Ok, so I know Christians make promises to god to not have sex until mariage. I disagree with this completely. I do not believe that you should set a date in your life when you can wake up and say "Hey! I'm married, we can have sex now!" I beleive that when you hae found your true love, and you think you are ready to have sex, then you can have sex. Does anybody else agree or disagree, and why?
Another thing, I know they also must love god the most out of anybody, I disagree with this as well. Why must one love god the most, when you do not even truly know him? God does not love you the most, so why must we love him the most? He cannot love everyone the most, so I don't see why you would have to. Sure, you can love god for the things he has done, but why must you love him the most, when you do not get the love in return? I think if you have truly found your true love, then you must have to love him/her the most. Does anyone agree or disagree, and why?
Also, I am not Christina, or religion, I just know these two things, and I highly disagree with them, and I want to know what they are all about, and your opinions on them.
The answer is simple, I now answer just as if God would answer it: the holy bible is not correct!
God is everything - especially a good thing as SEX! If the time is right and both (less or more persons...) wants to; enjoy it!
You don't have to love God to be a great person, or even 'godly'! God don't need anything! God and people are ONE - If you fall in love then you fall in love with God. If you want to; be a friend of God! God loves everyone - everyone. God do not judge! There is no right or wrong - it is just the way of God!
If you believe that God forbids sex before marriage why would you still make a promise?
Yes, those two issues are certainly 'weird' for most any thinking person. That's like setting out rules, do's and don't's and all that stuff that don't really matter. Maybe because Christians will see life as a doorway to heaven or hell, while nonbelievers see it as the only life they have and refraining from joy for some mythological nonsense seems madness. And if God was all the good and caring they promise, why would he ban stuff like that?
Maybe cause no Christians I know actually believe that "God" wrote the bible.
If "God" would've wrote the bible then he's either a lie or have a double personality problem as it contradicts itself so much.
Many early Christian sects were anti sex and marriage. I remember reading about one high profile early christian who wanted to be castrated so he wouldn't give in to any sexual urges. If I remember it rightly, his request was refused. The reason behind the anti sex and marriage is because the pagans were pro it. In many celtic countries pagan females had "thigh freedom" which meant they had the right to have sex with any man they chose. This is the reason why the right of succession was down the female line - another thing the Christians changed. Pagans saw sex as something to be embraced. It also had symbolic meaning which was the fertilization of the land.
This Christian - Pagan thing can be likened to parent - child, where the child wants to be the opposite of the parent.
If we are to understand Christianity we need to look beyond the bible. lets face it, it was put together by an egotistical mad man who decided what writings were going to go in it and what was going to be left out. The first four books of the new testament contradict each other so which is to be belived?
i completely agree with woundedhealer
Nut besides I don't get what is bad about sex. Ok maybe it's better not to have it with some random dudes/girls but hey that's their own choice. Let everyone enjoy life before they die.
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
| Let everyone enjoy life before they die. |
Wise words. 
Anyways, to the original poster, the no sex before marriage comes from one of the ten commandments; "Thou shalt not commit adultery". | miacps wrote: |
| Klaw 2 wrote: | | Let everyone enjoy life before they die. |
Wise words.
Anyways, to the original poster, the no sex before marriage comes from one of the ten commandments; "Thou shalt not commit adultery". |
=/ Having sex before marriage isn't adultery. Adultery is pretty close to the opposite of having sex before marriage in that it's voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.Thank you for all you replies.
I don't remeber who asked me this, but I did not make this promise to god, I just have my own personal reasons for me to bring up this question.
I see that most of you pretty much agree with me, and do not see the point in this promise, as in my opinion, this is something natural and I see no problem in doing it, as long as you are sure you want to do it with your b/f / g/f and or Wife/Husband.
Once again, thanks.
| liljp617 wrote: |
| miacps wrote: | | Klaw 2 wrote: | | Let everyone enjoy life before they die. |
Wise words.
Anyways, to the original poster, the no sex before marriage comes from one of the ten commandments; "Thou shalt not commit adultery". |
=/ Having sex before marriage isn't adultery. Adultery is pretty close to the opposite of having sex before marriage in that it's voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse. |
The Christian community I grew up in considered premarital sex as adultery. Even if thats not the actual meaning, I suspect/assume many Christian communities view it as the same thing.They call it fornication.
| Arnie wrote: |
| They call it fornication. |
I find it incredible that religious people should have such a hang-up over what must be the most natural act in the world. It's only the new religions which have this attitude. The early Christian priests may have seen sex as an act of depravity, but the later ones definately didn't Take the Roman Catholic church, the reason why their priests weren't allowed to marry was to prevent their children making a claim of church property. Lets face it, there was a time when the priests sowed their seeds widely!! | miacps wrote: |
| liljp617 wrote: | | miacps wrote: | | Klaw 2 wrote: | | Let everyone enjoy life before they die. |
Wise words.
