Dating

A recent article in a Canadian magazine entitled “Is Dating Dead?” observed that dating has surely changed. In the Western world a person tries a succession of sexual partners prior to cohabiting. Understandably some refuse to use the word dating at all, preferring instead such an innocuous phrase as “going out.” Even “having a relationship” unfortunately now connotes a sexual liaison. The much older English words courting and wooing—similar in meaning to the terms “speak to the heart” and “allure” found in the Hebrew Bible (see Isaiah 40:2; Hosea 2:14)—suggest the sensitive persuasion with which a man will plead to a woman’s heart for her hand in marriage, thus raising the crucial question of whether dating and mating should themselves be married!

Must dating be practiced with a view to finding a suitable marriage partner? Should Christians participate in recreational romance or romantic networking—whether or not one has any interest in or calling to marriage? Can dating be a ministry to not-yet Christians, a form of romantic evangelism? Should dating be restricted to finding a spouse? Is there a place in dating for relationship enhancement, the enjoyment of other persons, a form of neighbor love without marriage in view? Is there an explicitly Christian approach to dating? Is there a place for dating after one is married? Are there initiatives a person can take, specifically if one is female, when no dating prospects seem to be on the horizon?

Dating Through the Ages

All cultures have found ways of allowing people to meet members of the opposite sex with a view to finding a suitable marriage partner, though in most cases these have been tightly controlled by social taboos, such as “no dating without the presence of a chaperon,” and in others there simply was no opportunity for relational experimenting. In most ancient societies marriages were arranged by parents, and there was virtually no social contact prior to engagement (except through observation in village life or shared survival activities) and no sexual contact until marriage.

In some cultures today it is assumed that a man or woman cannot be alone together without having sexual intercourse. So the arranged marriage survives in a few places, and where there is wisdom exercised by parents, family and friends, this system may be preferred to the romantic networking of the Western world, which is usually focused on falling in love or infatuation—a phenomenon that is actually a temporary derangement. The Christian church has penetrated and transformed various cultures all over the world, but where it has brought the Christian view of marriage, it has not always eliminated the system of arranged marriages. Sometimes the church has transformed the system. But one thing Christianity has always brought is the requirement of consent, which is based on theological reasons relating to God’s covenant with God’s people. No covenant can be formed without the willing heart agreement of the bride and groom—hence the questions asked in a Christian marriage ceremony (“Do you take this man to be . . .”). Consent is implicit in making promises and vows.

Some African tribes offered socially acceptable ways for young people to explore relationships with the opposite sex by permitting limited sexual affection in a very controlled situation, especially for couples that were predisposed to marry each other. This was not unlike the bundling or binding (in bed for an exploratory night together with a physical barrier between!) practiced by some Christian sects until quite recently. Festivals and harvest celebrations were natural contexts in which people in agrarian societies would experimentally explore special relationships with others of marriageable age, sometimes indicating interest through socially learned signals such as making repeated eye contact.

The older systems could assume a stable social network of families, clans, tribes and peoples in which the parents and the children knew each other. A young man and young woman would observe each other at work, home and community activities over years. This prolonged exposure cannot easily be accomplished in the modern city, especially in a mobile society (see Mobility). In fact, there is no possibility for prolonged exposure in most of the world, careening as it is toward global urbanization. Only a disciplined approach to the modern dating system can replicate the advantage of long-term relationships in the same social network.

Jewish Betrothal

The Jewish system at the time of Jesus did not allow for anything that could be called dating. There was simply betrothal—the arrangement, much more than the modern engagement, by which two people were pledged in troth to each other. Through the betrothal ceremony the couple formally belonged, so much so that betrothal could be broken only by divorce (as the case of Mary and Joseph in Matthew 1:19 poignantly illustrates). Betrothal was presexual marriage—covenant without covenant consummation—tion—and therefore Scripture views betrothal as an illuminating analogy for our relationship with Christ as we wait for his Second Coming when we will “know” as we are now known (1 Cor. 13:12; 2 Cor. 11:2). Until then we belong unconditionally, but we do not have full union.

