RE: Abstinence before marriage

[CamB]

But why split hairs? Sex is sex is sex. What should grab ones attention is that the people described in the text will spend eternity apart from God!

Yeah, but I'll repeat the text again:

"sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies"

While not getting into witchcraft and orgies isn't too much of a problem for me, and I manage to avoid drunkenness because I don't drink (not for Christian reasons - I just don't), not breaching some of the other things is pretty hard work.

You say "don't split hairs" but it isn't that easy. Let's pick envy. How much envy is ok - I envy a lot of things, but do I envy them enough to sin? Is my sin of envy worse than any sexual immorality I engaged in with my wife prior to marriage? Are all sins created equal?

Mostly, I'm just glad I get forgiven for them! And I do my best to be a good boy.

[CamB]

http://essenes.net/virgin.htm

Whilst I acknowledge that the Nazorean prophets may be right, and I may be wrong, I'm struggling to accept the Buddhist vegan version of Christianity they present.

For instance, Jesus sitting down to the Last Supper was the Jewish Passover - a well known meat and bread event.

[djmcmath]

Originally posted by CamB

The changes are interesting - I wonder what the Greek says?

Gal 5:19-21 -- phanera de estin ta erga tas sarkos, atina estin porneia, akatarsia, aselgeia, eidololatria, parmakeaia, extrai, eris, zalos, tumoi, eriteiai, dixostasiai, aireseis, phthonoi, methai, komoi, kai ta omoia toutois, a prolego umin kathos proeipon oti oi ta toiauta prassontes basileian theou ou klaronomasousin. (transliterating Greek characters into something I can type with this font, taken from Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece).

You asked. Not sure how that helps the argument, though. Want me to do the detailed translation with the lexicon? Perhaps you'd prefer an applicable summary?

Dan

[ronin]

Originally posted by dd74
But seriously, I agree with lendaddy here. It isn't truly a religious thing. It's a moral thing. But as often is the case with morals, morals are usually out of touch with society, and in this case, hormones.

I'd rather say that it is society that is out of touch with its morals

[Isabo]

Originally posted by fintstone
The bible of course....only answering the question asked previously...not selling anything.

After lunchtime discussion on this point with Milu, who is reasonably informed on these things:
Sodomy in biblical terms is "unnatural sex practices". This could be interpreted to cover anything the reader did not consider natural which changes from culture to culture. Most likely for the time was beastiality.
And let us not forget onanism, which is clearly defined as a no-no in the bible but has sometimes been defended as a right by some of the modern avantgarde Jesuit thinkers.
Would any of the religious, pro abstinence posters care to comment on where they stand on that point.

[Milu]

I suppose it's much better to have RC priests with hairy palms and going blind than paedophiles

Much better would be if RC priests were allowed to marry. The real reason for the restriction which dates to about the 10th century was to preserve church property from the heirs of married priests.

Oh well, lunchbreak over. Time to go out for a coffee.

[djmcmath]

Ok, so let me see if I can summarize:
1 - Don't have sex before marriage because of the risk of having unexpected babies without the family structure to support said babies and the potential risk of STDs due to being generally promiscuous. The biblical argument is interesting, but relatively moot -- if you're a bible-thumpin' right-wing wacko, the other two major points merely act as supporting evidence for God's principle. If you're a heathen-pagan-whatever, then the other two arguments are the bread-and-butter, and the bible is an unrelated rabbit-trail, a red-herring.

2 - Have sex before marriage because a good sex life is critical to a good marriage, and you'll never know if the sex will be good without trying it out beforehand. Sex is fun, and it feels good, and if you're halfway careful about your selection, you can avoid problems most of the time.

At the one extreme of this issue, you have guys like Joshua Harris (I kissed dating goodbye) who claims to have not kissed his wife until the wedding. At the other extreme, you have my friend Mike, who is only marginally less sexually active than my neighbor's dog. Is either extreme right? No, not usually ... I don't believe it's responsible to act like my friend Mike, and I don't believe it's realistic to follow Joshua Harris. (sigh) A more reasonable middle-ground is held by Josh McDowell, who still holds that premarital sex is a bad choice, but doesn't take the extremist position to ban dating. "True love waits" was his big push; he emphasized the logical and non-biblical reasons for premarital abstinence, while still mentioning the validity of the biblical arguments.

Dan




PS -- I'm serious about this "bible" thing. You really want to know what the Greek or Hebrew says? (I don't do Aramaic, sorry) You're really serious about wondering where the bible says X, Y, or Z? You're honestly interested in the biblical stance on such-and-such topic? I'm game ...

[ronin]

Originally posted by Isabo
Would any of the religious, pro abstinence posters care to comment on where they stand on that point.

well, I suppose I would have to stand a little to the left to avoid the mess

[Milu]

The Josh McDowell position does not sound like a reasonable middleground position. Sounds like Joshua Harris with better PR staff.

Where does he stand on oral sex before marriage?

[Milu]

Ronin!

10/10 for sense of humour!

How long before Z-man has to lock/delete his own thread?

We have some ideas but don't want to frighten younger readers and offend the moral majority

Milu & Isa

[Z-man]

Originally posted by Milu
How long before Z-man has to lock/delete his own thread?

LOL!!

Good interaction here. That's why I posted.

