Lust vs. Showing Affection

white dove · Mar 8, 2005

Cherub8 said:
I like the idea of not kissing until the wedding.

I highly respect the logic behind this kind of abstinence...it does make sense....

however...

man, would that just be incredibly difficult for someone like me. I'm not saying it's impossible (esp. considering there are those who've actually done this), but...I know that God would definately have to do a tremendous amount of change in me in order for that to happen...

Actually, considering I am the way that I am, I think it'd be in my best interest to go about physical affection in the way of kissing this way...

waterbear · Mar 8, 2005

Multi-Elis said:
I'd like to raise this issue: what if touching caressing and kissing, were to arrouse you, and get you emotional to the point where you lost your rational thinking, I mean what if you do it to the wrong person, to a person you will regret doing this to if you break up?

There are defenses past rational thinking, though definately easier if your'e an introvert.

That's a good point though; why do something in the immediate, which satisfies some immediate interest, that could potentially lead to indefinately long regret? If there isn't any long term incentive but potentially long-term problems, that should be an easy decision.

And what if you know that kissing and touching will arouse you, so doing so would be a delibrate choise... like masterbuting, or delibrately looking at something else that arouses you?

Those would all seem like equivalents.

Are there other ways to show respect, affection and give the other a feeling of significance, without running the risk of it turning into lust?

Absolutely, attention can act as affection, artistic expression can show affection without being sexual, expressions of devotion, etc.

Is delibrately looking for arousal wrong?

Probably, arousal irritates self-control which means you probably don't have a great motive for seeking it.

waterbear · Mar 8, 2005

horuhe00 said:
So what is a couple that's in love to do? Handshake? There's got to be more liberties in a relationship because if not, it's just like having another friend.
SOMEWHERE in the Bible it's got to say what you can do, besides saying what you can't do.

As there is a greater context in a romantic relationship (i.e. marriage), it's not just having another friend. Friends don't usually discuss the same topics romantic partners do: they aren't considering raising children together, they aren't considering sharing the entirty of their remaining lives together in the same house, etc.

If anything the distinction between a romantic relationship and a friendship is made more clear by lack of physical contact.

waterbear · Mar 8, 2005

Multi-Elis said:
Well the fact is that there exist couples who save their first kiss for the alter. I guess they find other ways to show affection while waiting for the Big Day.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that a goodbye kiss or a kiss when getting engaged is bad or necessarily lustfull, and it won't necessarily arouse you much, but that is exactly the point of this thread, where is the limit, between a normal goodbye kiss, and holding hands once and a while, and a relationship that becomes based on the physical aspect. These are two extremes, but in the place where they converge, where is the limit?

I have two paradigms on this -

1) Any physical contact done with a significant other that wouldn't be done with a sibling or friend is sexual contact and should be avoided until marriage.
2) Any contact with either's sex organs is sexual contact and should be avoided until marriage (obviously other contact is not, by this notion, and thus permissible prior to marriage).

As for what I do, I consider anything that might offend my potential future spouse, were we in a relationship, to be something worth avoiding (which flows from (1)) but my strict limit on what I absolutely won't do is (2).

Rae_Psyche · Mar 10, 2005

waterbear said:
As there is a greater context in a romantic relationship (i.e. marriage), it's not just having another friend. Friends don't usually discuss the same topics romantic partners do: they aren't considering raising children together, they aren't considering sharing the entirty of their remaining lives together in the same house, etc.

If anything the distinction between a romantic relationship and a friendship is made more clear by lack of physical contact.

You couldnt have said it better, I was still looking for an answer to that question. ;-)

horuhe00 · Mar 10, 2005

waterbear said:
As there is a greater context in a romantic relationship (i.e. marriage), it's not just having another friend. Friends don't usually discuss the same topics romantic partners do: they aren't considering raising children together, they aren't considering sharing the entirty of their remaining lives together in the same house, etc.

If anything the distinction between a romantic relationship and a friendship is made more clear by lack of physical contact.

So it's normal for me to have a more physical relationship with my best friend (that happens to be a girl) than with my girlfriend?

waterbear said:
I have two paradigms on this -

1) Any physical contact done with a significant other that wouldn't be done with a sibling or friend is sexual contact and should be avoided until marriage.
2) Any contact with either's sex organs is sexual contact and should be avoided until marriage (obviously other contact is not, by this notion, and thus permissible prior to marriage).

So if I do something with my friends, then there's no reason why I couldn't do it with my girlfriend? So I can hug and go to the beach and slap my g/f's *blank* from time to time since I normaly do that and they do it to me too?
But I stay away from her sexual organs. Like I told her: "If it's covered by a bikini, I'm not touching it."

-------------------------------------------

Multi-Elis · Mar 10, 2005

It seems to me that there have been good ideas brought up, but mostly ideas about how to keep decent in our sociaty.

Multi-Elis · Mar 10, 2005

I mean, isn't the original question something along the lines of:

If I take Waterbear's two rules and put them into practice, and only hold hands with my BF, when is the hand holding legitimate showing of affection, and when is it becoming an excuse to lust...

So we agree that it's something to do with intention.

Then we talked about arousal, and we all agree that if you get aroused then it's not sin in it's self. We wondered if deliberatly doing something arousing was wrong/sin/lust.
And then we realised that there are norms in sociaty to help us decide what bounderies we should give ourselves so that we don't arouse ourselves deliberatly...

