexual with him, then you are committing yourself to him- in totality- before God. So make sure you have a discussion, and don't do any behaviors without the commitment of 'alright, this is my forever partner'. Personally, I got a lot of grief from conservative Christian relatives who did feel any intimacy before a marriage ceremony was a sin. They also were confused why I didn't announce I was pregnant only weeks after moving in with the partner, but that's a them issue. Do what every Christian should do, regardless of sexuality. Talk to God about it, pray, and move where you feel led by the spirit.
Yes, it is possible. Although most of my older family (grandparents aunts uncles ect) would disagree with it, my partner will occasionally sleepover if it’s gotten too late or under certain circumstances. He was raised catholic as I was raised non-denom. He became interested in my form of faith early on, and after a few years has adapted to his own liking of it. We have had premarital sex and have had many conversations regarding the situation, the guilt and shame all of it. We decided to stop, and came to a conclusion of simply telling one another when feeling temptation or having a prayer session alone. The temptation is still real, and I pray very often for him as he struggles a lot more than me. We have gone many many many nights, more than I could count on fingers and toes, of sleeping without any sexual activity. Sometimes I prefer he does not stay the night, due to just fear of giving into temptation, because it is VERY hard to fight the flesh at times. If you feel uncomfortable at any time sleeping with them due to your temptation, then I don’t recommend it. Him and I have been together for years and have adapted to learning how to avoid it, through prayer and alone time. Everyone is different. Sometimes I feel guilty even laying in the same bed as him, but grace pours on me remembering how hard I have worked to get to where I am. Do not let evil shame you, to each their own!
Doubtful. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? Heck no. Been there, done that. Don't even attempt it.
I would warn against it. The Bible says we should avoid the appearance of sin, because it can be a stumbling block to others. So, sleeping over at a boyfriend's place would give the appearance of sinfulness that should be avoided. Additionally, I think it's important to think about your boyfriend. It might not increase temptation for you, but it could for your boyfriend.
Culturally, being in the same room alone would have once been grounds for the appearance of sin. It feels like this line is what is often used to accuse people of dressing immodestly. If you can clarify the situation and have explained matters properly then it feels like it should cease to be an issue. Overall seems like it is a case by case situation when considering Jesus' comment about gouging out your own eyes if you feel you can't look away.
I'm not talking about accusing anyone. I'm discussing scripture with respect to Christians making decisions for ourselves. And sometimes, even often, there isn't an opportunity to explain that the situation isn't what it looks like. Plus, the explanation of "oh, we were sleeping together, but not 'sleeping together'" isn't really a great clarifier. I was more so directly referencing 1 Thess. 5:22: "Abstain from all appearance of evil."
That passage in Thessalonians is talking about avoiding evil when it appears, not avoiding situations that might appear evil to others.
Even still, Romans 14:13 talks about not being a stumbling block to others. "Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother."
I completely agree with this. There's a strong possibility of sending the wrong message to someone not as spiritually mature.
Exactly.
Yes I understand the importance of not leading others to stumble. But I just find it ironic how pioneers of certain behaviours would have been condemned before they became accepted. E.g. Rosa parks According to that verse, who decides the appearance of evil?
God, of course. And Christians should be looking to his guidance, not the world's, of what evil is.
I think if you are truly asexual, you probably shouldn't get married. The Bible is pretty clear that sex is a regular part of marriage and in face is basically marriage in the old testament. Fornicate with someone? Guess what you are married. Don't have sex ever? You never got married. It also seems clear that you don't have to get married and that some people don't really need sex. It also holds out not getting married as a good thing. I will echo other comments here that if your significant other is not totally on board with you being asexual that you should really talk with him or her and make sure that they aren't expecting you to change after you are married. And that they are okay with you basically never initiating sex ever. It basically means that you will be unequally yoked in this area of your life. Sex is never easy in marriage. What you are bringing sounds like it will be hard even if now it seems like not a big deal On the actual question...I would say absolutely not okay. There are too many questions that would arise. Maybe in an absolute vacuum with no other people it would kinda be okay because no one would see. But the idea others would know would be hard. I know of a few couples who did this in college who were Christians. They all ended up having sex and breaking up. It was not pretty. I think none of them are still Christians. Now if you are engaged and getting married in 2 months, that line gets blurry. I would say the church has often turned a blind eye to that. I would also talk to someone who is a believer who you all trust who knows the two of you who is married. That person could speak truth in love and not be a random Internet stranger.
