Sex... losing a part of yourself!?!?

[Noscentia]

May I ask you a question though? Respectfully, and serious. In my experience, I've never seen anyone use the justification statement on anything other than sex related topics. Like, if I said I was trying to learn the definition of the term related to "kill", in thou shalt not kill. No one ever says, you're trying to justify murdering someone. You know what I mean, why is that?

I think there are at least a couple of reasons for this. Primarily though, I think it's because random fornication and adultery have become far more culturally accepted than random acts of murder. It's to the point now that being married as virgins is considered strange by the culture (it's considered so unusual there's at least one reality show dedicated to it.) No one really questions whether or not murder is okay (though I doubt if anyone living in the world would accept Christ's definition of hate as murder), it's not the same as sexual acts.

 

[rturner76]

Well, since I've have been married for 14 years, and have no interest in prostitutes... for me, it's neither.

May I ask you a question though? Respectfully, and serious. In my experience, I've never seen anyone use the justification statement on anything other than sex related topics. Like, if I said I was trying to learn the definition of the term related to "kill", in thou shalt not kill. No one ever says, you're trying to justify murdering someone. You know what I mean, why is that?

You said something like "some christians say it means temple prostitution some say it means premarital sex" so I'm saying that main reason people want to interpret it as temple prostitution is because they want to say it'snot a sin to have premarital sex. If somebody wantstohave premarital sex that's fine but we dont need to change what the Bible says to do it

 

[Tetra]

You said something like "some christians say it means temple prostitution some say it means premarital sex" so I'm saying that main reason people want to interpret it as temple prostitution is because they want to say it'snot a sin to have premarital sex. If somebody wantstohave premarital sex that's fine but we dont need to change what the Bible says to do it

Well, I suppose if I am to be honest, I do struggle a bit with the Scripture on that one. Not because I'm trying to justify pre-marital sex though (as I said... married for 14 years now), more because it's just tough for me to know the EXACT answer. I suppose it's like that with a lot of Scripture though. I guess what I mean is, sometimes people try to justify things, sometimes we just honestly struggle to understand things.

 

[Tetra]

I think there are at least a couple of reasons for this. Primarily though, I think it's because random fornication and adultery have become far more culturally accepted than random acts of murder. It's to the point now that being married as virgins is considered strange by the culture (it's considered so unusual there's at least one reality show dedicated to it.) No one really questions whether or not murder is okay (though I doubt if anyone living in the world would accept Christ's definition of hate as murder), it's not the same as sexual acts.

I may have used an extreme example, but, I've definitely not heard anyone ever say "your're trying to justify" to any other sin. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen, just don't think it's super common is all.

 

[rturner76]

Okay, BUT do they feel that way because culture taught them that? Have we taught girls they lose self respect, OR do they feel that way because they in fact do lose self respect. You see what I mean, I think it's all cultural influence either way.

Yeah I think some of that could be cultural but I'm not just saying this because I am Catholic.....I think it's natural for a woman to want to settle on one man and depending on what is happening in society or with the tribe, or however you live, a man should have any where from 1 to 3 wives. When everything is normal 1. During a population or labor shortage maybe 3. I think it is natural for women to mate with either the smartest or strongest man she can find and she will likely take a lover on the side of either the strongest or smartest male she can find the opposite of what she has at home for further genetic diversification and for a secondary location for her and her children as a back up. I think that is how it would be naturally without religion or social engineering. Either that or the one Chief or king who gets all the wives andthewives take secondary loverson the side

 

[rturner76]

Well, I suppose if I am to be honest, I do struggle a bit with the Scripture on that one. Not because I'm trying to justify pre-marital sex though (as I said... married for 14 years now), more because it's just tough for me to know the EXACT answer. I suppose it's like that with a lot of Scripture though. I guess what I mean is, sometimes people try to justify things, sometimes we just honestly struggle to understand things.

Fair enough

 

[SolomonVII]

The exercise appears to be aimed at hook-up culture.
In the end, while both girls and boys do tend to feel used and even jaded and used up by partaking in hook-up culture, this would happen to girls more, and to girls first.
One reason for this is that girls have simply evolved differently.bottom line, Girls get pregnant with sex. Boys don't. It is a survival of the fittest sort of scenario that develops out of that biological differentiation.

Second reason that girls feel used up before boys in hook-up culture revolves around the basic economics of supply and demand. There is an unlimited supply of boys ready to have meaningless sex, and a limited supply of girls. the simple fact that there is a competitive challenge for boys in the meat market of hook-up sex, adds a measure of prestige that keeps boys in the game longer.
Of course what is true for hook-up culture is not the same for marriage. I suppose that the way that the pastor could get that point across would have been to give both the girl and the boy a heaven dollar from God for every time they engaged in sex within a marriage.
When it comes to sex, context is everything.

 

[ChristianFromKazakhstan]

I was having a conversation with my wife about an experience she had in youth group as a young lady. This activity in youth groups was all the rage in the early 90's.

She said the youth pastor would have the girls hold a piece of paper while boys, one by one, would come up and rip a piece off (odd how the boys don't hold the paper).

The youth pastor would then claim that by having sex, girls lose a "piece of themselves". Like, how each boy owned a piece of the paper.

Okay, not only is this story so freaking disturbing and disgusting to me, if it was my daughter that this happened to in the youth group, I can't image how I'd react.

Where the heck is this in the Bible??

Excellent exercise! Whether you like it or not, it depicts truth. Not only they tear out and keep a piece of you, they can easily forever give you a piece of themselves - a fetus, a disease on the physical level or a package of sins on the spiritual.

Sex isn't a light matter. It has a deep life-time effect.

It's good at least in this group they talked about it. Even that is good. In our age of hypocrisy and hushing any difficult subjects it's very praiseworthy.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I may have used an extreme example, but, I've definitely not heard anyone ever say "your're trying to justify" to any other sin. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen, just don't think it's super common is all.

Hey you never responded to my big post that answered what you wanted back about 20 posts.

 

[Slytherina]

But that pastor was right. Girls do lose a part of themselves, By having sex. And the men then ''have'' this part.

The pastor was simply trying to teach them, That they should save their virginity and lose it to someone they love and not to a random bully while they're not even 18, Like most women.

Why are you all saying that what he did was wrong? You want girls to indulge in premarital sex and to be reckless about who they do it with aswell?

 

[Victory-N-Christ]

It is indeed a shaming tactic, but there is some truth behind it. People will resist this, but men and women are not the same, we are not equal. If you do some research, the biggest indicator of whether a marriage is going to end in divorce or not is how many partners the FEMALE has had before the marriage.

"If a man divorces his wife and she leaves him and marries another man, should he return to her again? Would not the land be completely defiled?" - Jeremiah 3:1b

That verse is one of several examples the Bible makes comparing men to sowers of seed, and the woman to the ground the seed goes into.

It's actually pretty literal. Research microchimerism and telegony. You will see that the seminal fluids of men contain DNA in it, and when women have casual sex with men, the DNA of these men gets into the woman's blood stream and becomes a part of her body, permanently. One flesh, right? Furthermore, when she finally has children, her children even carry traits and dna from her previous partners even though it was her current man who sired the children. This is why it is called "adultery" when the married woman is with a man who is not her husband, the land is being polluted, adulterated. It's not reversable, so I'd definitely say the woman is losing pieces of herself through casual sex.

Sounds more like she's gaining pieces of men. Even the verse you quoted called the "land" greatly polluted ..to pollute something you add something bad to it which destroys it's purity...And women generally don't want a man harlot either so this blaming the ending of a marriage on how many men the wife's had in her past is about 70% true in my opinion..