In the Jewish context betrothal might last for up to a year and was concluded with the wedding feast, sometimes lasting a week, during which the couple would consummate the relationship. Both virginity before marriage (Deut. 22:13-21) and regular intercourse within marriage were assumed. Indeed the Jewish Mishnah, the textbook on Jewish life, regulated for how long a man might withhold sexual affection from his wife for the purpose of studying Scripture or because of work pressures (an interesting reversal of what is stereotypically thought to be the politics of the matter). A man may withhold sex for up to three months if he is a camel driver traveling on long safaris but must engage in it every day if he is unemployed (Ketubot 5:6-7)!

Remarkably, the apostle Paul taught full mutuality of sexual pleasure, full mutuality of bodily “ownership” and full mutuality of decision-making on when refraining might be appropriate. Paul relegated the matter to an occasional and brief time of sexual fasting for purposes of prayer (1 Cor. 7:1-7; Stevens 1989, pp. 107-17). The New Testament assumes the Jewish approach, at least in areas where Jewish Christians predominated, though it is obvious from Paul’s correspondence that the church was forging new patterns in the Gentile world, where sexual permissiveness and relational promiscuity were the norm, hence the strong teaching of 1 Cor. 6:12-7:40.

North American and Western Dating

Except in the baths and brothels of the ancient world, and the privileged courtly life of the rich in Europe in recent centuries (from which we have the pejorative term courtesan), there has never been a dating system like the modern Western one. At the same time there has never been a more fragile marriage system than the modern Western one. Indeed, researchers on family life suggest that the greatest problem in North American marriage may well be North American courtship, that is, the dating system (Sell). From the earliest age children are taught and socialized to prepare for an extended period of relational experimentation in which each presents his or her best self to potential girlfriends or boyfriends and marriage partners. Long before dating became industrialized through dating services, escort services, voice mail and newspaper advertisements, an entire industry supported this social expectation through providing dress (see Adornment), cosmetics, mass media (especially Hollywood movies) and endless environments in which to meet people such as singles bars. Obviously the system favors the young, the wealthy and the outward-going personality who thrives on entrepreneurial challenges and enjoys networking, but even they are not served well by a system that does not encourage honest self-disclosure and true friendship.

Dating, as currently practiced, is a staged play in which each person presents his or her outer “ideal” self (he, a macho male; she, a gorgeous doll) to the other. Inside, both he and she are insecure and weak, but they each see in the other the external image of what they have always wanted in a friend/partner of the opposite sex. They fall in love, that delightful derangement in which judgment is suspended and people live in a dream world of ecstasy. Some research suggests that this delightful derangement is supported by natural drugs and hormones in the body, though eventually the chemical balance of the body is restored. Without revealing their private selves, couples become entangled sexually sometimes as early as the second or third night, believing that touch, feel and fondle are quick ways to intimacy, whereas in reality the conversation they have shut down would better serve the purposes of intimacy.

This romantic relationship is promoted in ideal circumstances—restaurants, theaters, hotels, leisure spots—with scant exposure to one’s family or workplace and with rare openness to being seen without being made up, dressed up and presentable. Psychologists call this a collective defense mechanism. This period often lasts for as long as two years. If two people marry at this point, they are doomed to disillusionment, as when he (in his insecure private self) realizes he has married not a Barbie doll but another insecure person who is also swapping an empty bowl and saying, “Please fill up my emptiness.” Couples often divorce at this point, at the very moment when they could get married at a deeper level and when sensitive counseling (see Counseling, Lay) could serve them well. If they are cohabiting or just spending weekends together in each other’s apartments, they will probably move on to another “ideal” relationship and fall in (and out) of love once again.

Can Dating Be Redeemed?

It is my conviction that both the arranged-marriage system and the dating system can be redeemed. People have found suitable partners and made lifelong companionship covenants through private arrangements. My wife and I have assisted some young people to start a relationship that could lead to marriage. We also know of people who have found very suitable partners by anonymous, computerized dating services (we also know of Christian couples who have found very suitable partners by this means). In the same way the dating system can be redeemed, but this will require deep and costly measures. Christians are not exempt from the need to rethink and relearn dating from a Christian perspective.

