Sex And The Bible

[yxboom]

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/images/links/familydynamics.gif
FAMILY DYNAMICS (http://www.familydynamics.net)

SEX AND THE BIBLE

By JOE BEAM

As God made every animal He created a partner of the opposite gender. The partner provided companionship and assistance. The two of them also made the perfect team for raising offspring.

Why did God give us the gift of sex?

God blessed the human animal above the other animals by placing within them a different sexual need and a different sexual fulfillment. Most other creatures participate in sex simply for procreation. When the female enters a period of fertility she accepts the sexual advances of a chosen male.

In the human animal, sexual desire and activity continually exist-not just in periods of female fertility. For us He made sex to be more than just the joining of two bodies for procreation. He made it so that when we join another person in sexual union, a spiritual union of sorts takes place at the same time.

The apostle Paul used that argument to dissuade Christians in the city of Corinth from hiring prostitutes from heathen temples to satisfy their sexual needs. He argues that joining oneself sexually with a prostitute makes a person one body or one flesh with her. He then says that the person shouldn't do that because he is already one with God-the Spirit lives in him. The implication is that the union of a Spirit-filled body with another human somehow carries spiritual dimensions. Therefore, the body bought by Christ should not participate in such behavior.

1 Corinthians 6:15-20, "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, 'The two will become one flesh.' But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit. Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body."

For human beings, sex isn't just to make babies. It is to join two humans in the most intimate union possible. I believe that sexual love freely shared in marriage is the most beautiful way God gave us to say, "I love you."

Strong sexual needs exist in BOTH husband and wife

Sex in marriage is wonderful! But like all blessings, there can be an accompanying curse. Unfulfilled sexual needs sometimes lead to illicit relationships.

God addressed this strong sexual desire and need in humans through the writings of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:2-5.

"But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."

What does God teach about sex?

If you wish a wonderful picture of the positives about sex, read carefully the Bible book sometimes called the Song of Songs or the Song of Solomon. The love story there is extremely sexual and very graphic. You may not see that with a casual reading since so much of it is written in the idiom of their day. From time to time in our question/answer section, we will refer to that book and, hopefully, make clear some of the explicit sexual references. In this section, we take a slightly different approach to learning God's view of sex.

A great deal of what the Bible teaches about sex comes in the form of prohibitions. Don't let that make you think God is against sex. He made it! But He made it to be enjoyed in His design-not in any human aberration of that design. Let's examine some of those prohibitions. By knowing what God prohibits, we can deduce what God designed to be fulfilling in sexual union.

The Ten Prohibitions

1) Incest

God strongly condemned sexual relations with a "close relative." Relatives listed include:

Mother (Leviticus 18:7) Father's wife-stepmother (Lev. 18:8-under penalty of death, Lev. 20:11)Sister, half-sister, or stepsister (Lev. 18:9, 11-penalized by being cut off from the people, Lev. 20:17) Grandchild (Lev. 18:10) Aunt (Lev. 18:12, 13, 14-penalized by dying childless, Lev. 20:19) Daughter-in-law (Lev. 18:15) Sister-in-law (Lev. 18:16)
Daughter or granddaughter of woman one had sex with (Lev. 18:17-penalized by death, Lev. 20:14)

2) Homosexuality

God strongly condemns sexual relations with a person of the same gender in the Old Testament (Lev. 18:22-penalized by death, Lev. 20:13). He condemns it just as strongly in the New Testament (Romans 1:24-28-penalized by spiritual death, Rom. 1:27, 6:23)

3) Rape

The Old Testament law definitely favored the male. If a man raped a married or engaged woman, he was to be executed while the woman was held to be innocent and worthy of no punishment. If the woman could have summoned help but didn't, she was also to be executed Deuteronomy. 22:23-27). If a man raped a single, unengaged woman, he was not put to death. The penalty was to marry her with no possibility of divorce, ever. (Deut. 22:28-29)

4) Consensual sex with one other than your mate

If a man slept with a woman who consensually engaged in sex with him, his penalty was to marry her (if her father wished) with no possibility of divorce (Exodus 22:16-17).

The New Testament made it clear that God expected marriage to take place only in the boundaries of marriage. (1 Corinthians 7:2-5) Anyone guilty of sexual sin-called fornication in some versions and sexual immorality in others-would suffer spiritual death unless he or she finds God's forgiveness. (Galatians 5:19-21)

5) Adultery

In the Old Testament adultery only occurred if a married woman was involved. A man who slept with a single woman (see above) didn't commit adultery since men could, by law, have more than one wife. Since women couldn't, by law, have more than one husband, any sexual encounter with another man-married or single-was adultery. God vehemently condemns it (Lev. 20:10) and listed the punishment as death (Deut. 22:22).