Anyways, to the original poster, the no sex before marriage comes from one of the ten commandments; "Thou shalt not commit adultery". |
=/ Having sex before marriage isn't adultery. Adultery is pretty close to the opposite of having sex before marriage in that it's voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse. |
The Christian community I grew up in considered premarital sex as adultery. Even if thats not the actual meaning, I suspect/assume many Christian communities view it as the same thing. |
It wouldn't be the first time Christianity falsely twisted something to fit their views. Either way, adultery has nothing to do with sex before marriage. It's exactly the opposite (along with other aspects). I don't particularly care what Christianity calls sex before marriage, but adultery isn't the right word in any shape or form.If sexuality is by absolute definition "the most natural thing in the world" and thus there cannot be rules restricting it, you cannot blame pedosexuals and the like. If there can be rules, the question is which, and I'm not particulary interested in discussing that.
| Arnie wrote: |
| If sexuality is by absolute definition "the most natural thing in the world" and thus there cannot be rules restricting it, you cannot blame pedosexuals and the like. If there can be rules, the question is which, and I'm not particulary interested in discussing that. |
-.- There's quite the difference between sex between consenting adults who are capable of making remotely mature decisions and a 40 year old man/woman molesting a 12 year old. There doesn't have to be rules. Sex between consenting adults doesn't involuntarily hurt anyone (unless of course they have a child they're incapable of taking care of..but that's a different discussion). Molestation/Pedophilia of a kid who has no idea what's going on has numerous negative effects. It's basic knowledge and logic, no rules necessary.
I don't think anyone truly thinks it cannot be restricted, they're just pointing out the irony/laughing at the fact that promises of this nature found in Christianity resemble the 15th century. | Quote: |
If sexuality is by absolute definition "the most natural thing in the world" and thus there cannot be rules restricting it, you cannot blame pedosexuals and the like. If there can be rules, the question is which, and I'm not particulary interested in discussing that.
|
That's taking it out of context. We're talking about sex - the act of reproducing. Pedophillia is not a natural act, it's child abuse and no decent society is going to accept it
| Quote: |
| If there can be rules, the question is which |
As liljp617 says, only one rule - consenting adults. The witches crede says it all "and it harm none, do what thou wilt" Personally, I think that's the only rule a person needs.Well, simply put, for Christians, sex is exclusive to people who are married.
Anyway I agree to this, one because underage sex is disgusting >_>
And two because why have sex with anyone other than "the one"? Hmm?
| Arty wrote: |
Well, simply put, for Christians, sex is exclusive to people who are married.
Anyway I agree to this, one because underage sex is disgusting >_> |
Wel if you are 22 your not underage, what about that?
| Arty wrote: |
| And two because why have sex with anyone other than "the one"? Hmm? |
Eeeeh the word Fun, pleasure etc.?!? come to mind. | Arnie wrote: |
| If sexuality is by absolute definition "the most natural thing in the world" and thus there cannot be rules restricting it |
err...non sequeter alert. Of course there can be rules restricting it. I have a problem with this word 'natural'. I don't see how it can mean anything, unless you posit that humans are 'un-natural'...
Anyway, that aside, we have instincts which are inherited and, overlayed on this, are social 'rules of conduct'. This goes for other animals as well as homo-sapiens. Sex is 'natural' but that does not mean that sex is 'allowed' between any individuals - in homo-sapiens or in other animal species.
| Quote: |
| , you cannot blame pedosexuals and the like. If there can be rules, the question is which, and I'm not particulary interested in discussing that. |
You cannot blame paedophiles for their urges - true. You cannot blame anyone for any urge, since they are beyond conscious control. What you can do is hold them to account for acting on their urges, because those actions are conscious.
I have the biological 'urge' to have sex with women (and like many/most men that urge extends to many women I come across), but I do not act on that urge because there is the little matter of consent. With a paedophile there can be no consent. That, you may say, is hard to bear for the paedophile - and I would agree with you. It does not mean, however, that paedophilic sex must be allowed because it is 'natural' any more than rape (non consensual sex) is allowed for hetero/homo-sexual adults.
As far as religious rules on sex goes - it really depends on whether you buy into the religion or not. If you are a member of a church which forbids premarital sex then you should probably not have premarital sex - that is your decision. To redefine this as 'adultery' is, of course, factually incorrect and well as ridiculous. Clearly nobody should take that seriously - religious or not, since it is a simple lie. I think adults should be free to have consensual sex or to choose not to - it is a matter for the individual. If religious people want to refrain from sex before marriage then fine - what business of mine is that? If they want to impose that on non-religious people then they should be told to take a hike.
(edited to remove sexist reference).
Last edited by Bikerman on Mon Jun 23, 2008 5:25 pm; edited 7 times in total | Arty wrote: |
Well, simply put, for Christians, sex is exclusive to people who are married.
Anyway I agree to this, one because underage sex is disgusting >_>
What is underage sex? Under 18? So if you're 18 or older (or legally an adult in whatever country), sex outside of marriage becomes different? |
| Arty wrote: |
| And two because why have sex with anyone other than "the one"? Hmm? |
Very simple. Sex is pleasurable. Attempting to find "the one" (if there is such a thing) isn't easy nor is it generally pleasurable. There are also some people who see nothing wrong with living together as a family, having children, and acting like a normal married couple without the state/church giving them a slip of paper that says they're officially a married couple. Marriage is nothing more than a worthless label. I don't see why the word matters so much. | Ghost Rider103 wrote: |
| Ok, so I know Christians make promises to god to not have sex until mariage. I disagree with this completely. I do not believe that you should set a date in your life when you can wake up and say "Hey! I'm married, we can have sex now!" I beleive that when you hae found your true love, and you think you are ready to have sex, then you can have sex. Does anybody else agree or disagree, and why? |
disclaimer: i am not a christian now but previously was
When you and your girlfriend wants to have sex, is it for the purpose of procreation? or is it of lust? or of love? These 3 examples are main reasons why one would engage sex.
procreation:
Naturally, sexual intercourse is what you do to procreate. Morally speaking, only 2 people who are married should have the priviledge to produce a child, this is not for the sake of the parents but rather for the sake of the child. A child has the right to know a father, a mother and a legal family in order to have a healthy living in society.
out of lust:
mainstream christianity abhors lust & sexual immorality (Acts 15:29). I assume that you know the Bible or the scriptures are instructions for christians to obey their God, that is why christians are advised not to resort in lust, even if married.
out of love:
true that christianity promote love in the world, but we have to consider that there are other means or ways to express love. Christianity promotes sex out of love between married couple. christianity even consider sex as something holy.
now to answer your question: i agree with fornication, that is to have sex with my girlfriend so long as my objective is to procreate and to have a family, which means that if my girlfriend gets pregnant, then i'll have to marry her and start a family.
now if the purpose is not procreation, which is only out of lust or love: one must first make sure that his girlfriend will not get pregnant, any form of artificial birth control method fails since it will not guarantee 100% that there will be no surprise baby.
| Quote: |
| Another thing, I know they also must love god the most out of anybody, I disagree with this as well. Why must one love god the most, when you do not even truly know him? |
to love is a subjective matter, you can love avril lavigne even if you dont entirely know her, see.
| Quote: |
| God does not love you the most, so why must we love him the most? He cannot love everyone the most, so I don't see why you would have to. Sure, you can love god for the things he has done, but why must you love him the most, when you do not get the love in return? I think if you have truly found your true love, then you must have to love him/her the most. Does anyone agree or disagree, and why? |
love is not necessarily give and take, you may love avril lavigne without expecting her to love you back
sorry, i find avril lavigne sexy, i wish she could be my girlfriend 
| Ghost Rider103 wrote: |
| Ok, so I know Christians make promises to god to not have sex until mariage. I disagree with this completely. I do not believe that you should set a date in your life when you can wake up and say "Hey! I'm married, we can have sex now!" I beleive that when you hae found your true love, and you think you are ready to have sex, then you can have sex. Does anybody else agree or disagree, and why? |
Because the human body is sacred, not an object (i.e. a sex toy).
| Ghost Rider103 wrote: |
| Another thing, I know they also must love god the most out of anybody, I disagree with this as well. Why must one love god the most, when you do not even truly know him? God does not love you the most, so why must we love him the most? He cannot love everyone the most, so I don't see why you would have to. Sure, you can love god for the things he has done, but why must you love him the most, when you do not get the love in return? I think if you have truly found your true love, then you must have to love him/her the most. Does anyone agree or disagree, and why? |
You're telling me that sending your son to die for everyone, to erase everyone's sins is not a sign of true love? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son". Since this is the picture of perfect love, it is only correct that we love God back, as perfectly as we can, no?
Just my 2 cents, not necessarily what I believe in, but presenting the other side a bit.