Shrinking from the to-bed-the-first-night culture, and sometimes reacting to a promiscuous past, some Christians refuse to date at all. In its place they enjoy fellowship and pursue ministry with people of the opposite sex, all the while praying that God will deliver that one special person in the world who is God’s choice. Some of this amounts to group dating in a work context and has the advantage of mutual exposure to others in contexts that are not idealized. There are, however, severe drawbacks, especially since any resulting relationship can be founded exclusively on mutual interest in Christian service and is not a well-rounded friendship.

The advice not to marry until you find someone with whom you can better serve God together as married rather than as single people is problematic and probably dangerous. Marriage is for companionship (Genesis 2:18), not to get God’s work done on earth. Further, many Christians think that if they pray, God will magically deliver a spouse from heaven. But in reality there are only two ways to get married: have an arranged marriage (someone else does the arranging) or arrange one yourself! God can work through both, and the church has a crucial role to play in both.

What the Church Can Do

Arranging marriages. Elders and mature couples in a church could sensitively introduce people to each other. Such arrangement must be followed by a period of friendship and mutual self-disclosure in a variety of settings and assumes that a couple will not marry until they are substantially without reservations and are able to give their full consent. Romance will follow and usually does, contrary to the mythology of Hollywood. Marriage does not destroy romance but is the normal garden for its cultivation. As Walter Trobisch once observed, the Western system of marriage is like taking a hot bowl of porridge and letting it cool down on the table, while the arranged-marriage system is more like putting a pot of porridge on the stove to cook and turning up the heat (p. 56).

Arrangement is implicit, or at least envisioned as a possibility, in the promises and vows that ask “Will you love . . . ?” not “Do you love . . . ?” Arrangement is also consistent with the view of marriage as a vocation or calling. On this point Ray Anderson and Dennis Guernsey make an insightful observation:

What we discover—almost, as it were by accident—in selecting a mate and in being selected is that God also participates in this selection by virtue of election. This is why the marriage vow is not itself capable of sustaining the relationship as an expression of human wisdom (I made the right choice) or of human endurance (I made the wrong choice, but I will see it through to the end). The marriage vow can only be a sign of the covenant, and those who make the vow can find lasting joy and love only in being covenant partners—receiving each other as God’s elect. (p. 43)

Two biblical examples of such arrangement are Abraham’s servant finding a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24) and Naomi’s guiding Ruth to take the initiative with Boaz (Ruth 3:1-6), though Ruth may be one of the few biblical examples of a woman who took an initiative in finding a marriage partner (Stevens 1990, p. 32).

One point to note in passing is that psychologists now say that in one sense all of us have marriages arranged by our parents, since our families of origin to a large extent determine whom we choose to date and marry, even in a healthy home and especially in one that encourages fusion and codependence (see Family Systems). The process of leaving one’s father and mother (Genesis 2:24), which is so crucial to cleaving and becoming one flesh, turns out to be a lifelong process rather than a single wedding event.

Developing a congregational dating and mating ministry. As well as offering sensitively and confidentially to make some matches, leaders in the church can teach and model a family style of dating by encouraging kinship relationships in the church and the development of significant friendships in the context of service. Couples can open their homes to young adults to let them discover models of marriage other than ones in their families of origin. An environment can be created in which young adults can meet one another in the context of hospitality, perhaps even through a spiritual friendship weekend. The church should offer seminars on sexuality to help people cope constructively with the sexual pollution of our culture.

As members of the church, we can encourage group dating to take the pressure off one-to-one pairing. We can encourage people to seek pre-engagement counseling with trusted older people in the Lord’s family to discern the marriageability of the relationship (this is generally a more teachable moment than after the the engagement is announced and the wedding date is set). We can teach biblical love and help people learn how to love one another with all the languages of love (from practical caring to verbal affirmation). We can empower laypeople to be involved in marriage ministry by linking mature married couples with engaged couples to do marriage preparation in the context of a home. Above all we can work in the church to develop covenantal relationships, a for-better-or-worse type of church membership that is implicit in house churches (see Church in the Home) and small groups, and so to communicate and foster covenant formation in marriages. We should not yield to the tendency in the Western world to reduce church life (and the marriages within that church) to a contract basis amounting to an exchange of goods and services for pay by agreed-upon terms. If the church can prayerfully assist in the redemption of the arranged-marriage system, it can also minister toward the redemption of the dating system.