In the New Testament anyone married to one person but sleeping with another committed adultery. "Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.” (Hebrews 13:4)

6) Lust

In the Old Testament God phrased it this way, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife." (Exodus 20:17) In the New Testament Jesus said it like this, "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matthew 5:27-28)

7) Prostitution

God stated He detests prostitution. (Deut. 23:17-18) In the New Testament He said through Paul, "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never!" (1 Corinthians 6:15)

8) Bestiality

Any person, male or female, who participated in sexual activity with any animal was to be put to death under the Old Testament law. (Lev. 20:15, 16)

9) Sex during menstrual period

A basic principle of Scripture is "the life of a creature is in the blood." (Lev. 17:11) Therefore, blood is always treated as holy-even in the New Testament (Acts 15:29).

Understanding that principle helps us understand God's law listed in the Old Testament about sexual relations during the wife's menstrual period. He said that it shouldn't happen (Lev. 15:24, 18:19) and listed the penalty as being "cut off" from the people. (Lev. 20:18) Many today believe that particular part of the "blood" law was given primarily for health reasons-the people of the Old Testament not having access to our modern hygiene or medicines-and that particular law has no application to Christians. Others feel that it lists God view of the sanctity of blood and should still be observed by Christians who respect God's feelings.

10) Harm the body

While this isn't specifically mentioned as I will describe it, the principle applies to anything that affects a person's body. Remember, the context in which this passage is found is one that discusses sexual activity. In 1 Corinthians 6:19, 20 Paul wrote for us, "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore, honor God with your body." While our spirits belong to God, so does our body. We are not to do anything that desecrates that temple of God that our body is. Sexual activity that harms the body should not occur.

What are the basic principles?

Positive Points

Based on all we've studied in this section, it seems to me that we may infer these basic principles about God's view of sex.


* God intends for sex to be enjoyed by people married to each other-sex isn't just for procreation as with the other animals.

* God endorses our enjoyment of every part of our spouse's body.

* God wants each person in the marriage to conscientiously fulfill his or her mates sexual needs and desires.

Prohibitive Points

Based on our study, I believe that the following limitations must exist for sex to be everything that God intended.


* Sex must only take place in the confines of marriage.

* Sex may never involve:

Another person besides your mate.

Any animal.

Anything that causes harm to either person's body.

That means that anything not prohibited by these principles is acceptable to God! So many things that some avoid for fear of offending God shouldn't be avoided at all. At least not avoided for religious reasons. They are just as valid and good as kissing, hugging, or any other expression of love between two who have committed themselves to each other. For more specifics, please read our weekly question/answer column about biblical principles of sexuality.

What does this mean to your marriage?

Priority One

First, pay attention to your sexual life. While it is true that every part of your life affects every other part, you must make every effort to keep your sexual life healthy. Never forget God's warning about Satan's attack that He gave you in 1 Corinthians 7. Sexually unfulfilled people can be tempted through their lack of self-control. Remove that avenue of attack from Satan's forces by keeping your mate thoroughly sexually satisfied!

Priority Two

Second, keep the bedroom special. Never argue in that room. Never discipline the children there. Never, ever, pay bills in that room. The bedroom should be for sleeping and love-making-nothing else! Don't let that room be associated with any negative thing in your mind or emotions. Make it the most special room in your house.

Teach your children to respect the privacy of that room. Train them from infancy that when that door is shut, parents are spending special time with each other that is not to be violated. If you fear that they may figure out what you're doing in there, what better way to teach them healthy attitudes about sex? They learn to associate sex-although, of course, they shouldn't see or hear anything inappropriate-with love and marriage.

Priority Three

Third, if either of you wants sexual activity that the other finds uncomfortable-or perhaps even repulsive-each should submit to the other. That means that the initiator must not manipulate, cajole, pressure, or punish the reticent mate. But it also means that the reticent mate should prayerfully and purposefully work toward doing what the initiator requests-as long as it fits the principles outlined in this chapter.

For example, the reticent one should not allow another person to be involved in the couples sexual life if the initiator was to request such a thing. But if the initiator requests something outside the current comfort zone of the reticent mate that isn't wrong in the eyes of God, the reticent person should start making progress toward fulfilling that request.

With time and patience, each mate will get what he or she desires-a loving relationship that doesn't get stale, doesn't frustrate, and does fulfill each with great satisfaction.

Fore information on how you can enhance your marriage ministry, go to Family Dynamics (http://www.familydynamics.net).

Joe Beam

300

Joe Beam is an internationally know Christian author and speaker. His books include national best seller Seeing the Unseen, Fantastic Families, and Becoming One: Emotionally, Spiritually, and Sexually. Joe serves as president of Family Dynamics Institute (www.familydynamics.net) in Nashville Tennessee. Family Dynamics trains concerned Christians across the nation to lead marriage courses at their churches.