Well this is just the resume of the thread to organise ideas...

At one point we agreed we'd have to be sexually attracted to someone for this person to be considered as a possible future mate, and I think this is also a difficulty, that we talked about a little... maybe we can talk about that a little? How do you avoid lusting on this basic given?

Jon_ · Mar 10, 2005

Multi-Elis said:
At one point we agreed we'd have to be sexually attracted to someone for this person to be considered as a possible future mate, and I think this is also a difficulty, that we talked about a little... maybe we can talk about that a little? How do you avoid lusting on this basic given?

An exposé into this concept could certainly be helpful, I think.

Most people would state that find sexual attraction to be a very strong need in a relationship. I am one of those people. It's very hard for me to show affection to someone I am not attracted to. By affection, I mean romantic attention. Attraction certainly isn't a requisite for love.

The question then is, How do we avoid lusting when we consider this? Let's first establish what lust is. Merriam-Webster defines it as "Intense or unrestrained sexual desire." I think the unrestrained portion of this definition is the key. We've established that sexual desires are natural, so at what point do they become unnatural (here, unnatural means sinful)? The answer is this: lust is the selfish indulgence in sexual desire. When you lust, you put your desires before God's. This is an act of unrighteousness, and thus, by definition, sinful.

How then can we avoid doing this? The answer is simple, but the application more difficult. Since lust is the antithesis of the fulfillment of God's will, to stave off such carnal desires we should constantly strive to live in God's will. By supplanting our desires with God's, we avoid sin because our focus is on God, and not on ourselves.

Godsgirl481 · Mar 10, 2005

horuhe00 said:
Funny thing... I asked myself that about a year ago.
Here's an example to answer your question: Mary was going to marry Joseph when the angel came to tell her she would have Jesus. Mary's answer was "Huh? I haven't even had sex yet!" So from that story of the Bible we get two things. First, that people get married. Second, that trying to follow the Will of God means don't have sex before geting married.

Well I have sorta blew that 'no sex before marriage' thing right out of the water...oh so many times

horuhe00 · Mar 10, 2005

Bams481 said:
Well I have sorta blew that 'no sex before marriage' thing right out of the water...oh so many times

You can always make an effort to stop doing it. I'm sure it's very hard though. Oh well, if all else fails... chastity belt

waterbear · Mar 10, 2005

horuhe00 said:
So it's normal for me to have a more physical relationship with my best friend (that happens to be a girl) than with my girlfriend?

No, it's more that physical relationships blurr what romantic relationships are really about - they're more devotional relationships than sexual relationships. It's true that the basis for the relationship is sexual, but the major manifestations (devotion, affection, attention) are not inherently sexual. Focusing on the physical (sex) is distracting.

So if I do something with my friends, then there's no reason why I couldn't do it with my girlfriend? So I can hug and go to the beach and slap my g/f's *blank* from time to time since I normaly do that and they do it to me too?
But I stay away from her sexual organs. Like I told her: "If it's covered by a bikini, I'm not touching it."
-------------------------------------------

If your state of mind is comprable when you slap her posterior as when you slap their's, no problem. It should also be something you'd be happy doing with your male friends too - if it starts getting to gender-specific behavior that's approaching sexual.

horuhe00 · Mar 10, 2005

waterbear said:
If your state of mind is comprable when you slap her but as when you slap there's, no problem. It should also be something you'd be happy doing with your male friends too - if it starts getting to gender-specific behavior that's approaching sexual.

Nah, I do it all around It's a move that one does only to those one has confidence in. Besides, it's not a grope. And careful with the use of words for the posterior. You might unknowingly break one of the rules of the forum by disrupting the peace and harmony of this forum. (Public Service Anouncement)

waterbear · Mar 10, 2005

Multi-Elis said:
At one point we agreed we'd have to be sexually attracted to someone for this person to be considered as a possible future mate, and I think this is also a difficulty, that we talked about a little... maybe we can talk about that a little? How do you avoid lusting on this basic given?

The incentive for romantic relationships is sexual attraction - by this I mean that sexual attraction is the 'cue' that creates the interest. And this isn't all that sexual if you consider - as I do - that attraction is rather subconcious and the subconcious isn't end focused - there is an intent (which is sexual) to what the subconcious shows interest in, but the subconcious itself is merely responding to cues, only the higher mental facilities are aware of the ends.

So in that respect, empahsis on sexual attraction is okay because that's what creates incentive and provides the motivation for devotional love (which is itself not sexual). The more attraction you have for someone, the easier it is have devotional love for them. I'd also think that devotional love can be self-sustaining after it gets enough momentum, so sexual attraction is really only important when the devotional love is immature.

waterbear · Mar 10, 2005

horuhe00 said:
Nah, I do it all around It's a move that one does only to those one has confidence in. Besides, it's not a grope. And careful with the use of words for the posterior. You might unknowingly break one of the rules of the forum by disrupting the peace and harmony of this forum. (Public Service Anouncement)

I'm saved by a typo , thanks for the reminder.

MentalSoliloquy · Mar 19, 2005

I don't see how kissing and hugging is a sin...

kenalim · Apr 3, 2005

Read 1 Cor 13.... and compare your love with the Bible's.

Lust vs. Showing Affection

(she's a) maniac

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

The Dark Wolf

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency