Virgin?

[Daniel Marsh]

1 Corinthians 6 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
6 Dare any of you, having a complaint against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

4 If then ye have judgments to make on things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church!

5 I speak to shame you! Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, no, not one, who shall be able to judge between his brethren?

6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers!

7 Now therefore, there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one against another. Why do ye not rather accept wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

8 Nay, ye do wrong and defraud, and that your own brethren!

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived: Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God.

11 And such were some of you. But ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

12 “All things are lawful unto me,” but all things are not expedient. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be brought under the power of any.

13 “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats,” but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

14 And God hath both raised up the Lord and will also raise up us by His own power.

15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them the members of a harlot? God forbid!

16 What? Know ye not that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? “For two,” saith He, “shall be one flesh.”

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

18 Flee fornication. Every other sin which a man doeth is outside the body, but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

19 What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you and which ye have from God, and that ye are not your own?

20 For ye are bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

 

[Kit Sigmon]

If a woman has played around with a man and done everything sexual but has not been penetrated by him, is she still a virgin?

"Is she still a virgin?"
Medically speaking, it depends...'cause it be known that females can break/tear their own hymens by non-sexual activities and it is also known that not all
females are born with hymens.

 

[Invalidusername]

Think about it in the reverse. If a man does everything except intercourse with a woman is he still a virgin?

 

[SolomonVII]

If a woman has played around with a man and done everything sexual but has not been penetrated by him, is she still a virgin?

Yes.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

But having a hymen and being a virgin are not the same thing.

Yes. Especially if you are a man.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Yes. Especially if you are a man.

My point is that is what planned parenthood wrote on their website.

I Cor 7:8 To those who are unmarried or widowed, here’s my advice: it is a good thing to stay single as I do. 9 If they do not have self-control, they should go ahead and get married. It is much better to marry than to be obsessed by sexual urges.

1 Corinthians 7:9 Good News Translation (GNT)
9 But if you cannot restrain your desires, go ahead and marry—it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Job 31:1
I have made a solemn promise never to look with lust at a woman.

Matthew 5:28
but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Matthew 5:28 J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
27-28 “You have heard that it was said to the people in the old days, ‘You shall not commit adultery’. But I say to you that every man who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her—in his heart.

Paraphrasing, If a girl has looks at a boy with lust in her heart she has already committed sexual sin in her heart.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

My point is that is what planned parenthood wrote on their website.

Well, I'm not an expert, but I've read it is technically true. Although it's also true that traditionally, the presence of the hymen was the measurement (or symbol) of virginity in females. I think also, traditionally, men were not classified as virgins or no, so the absence of this feature in males reinforced the symbolism for females. Above said, my opinion is that anything the Planned Parenthood organisation claims is probably some sort of justification for doing the perverted.

Paraphrasing, If a girl has looks at a boy with lust in her heart she has already committed sexual sin in her heart.

I understand it's usually the other way - man lusts after woman. But whether adultery, or murder, or something else, our hearts are evil, so we have all sinned in our hearts - whether adultery through lust, or murder through anger, or something else.

I'm not trying to justify sin in our hearts, but at least from an Earthly perspective, capturing an evil thought and cutting it off causes far fewer problems, than giving birth to it and sinning physically.

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON
This thread has been moved to Christian Philosophy & Ethics.
Please note and abide by the SOP of this forum.
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[FireDragon76]

Me too, but it is understandable in the context of the patriarchy of the time and place. If the inheritance of wealth, power and privilege is to be only through the male line, then protecting the virginity of daughters until marriage is all important. So too is the protection of wives from other men. After all maternity is obvious but paternity is not. And remember that male virginity has never been an issue.

It was in ancient Rome, sort of... though I don't pretend to fully understand it. I just know that's one of the things Marcus Aurelius mentions at the begining of his Meditations. Roman families were concerned about their sons sleeping around at too young of an age.