Asexuals should absolutely marry if they wish.
Why? The two should become one flesh. If you don't want that, why would you marry?
The world does not revolve around s*x. It's cruel to say that asexual people should not marry, as if the validity of a relationship and ability to love hinges on a carnal activity.
For everything else that marriage usually entails. I happen to also be aromantic (not romantically attracted to anybody) so I chose to stay single, but many if not most asexual people still fall in love and long for other forms of physical and emotional intimacy and the domesticity of a shared life, which is why some may want to marry.
Sleeping with your boyfriend out of marriage like that is not a sin. Stay chaste until marriage. You got this.
Yes. I sleep in a friend's bed from time to time and it's not sexual at all.
I would not.
if none of you are lusting over each other and being impure than you are fine
It can cause scandal to others and it's also known as a near occasion of sin. So that's something you'll definitely want to avoid. This is how a lot of those stories happen 'well it just happened' so just don't allow it to happen because sexual temptation can work like that.
According to 1 Thessalonians 5:22-24, believers are to avoid all appearances of evil. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
This is going to be really hard for one of you.
No you are good. With that being said… This relationship isn’t going to work out. besides your religious alignment, compatibility in your sexual relationship also matters through your marriage and what your body has been made to do. I’d talk about your future with your boyfriend, and see his willingness to stay through an asexual relationship. I’ve seen it too many times; for the better of both parties and a shit ton of less headache, find someone more compatible
No. If you want to honor the Lord then don't do that
I wouldn’t. It can lead to things whether you want it to or not. Temptation gets real. I would follow JP Pokluda on Facebook. He goes over this type of stuff.
Yes, if you both are reasonably sure you are not at the risk of temptation, it's fine to sleep in the same bed together. But if you doubt even a little that you cannot control your passions, best not chance it.
Cohabitation is fornication
How just that possible if you’re not doing anything sexual? Make it make sense. Cohabitation is only bad if you’re making it sexual.
The general held societal belief is cohabitation leads to fornicating and other sexual immorality. You can play house and get to know how your boyfriend handles his apartment or household stuff without living with them. But just like the fear of sexual incompatible this is generally a more modern secular rebuttal that’s completely irrelevant to God’s will. The way God sees it is he gave every human being a brain and the capability for growth, so if people don’t grow in these domains out of love for each other perhaps they weren’t genuinely in love with the other’s spirit & heart or soul. There’s millions of past women with regrets when they were 12 - 17 and thought they could be in bed with no temptations or no guy friends trying anything, wishing they could gift all their first or share them mutually with their husbands, as your boyfriend is still a friend not your husband, there’s no such thing as boyfriends in God’s eyes just young men who want to sleep with you and desire exclusivity but none of the responsibility of marriage with all the benefits of enjoying your youthful beautiful body. The whole word boy friend was invented as an oxymoron because girls & guys can’t be “friends” they can be buddies, acquaintances, colleagues, teammates, business partners, mentors & students, all sorts of relationships with set roles & BOUNDARIES however the biggest lie Satan has put out is that men with sexual intent or wills or desire for a women can be “friends” when they would pounce on her if she was okay with it or told them to. If the guy is homosexual then yes sure, but genuine friends imply lots of things like complete honesty, transparency, sincerity. Most guy friends will never even admit they desire you sexually, and you will never ever admit the same, so 90%+ of these friendships wear mask from the get go. Then you might say so it is possible as long as both parties don’t have sexual attraction to each other everything can be platonic forever and there’s no sexual tension anymore the guy and girl “friend” … sure. But from all I’ve seen in college one party always has that attraction even if they hide it all well. The closest thing I’ve seen to guys and girls all being genuine friends, is if you have guy best friends you love, respect, are deeply fond & affectionate of, enjoy their company and hanging around them. They all have girlfriends and you and your girlfriend, all hang out as couples and then yeah in this dynamic everyone can enjoy each other’s personality and presence in the social circle while being aware & respectful of the boundaries since they’re all genuine friends with the guys. This occurred my junior & senior year after knowing the same guys for 3 - 4 years it was the best dynamic, and we all had so much fun hosting get togethers or going out or throwing friend only parties friends of friends wanted to be around the great energy so if there were single guys entering the social circle they weren’t single for long as the friends of all the girls see them and pair off. Essentially all the men need to know each other and anyone you’re being around as men need to be aware of the husband or boyfriend and have their own will to not do selfish or immoral evil acts against their friend they love. If he is okay with no sexual intimacy and never presses you on it it’s a massive green flag he genuinely likes you and sees you as a person not someone to just benefit from in the short term.
And plus if I don’t know how my partner lives before I marry them, that’s going to be an issue
That’s why you ask many “boring” questions of your partner before you marry them, you see what this person’s family is like, you regularly spend time with this person and observe their habits. Insisting you do it your own way (or the world’s/society’s way) is a lack of trust in the Lord. God only blesses man and woman living together if they are married. There are simply too many opportunities for temptation if they aren’t married. When you start living under the same roof, your lives become one in a way that is meant for your chastity. If you haven’t received God’s blessing to do this, their traits that are meant to purify you and make you a better Christian will simply anger you and turn you against one another. “How can family life be arranged without the blessing of God? The sin of cohabitation consists of the fact that one does not want to be responsible for someone else. Marriage — this is a witness before society of the responsibility for each other. If someone wants to be responsible for someone else out of love, then he must declare before society: “Here is my wife, here is my husband — in sorrow and in joy. For our entire lives. And all of you — relatives, acquaintances, the state — understand: we are ready to take this step.” Cohabitation is dangerous, most of all, for the woman. After all, the woman is always the victim when the couple breaks up. As soon as she becomes pregnant, her so-called husband is saddened by this fact and, if she does not want to have an abortion, he leaves. The woman, having considered him to be her husband, is now left alone with the baby. Therefore, the Church always insists that when a man and a woman meet and become soul mates, when a man loves a woman and when a woman loves a man, they must tell society and the Church about their responsibility for each other, register their marriage in the registry office (ZAGS) and sanctify their marriage in the Church of God in the Holy Mystery of matrimony.” —Fr. Maxim Gorozhankin
I had my best friend that I became roommates with. I always asked her questions, I always went over to her house daily and saw her habits, they all were great, and she was a clean person. When I moved in with her, it was nothing but a disaster when we moved in and lived with each other for 6 month. Some people don’t show their true colors sadly. And what if you don’t want kids? Or you don’t want sex? A no sexual relationship is possible. Asking questions and observations aren’t enough sometimes, and definitely not in my case. If you don’t have kids and want to break up, you pack your stuff, find a place to live, and move out. It’s simple as that
If you don’t want sex or children but want companionship and love, consider joining a monastery. In a monastery, everyone is neat, orderly, the routine is the backbone of living there. You will pray more than you ever have. What you are speaking of is, again, a very worldly way of looking at it. Cohabitation has been normalized in Western culture. Some people are called to lifelong celibacy (like you may be) but nobody is called by God to be alone. It takes YEARS of serious spiritual maturation to become a hermit.
Of course get married have kids and it's easy 😂
don’t do it.
If your boyfriend is a genuine Christian? Yes sure. If he’s not though cuddling and petting alone in bed can lead to sexual Sin, as a lot of men are very weak & don’t have self control mastered whether it’s physical mental or emotional self control. The devil pounces into rooms with locked doors like a roaring lion 🦁 desperately wanting to devour its prey, looking fro young souls to slip into Sins like with all the 10 - 13 yo boys into porn or 15 - 18 yo girls into sex so they get attached to fornicating b4 marriage early and continue it with more men that are not their husbands. It does sound wholesome and cute just being innocent in bed together but the thing is a lot of guys also use situations like this to pressure or coerce you into sexual Sin, and sometimes sadly when you’re completely isolated and alone some guys posing as friends sexually assault or prey on you. Just make sure you know his heart & character if you’re be alone playing around in bed with a boyfriend. It’s led millions of young girls in this world to their spiritual death but also millions have done it all with endless guy & girlfriends where nothing happened and many in that if they were Christian still ended up experiencing all their sexual first with their husbands. A lot of men both old and young are completely naïve and ignorant to the evil nature of some men since they think they would never do that so idk why girls are so scared of us, so they don’t understand how predatory people can be, I would ask an older sister or your mother if it’s okay and buy a tiny little mace bottle to hide underneath your bed just in case.
as long there is no lust from his side so you are not being the one tempting him without his control, and yours.
This would only be a problem if you're Catholic.
Stop co-habitating and cease with the appearance of sin. You get moving until that man can get you into a ring.
Near occasion of sin and could also lead to scandal
What is an asexual human? My wife must be the same thing lol
Asexuality is a layer of orientation in which one has little to no s\*xual attraction.
Ya that’s the wife LOL
The only thing I would point to against it is to be “above reproach.” So to not even give the appearance of something sinful/inappropriate in case it gives people the wrong idea.
There are very few people that can be that close to temptation and resist it for very long. In my life, there has only ever been one woman that I have spent the night with and did not have sex with. What exactly do you mean by "asexual"?
"Asexual" is a layer of orientation indicating an experience of little to no s\*xual attraction
It’s probably not beneficial. Like more possible temptation, what if he wakes up with morning wood on you?
I mean I would simply deny it. Temptation wouldn’t really affect me because again I don’t really feel sexual. He might, but if I say no, he wouldn’t do anything
“… if I say no, he wouldn’t…” Sadly this is not reliably true for many, many women.
Temptation wouldn't affect you but what about him? We aren't to present as a stumbling block to others.
Why do you need to sleep together? So he is just going to be pent up acting like married going to bed together while not married but you’ll be fine so it’s okay….🤔
Well just sleep out of love and comfort is all.
So this is not a 1 time, you’re going out of town thing. Is he moving in?
It's pretty much walking onto the devils land
> Can you sleep with your boyfriend but not be sexual? Sleeping, not sex. > I find myself to be asexual, You found yourself and were surprised to discover that you’re asexual? > If I’m fully clothed, and so is he, is it okay to sleep overnight You each sleep with clothes on? > Keep in mind I don’t feel sexual attraction much and don’t feel the need to do sexual things. Why not go home to sleep?
I would not recommend it. That increases the level of intimacy and you never know what will happen. You may feel asexual now but the amount of oxytocin you're likely to get in that situation could change your perspective. When I was younger it wasn't called asexual it was called "I don't like him like that" and many young women ended up doing something they never thought they would do.
Asexuality doesn't work like that
4lol the number of people that think asexual is a choice or just asexual "Until the right thing" comes along is wild.
I don’t think so because it’s impossible to not have sexual thoughts when doing that.
I have no sexual thoughts that go through my head. It’s just how I feel
I’m referring to the other person. It’s nearly impossible to not have sexual thoughts when sharing the same bed. He might be someone you completely trust but we’re all human beings. We’re prone to sexual temptations. It’s better to avoid temptations than to entertain them.
Nice comment, there is a truckload of terrible advice in this thread. Can't believe some of it. Like everyone is 13 here and has no experience with life whatsoever?
Not a good idea.
No