Arranging Your Own Marriage

For Christians a number of significant strategies are implicit in preparing for marriage and redeeming the dating system: (1) put the Lord’s kingdom first; (2) pray to know God’s will, whether it is to be single or married; (3) develop friendship relationships; (4) make a success of singleness; (5) become a marriageable person by developing the betrothal qualities of Hosea 2:19-20 (Stevens 1990, pp. 47-55); (6) be open to special relationships; (7) build these relationships on social and spiritual friendship, expressing minimal physical affection and avoiding sexual entanglement; (8) keep your ministry priorities but do not regard the building of a relationship as a diversion from ministry or the spiritual life; (9) go out for a long time, preferably one to three years, spending as much time as possible in the home and family of your friend; (10) seek the counsel of mature believers and your parents, who know you better than most others; (11) speak your heart to your beloved; (12) wait for marriage for intimate sexual expression, but prepare for it (see Stevens 1990, pp. 63-75). Indeed, this last point may reveal the need for sexual healing before one can anticipate a life of sexual companionship and mutual sexual enjoyment. While the Bible does not offer specific directions on dating, it does provide a theological context in which to rethink it.

Toward a Theology of Dating

Dating relates to two great theological themes: friendship and marriage. On the latter, dating serves as one, though not the only, way to discover your marriage partner and discern marriage readiness in both yourself and your friend. Therefore all the following theological dimensions of marriage call us to see that dating becomes a relational ministry to the glory of God.

Marriage is part of God’s creational design (Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:24); dating, while culturally determined in its present form, is potentially a means of conforming to God’s law written into creation. God’s creational design is leaving, cleaving and one flesh (Genesis 2:24), the experience of which led to the first hymn of praise in the Bible (Genesis 2:23). Dating one’s marriage partner after marriage can strengthen the cleaving and continue, albeit in a more mature and changed way, the romance that is meant to be lifelong. Because of the exclusivity of the marriage covenant, datinglike relationships with persons other than one’s spouse are highly problematic, dangerous and usually an offense to the covenant.

Sexuality—and its call to relationality, complementarity and community—is part of what it means to be made in the image of God. Dating can be a way of experiencing Godlikeness—though not, of course, by experimenting with full marriage sexual communication. Each person dated is potentially someone else’s marriage partner, so one must behave in a way that will not mark that person as one’s spouse. Even an engagement can be broken.

Marriage is “Christian” through conformity to God’s plan and intention in marriage (Genesis 2:24; Hosea 1-14; Malachi 2:14; Matthew 19:1-12), not simply because of the presence of two Christians or a church wedding; dating must be understood covenantally as a progressive preparation for covenant making and covenant filling. Marriage is an exclusive lifelong covenant in which there is total sharing of one’s life; dating someone without faith is therefore highly problematic (though divinely ordained exceptions exist). A Christian should marry a person of the same faith (see 2 Cor. 6:14-18, though it was originally written about a different subject).

Marriage has gone through the Fall; people in dating relationships will struggle with the tendency of men to rule and control and of women to revolt or comply, neither of which is a good basis for marriage. Under the new covenant the curse is substantially reversed as Christ empowers couples to live with mutual submission (Ephes. 5:21); couples enjoying a dating relationship will need the continuous infilling of the Spirit in their relationship to learn mutual submission (Ephes. 5:18, 21).

The mystery of covenantal marriage is that God, not the law of the country or the action of a clergyperson, joins a couple together (Matthew 19:6). Couples preparing for marriage through dating are called to reverence, prayerfulness and humility. This raises the question of the spirituality of dating as a preparation for marriage.

Toward a Spirituality of Dating

Because marriage is a parable of Christ and the church (Ephes. 5:32), the experience of unity through difference links us with God and makes sexuality contemplative (Genesis 1:27). Dating therefore is a process of learning to cultivate gratitude for unity through difference.