 

[FireDragon76]

This discussion demonstrates that the term "virgin" is relatively meaningless now days, unless it refers to a lack of sexual experience.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

This discussion demonstrates that the term "virgin" is relatively meaningless now days, unless it refers to a lack of sexual experience.

How is "virgin" relatively meaningless today? Did evolution find a way to eliminate the hymen from female anatomy?

The word has as much meaning today as it ever did.

 

[FireDragon76]

How is "virgin" relatively meaningless today? Did evolution find a way to eliminate the hymen from female anatomy?

The word has as much meaning today as it ever did.

It's meaningless because it suggests an overly mechanistic view of sex and sexual ethics.

We no longer live in a highly patriarchal world where we need to have intact hymens to know the woman we've bought is "good to go". In fact, for many people, especially in the developed world, that understanding of sexuality is considered very problematic.

 

[FireDragon76]

If a woman has played around with a man and done everything sexual but has not been penetrated by him, is she still a virgin?

Do yourself a favor and don't worry yourself too much. Sexual impurity is in the heart, not in your genitals, and so none of us is truly pure in that way. And there is no sin that Christ has not atoned for.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

It's meaningless because it suggests an overly mechanistic view of sex and sexual ethics.

We no longer live in a highly patriarchal world where we need to have intact hymens to know the woman we've bought is "good to go".

I understand there are legitimate ways for virgins to sustain hymen damage whilst still remaining virgins (e.g. horseriding?), but like it or not, the hymen is still symbolic of sexual purity.

In fact, for many people, especially in the developed world, that understanding of sexuality is considered very problematic.

I actually think it is biblical. To not value virginity prior to marriage seems like a worldly view of marriage, rather than a Christian view.

I understand that Christians sin, and that many may already not have been virgins when called. But to downgrade the importance of virginity prior to marriage due to our own tarnished, sinful state is indicative of a flaw in ourselves, not the biblical principle of purity before marriage.

 

[Paidiske]

Hymens... they're a problematic measure of anything. They stretch, they break, they're bigger or thicker or less perforated in some of us than in others. Some of us never seem to grow one. Now that medical recommendations are that women should start getting pap smears even before they're sexually active, I imagine that's going to impact things too.

Whatever your take on sexual activity, I'd suggest that getting hung up on a hymen or lack thereof is significantly missing the point.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Hymens... they're a problematic measure of anything. They stretch, they break, they're bigger or thicker or less perforated in some of us than in others. Some of us never seem to grow one. Now that medical recommendations are that women should start getting pap smears even before they're sexually active, I imagine that's going to impact things too.

Whatever your take on sexual activity, I'd suggest that getting hung up on a hymen or lack thereof is significantly missing the point.

I'm not really sure that any guy does, but to my understanding, it is still a symbol of purity. The absence of one doesn't necessarily mean impurity, but the presence of one is to my understanding, a fairly reliable indicator of (physical) purity.

 

[Paidiske]

But I'm saying that while it might be a symbol of purity, that doesn't actually relate reliably to reality. So better to drop the symbolic association.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

But I'm saying that while it might be a symbol of purity, that doesn't actually relate reliably to reality. So better to drop the symbolic association.

Lol. If what you say is true, it might take another 100 years or so. I don't have the power to change culture. And even if I did, I do like tradition.

 

[Sam91]

Lol. If what you say is true, it might take another 100 years or so. I don't have the power to change culture. And even if I did, I do like tradition.

A certain type of female sanitary products can eliminate the hymen I think. I don't think all women actually are born with them. I'm off to google.

EDIT
A study (although I think it was unethical to do the study with young girls included) found hymens still intact in a lot of sexually active women, pregnant ones too. They found not intact hymens (a dent in the cleft like in active people) in virgins, though granted at a lower rate.

WHO also say that it is not a reliable indicator.

It does not seem to be a reliable indicator of virginity in many sources.

Some people are born without one, others have a scanty barely there one. They are very different person to person.

Learn something new all the time lol

 

[Natsumi Lam]

Yes but it is unwise to awaken passion before its proper time.