What do you have against courtship? We believe that Courtship teaches many false, un-Biblical principles in key areas. For example:

A) The sufficiency of Scripture: Courtship advocates specifically deny that Scripture is sufficient in the path to marriage. They propose that not a single Biblical marriage actually occurs in the ‘right’ way (since, of course, no Biblical characters courted). Or, occasionally, they believe that the ‘right’ aspects of the relationship just happened to be not written down by God.

We believe, on the other hand, that Scripture is sufficient. That we can find several examples of Godly paths to marriage, with sufficient details to follow.

B) Courtship denies the authority of the father over the marriage of their virgin children. While they often give a veto to the parents of the woman, they specifically deny the authority of the father of the groom or the bride to choose a spouse for their children.

We believe that Scripture teaches quite clearly that the father does have the power to choose a spouse for their virgin child; and we see this in several Scriptural examples.

C) Courtship advocates generally deny the continuing authority of the father over the married son.

We believe, along with the Reformers and the Church historical, that the jurisdiction of the family is the primordial and fundamental jurisdiction, and it is not interrupted by the marriage of a son. (A daughter, on the other hand, comes under the jurisdiction of her new husband)

[...]

Why not try reforming the systems of courtship and/or dating? It is important to recognize where these methods originate. Dating and courtship hardly come from auspicious beginnings: The term “dating” had reference to prostitution, while the term “courtship” was originally a system of organized adultery. These systems were designed, from their beginnings, to encourage lust, and no amount of changes can take away this essential character from them. As Christians, we need to start with the Word of God with the teachings, commands, and examples therein and build our methods from here. We should not take the methods of the world and try to backfit “Biblical principles” onto them as an afterthought.

[...]

What if the person objects to the prospective spouse? Is there an opportunity to veto? First, if there is any doubt, any risk of the person potentially rejecting the spouse they are given (being betrothed), there is a problem. A betrothal should not be contracted if there is any doubt that the man or the woman will not honor the agreement. A betrothal, according to the Bible, is a very serious thing. It is a covenant, a binding contract. It has many of the same obligations as a full-fledged marriage, though not yet consummated. To disavow the betrothal is willful abandonment and/or adultery.

Second, there is no decision to be made once a betrothal is final. There is no approval required or veto allowed. The time for input from them or others (if any is to be given) is before the covenant is made. It is much the same as or modern wedding ceremonies where it is asked if any has “just cause why they may not be wed”. Once they are pronounced “man and wife” (as is the case with a betrothed couple), it is the duty of all to “hold your peace”.

Third, it should be considered (again, prior to any covenant agreement) what reasons a person would have to object to the spouse they are given. Do we see such an example in Scripture, with Adam or Isaac, Joseph or Moses? We do see Jacob making such an objection (after he had enjoyed his wedding night, it should be added), but his example as a whole and this part in particular are hardly good or meant for emulation.