Marriage is a vocation or calling, an all-embracing investment of ourselves in response to the summons of God that involves realignment of our relationship with parents (leaving), exclusive focusing on one special relationship (cleaving) and a private celebration of the covenant (one flesh). Dating that prepares for this vocation or calling is a process of spiritual discernment about the call and leading of God, not merely a process of making the best choice.

Marriage is a ministry through which the priesthood of all believers becomes actualized in mutual husband-wife ministry and in which we touch God through our spouse (Ephes. 5:21-33). Dating that prepares for marriage will be regarded not as recreational romance but as a form of ministry, even in playing together. Further, all the issues of ministry are raised by marriage and dating: accepting someone else’s spirituality, affirming God’s work, refusing to play God, being interdependent, being spiritual friends (which can happen only between equals), trusting a loved one or friend to God and interceding on behalf of another.

Marriage is a spiritual discipline, not merely an arena in which to practice disciplines. It is so because it invites us Godward by requiring a level of cooperation humanly impossible. Marriage calls us to lay down our life daily for our spouse as to Christ (Ephes. 5:21-33). It constantly proposes that our spirituality has to be down to earth (paying bills, raising a family, trying to say “I love you” and having sex). Marriage raises the question whether we are truly justified by faith and not by works by calling us to enjoy our spouse and not merely work with him or her. It calls us to renounce power and control and to become “equippers” of our spouse through empowerment. Marriage forces us to come to grips with ourselves—a person cannot role-play a marriage for very long—for our spouse is a mirror! Because of all this, dating that prepares for marriage is a school of Christian living.

Dating Without Marriage in View

Earlier I said that even single people should be marriageable people, cultivating those qualities that make for both stability and quality in a marriage covenant: faithfulness, loving loyalty, compassion, justice and righteousness (Hosea 2:19-20). Given the parameters outlined above, namely, that dating must be conducted in such a way that if one does not marry this person, no violation of the person sexually or emotionally would have taken place, then dating need not, in every case, be an active search for a partner. Indeed, some potentially vital friendships are spoiled by the pressure to head in the direction of marriage. Provided that both friends understand well the level of commitment (a very sensitive matter when one is anxious to find a mate), and provided that dating is not used for recreational sex, a series of dating partners may be a valuable way to learn about ourselves, the opposite sex and the ways of our God. As an environment of testing and temptation, especially in the sexual area, dating may even be an arena for the development of the Spirit fruit of self-control, thus inviting, if not encouraging, a maturity that might not come if one were never tested. Dating, like betrothal, can place us in a truly spiritual posture: learning, waiting, expecting and growing toward covenant readiness.

» See also: Cohabiting

» See also: Friendship

» See also: Guidance

» See also: Marriage

» See also: Promises

» See also: Sexuality

» See also: Singleness

References and Resources

R. S. Anderson and D. Guernsey, On Being Family: Essays in a Social Theology of the Family (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985); A. Fryling and R. Fryling, A Handbook for Engaged Couples (2nd ed.; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996); J. Huggett, Dating, Sex and Friendship (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1985); J. H. Olthius, I Pledge You My Troth: A Christian View of Marriage, Family, Friendship (New York: Harper & Row, 1975); C. M. Sell, Family Ministry: The Enrichment of Family Life Through the Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981); R. P. Stevens, Getting Ready for a Great Marriage (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1990); R. P. Stevens, Marriage Spirituality: Ten Disciplines for Couples Who Love God (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1989); R. P. Stevens, Married for Good: The Lost Art of Remaining Happily Married (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986); C. M. Sell, Family Ministry: The Enrichment of Family Life Through the Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981); R. P. Stevens and G. Stevens, Marriage: Learning from Couples in Scripture, Fisherman Bible Studies (Wheaton, Ill.: Harold Shaw, 1991); W. Trobisch, I Married You (London: InterVarsity Fellowship, 1971); E. L. Worthington, Counseling Before Marriage (Waco, Tex: Word, 1990); N. Wright, The Premarital Counselling Handbook (Chicago: Moody Press, 1992).

—R. Paul Stevens

---

---