 

[Greyy]

It's actually pretty literal. Research microchimerism and telegony. You will see that the seminal fluids of men contain DNA in it, and when women have casual sex with men, the DNA of these men gets into the woman's blood stream and becomes a part of her body, permanently. One flesh, right? Furthermore, when she finally has children, her children even carry traits and dna from her previous partners even though it was her current man who sired the children. This is why it is called "adultery" when the married woman is with a man who is not her husband, the land is being polluted, adulterated. It's not reversable, so I'd definitely say the woman is losing pieces of herself through casual sex.

There is nothing about that statement that is true. The DNA of men does not get into the bloodstream of women and it does not stay "permanently." That makes no sense from a biological perspective.

The reason adultery was an issue is because it was generally impossible to determine who the father was. Men were forced to care for children that were not their own.

 

[Tetra]

But that pastor was right. Girls do lose a part of themselves, By having sex. And the men then ''have'' this part.

What exactly does every girl lose? What Bible verse supports your position?

Why are you all saying that what he did was wrong? You want girls to indulge in premarital sex and to be reckless about who they do it with aswell?

Because it's a shaming exercise that isn't Biblical.

 

[Tetra]

Hey you never responded to my big post that answered what you wanted back about 20 posts.

Sorry, I was actually still thinking about it, and then I fell asleep. Sometimes one can get caught up in replying to smaller faster posts and forget others... wasn't intentional. I'll go look back now.

 

[Slytherina]

Sounds more like she's gaining pieces of men. Even the verse you quoted called the "land" greatly polluted ..to pollute something you add something bad to it which destroys it's purity...

But she's losing her purity.

There is nothing about that statement that is true. The DNA of men does not get into the bloodstream of women and it does not stay "permanently." That makes no sense from a biological perspective.

The reason adultery was an issue is because it was generally impossible to determine who the father was. Men were forced to care for children that were not their own.

I like how you've said that it isn't true, Yet didn't provide any proof of your claims. I've read what he said elsewhere and he's right. This is what God meant. God is smarter than our simple human mind. It took us years and scientific research to understand the wisdom of his words.

What exactly does every girl lose? What Bible verse supports your position?


Because it's a shaming exercise that isn't Biblical.

She loses her virginity. And so what if it's a shaming exercise? How else do you want to convince kids that something is wrong to do, Other than make them ashamed to do it? They need to know, That it's wrong.

''it isn't Biblical'' Telll me where exactly did God command us to breath? Not everything you or a pastor does needs to be ''Biblical.''

 

[Tetra]

Excellent exercise! Whether you like it or not, it depicts truth.

Yes, shaming is always good...

What is the piece that every girl will lose? Also, Biblical support please...

they can easily forever give you a piece of themselves - a fetus, a disease on the physical level or a package of sins on the spiritual.

This is adding something physiologically, not taking something away.

Sex isn't a light matter. It has a deep life-time effect.

This is completely subjective. I know lots of people who don't care about sex at all and wouldn't say it has a "deep life-time effect". Sometimes my wife and I have a "quickie", do what we need to do, and than go about our day...

 

[Greyy]

What exactly does every girl lose? What Bible verse supports your position?

Are you objecting to the idea that a woman loses something by having sex? What is being presented is the idea that sex is part of a process of creating a permanent bond between two people. When this is done, and then the relationship ends, there is a sense of loss that can never be recovered.

 

[Greyy]

This is completely subjective. I know lots of people who don't care about sex at all and wouldn't say it has a "deep life-time effect". Sometimes my wife and I have a "quickie", do what we need to do, and than go about our day...

Since you are bringing up your sex life, how many women did you have sex with before you got married?

 

[Slytherina]

This is completely subjective. I know lots of people who don't care about sex at all and wouldn't say it has a "deep life-time effect". Sometimes my wife and I have a "quickie", do what we need to do, and than go about our day...

Completely subjective? I'm sure God doesn't want us to look at sex as a physical way to ''get off.'' But rather as a romantic way in which two married partners truely show their full love and trust to each other.

And you don't need a Biblical Support for that claim.

 

[Armoured]

And you don't need a Biblical Support for that claim.

Um, then do you have any other support for that claim? or is this one of those "it's obvious! Every body knows!" type things?