I'd like to respond to some earlier posts:

BlueskyJaunte:
Would you buy a Porsche without a PPI????

Adam Chaplin
Back on topic, and along Blue's comments, would you buy a suit without trying it on?

In response to that:
Would you buy underwear that's been tried on by someone else?
or
Would you pre-test your air-bags in a newly purchased car?
or
Would you use a 'pre-tested' condom?

There are two sides to the coin, you know...

BTW: I have heard studies that stated that pre-marital sex did not help in terms of divorce: ie: just as many (or more, IIRC) couples that engaged in pre-marital sex ended their marriages in divorce vs. those who abstained. I will try to find the source of this study to substantiate this.

Just some more thoughts to ponder,
-Z.

[Z-man]

One other point:
It's been stated above that this whole abstinence thing leads to divorce: young kids get pregnant, are forced to marry and then get divorced.
I think there needs to be a clarification on this:
The failure of abstinence (and not using birth control) leads to this. If the kids were abstaining from sex, they would get pregnant!

The difficult part of that equation is getting them to understand the importance of abstinense. Fear and 'the wrath of God,' is not the proper way to achieve this. Raging harmones are difficult to control. Telling a teenager to 'stop your harmones' isn't gonna cut it either. But I truly believe that abstinense is the best way to protect kids from further complications in life, be that STD's, unwanted pregancies, or a rushed marriage.

Nobody said life would be easy...
-Z-man.

[jrdavid68]

Originally posted by dd74
They need therapy to stick "A" into "B"?

If that's all there is for you, I feel sorry for your wife/gf.

[Isabo]

Helping with abstinence and raging hormones:
Cold showers, a hair shirt and a good self administered scourging were considered very helpful at my convent school
Of course some of my schoolfriends are probably paying to get that sort of treatment now
Alternatively: good sex education and no hang-ups.

[techweenie]

Somehow, this seems appropriate to this thread -- at least in the duscussion of adultery:

http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/abc_show.html

[dd74]

Originally posted by jrdavid68
If that's all there is for you, I feel sorry for your wife/gf.

Are you a sex therapist, Junior? Or seeing one? My statement was in lieu of sex, not romance - two vastly different instances. Sorry if I offended your new-age emasculated male sensibilities...

[BlueSkyJaunte]

Here's how I see it:

Pre-marital sex, like religion, is a choice. It is the parents' responsibility to educate their children on both topics.

I may laugh at you because you think your pen!s is the Devil's tool (pun intended) but I won't laugh at you to your face.

Kindly show me the same courtesy and don't preach your "morals" at me.

If you're equating me (or my lovely wife, who in my unbiased evaluation is twice the mensch anyone here will ever be) to a "'pre-tested' condom" because we engaged in pre-marital relations, well, you've really got to re-evaluate your character analysis methodology.

I have a fraternity brother who was "born again". I describe him as follows:

"I see you're in trouble and I'd love to help you out, but I'm really too busy reading the Bible and learning how to be a Good Christian."

[Z-man]

Originally posted by Isabo
Alternatively: good sex education and no hang-ups.

Totally agree with you on that!
I went to a Christian Jr High and High School: Eastern Christian High School in North Haledon, NJ.

Actually, they taught sex ed in two classes: biology (one day with the lady teacher's flush-red face stuck in the book), and in psychology. Ray Vanderlaun, my psyche teacher, was very candid and open about pretty much everything we discussed in regards to sex. The only thing he was told that he couldn't discuss was various positions. That class really helped to dispell a lot of myths and pre-concieved (no pun intended) notions about sex and relationships.

If more Christians would be more open and candid with their youth, whether it be their children, or their Sunday School class, it would certainly help. As Christians, we need to learn that sex is not a dirty word.

My additional $0.42,
-Z-man.

[Z-man]

Originally posted by BlueSkyJaunte
If you're equating me (or my lovely wife, who in my unbiased evaluation is twice the mensch anyone here will ever be) to a "'pre-tested' condom" because we engaged in pre-marital relations, well, you've really got to re-evaluate your character analysis methodology.

Oh NO! I am sorry: that is not what I mean! Absolutely not! I apologyze if I have offended you! I was merely trying to make a point that comparing pre-marital sex to a Porsche PPI is as absurd as my examples.

I was not implying that pre-marital sex is like a dirty condom. Just trying to show that analogies often don't fit! (NO pun intended.) Please don't think I'm standing on a soapbox 'preaching' to you: I hate when people do that, and if I have come across that way, again, I apologyze. I'm just sharing my conservative views in this interchange of an interesting and much debated topic.

Hope you understand, BSJ.
-Z-man.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

I'm sorry as well, Z-man--frankly I've had one too many people tell me (or my friends) that I'm "going to Hell" for my beliefs or my choices. So I'm a little quick to take offense sometimes.

Back to the analogy, however. There's a saying that some of my psych friends have: "Good sex is 10% of the marriage. Bad sex is 90% of the marriage." I simply don't see how you can semi-permanently limit yourself to one sex partner if you don't know that you're compatible sexually, spiritually, ethically, politically, domestically, and most-other-allys.

My wife and I lived together for years before getting married. I can be a pretty tough person to live with (just ask my former roommates). Fortunately my wife is either tolerant or thinks my quirks are "cute". I'm guessing the former.