300

TheologyWeb thanks Family Dynamics and member Thundersbe for submitting this article and agreeing to be available to answer any questions.

300

Notice - The featuring of a particular ministry does not constitute endorsement of every single item or point of view published by said ministry by each and every member of TheologyWeb leadership. We strive to have a varied cross-section of representations of differing opinions on secondary Christian issues. The only requirement for the featuring of a particular ministry is that said ministry subscribes to the essentials artictulated in the TheologyWeb statement of faith found here in our Mission Statement (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/mission/)

[JardinPrayer]

I would like to thank the author for bringing relevent scripture and insightful commentary together in such a clear and accessible manner. This is, I'm sure most will agree, a very complex area of one's spiritual journey. While the bible is clear, sometimes the minds and emotions of sinners are not. It seems to me the very need for rules, guidelines, scriptures, is testimony to our struggle to get into alignment with what God wants from us.

This article presents the optimal approach to sexuality and marriage, which is a wonderful guideline to have. But, what happens when there is an imbalance in commitment to the ways of the Lord among partners? What happens when one partner is saved and the other is not? Well, the bible does tell us this:


1 Corinthians 7:13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
15 But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace.
16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

What isn't mentioned is how the saved partner is to remain steadfast and pure in her conduct with a partner who does not hold the same principles and priorities. It is interesting to me that the scriptural example shows the woman as the partner of faith. An unsaved husband is vulnerable to all manner of demonic attack that a wife may have to find a way to deal with while trying to honor her husband's sexual needs. Of course, the same could be true in reverse, but the image is much more clear with the traditionally vulnerable partner caught in the dilemma.

What if, for example, the husband's appetite for sexual activity is so great and so devoid of intimacy (quantity without quality) the wife feels emotionally traumatized when in union with him? Is she to pray for less emotional trauma or more intimacy? Both? What happens in the meantime?

Let's look at the reverse situation. What if the husband brings flowers home every week, treats his wife like royalty and utterly respects her wishes with regard to frequency and type of sexual activity, but the wife is simply exhausted from caring for the household and the children. Or, if she has simply lost interest and can't be bothered?

Certainly the point was made that both partners bear equal responsibility for making their best effort...assuming both are obediant to God's word. The difficulty arises when either one partner is unsaved or is weaker in their commitment to God - more vulnerable to attack. Rarely are two people exactly on the same "plane" in a relationship, and therein lies the rub. What I'm really wondering about here is how would a Christian couple bring their marriage into alignment with such an imbalance? Especially if one partner must carry the burden?

Thanks for a wonderful piece.

Peace,
JardinPrayer

[themuzicman]

IMHO, having to marry the single woman you raped without ever being able to divorce her would be a fate worse than death, wouldn't it? :shrug: :hrm: :huh: :eek: :shocked: :dufus: :argh: :ddw:

[spl_cadet]

I think the real reason that God prohibited sex when a woman is having her period is just the ewww factor. It's disturbing. Getting blood all over your equipment? Eww, eww, eww.

[JardinPrayer]

>sigh<

[Bill the Cat]

Today @ 02:40 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=133335#post133335)
spl_cadet:

I think the real reason that God prohibited sex when a woman is having her period is just the ewww factor. It's disturbing. Getting blood all over your equipment? Eww, eww, eww.

and you know this HOW?? :poke: :rofl:

[JCA]

Thanks for the post Yxboom! Very intersting stuff indeed, and makes a lot of sense..

Shame the thread had to deteriorate past the 3rd post, but no matter.. the material stands alone :teeth:


Love and Peace

JCA

[Dee Dee Warren]

Back on track folks.... sigh. Isn't this a cool article though?

[Socrates]

Breakpoint By Chuck Colson
17 June 2003
www.townhall.com/columnists/chuckcolson/cc20030617.shtml

The Heritage Foundation has published a new study showing a link between sexual activity and depression among teenagers. The news isn't good. For sexually active girls age fourteen to seventeen, the rates of depression (which the study's authors define as "unhappiness," not clinical depression) are more than three times higher than for those who have not been sexually active. Sexually active boys "are more than twice as likely to be depressed as are those who are not sexually active." And both boys and girls who have been sexually active are more likely to commit suicide.

Study co-author Robert Rector is quick to point out that the study, based on the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health, does not show conclusive evidence of a "causal link" between sexual activity and depression. Such a cause-and-effect relationship, he says, would be "really impossible to prove." And some people, of course, are skeptical about the study as a whole. Tamara Kreinin of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (or SIECUS), which promotes "safer sex" education, thinks it's important to focus on other factors as well when studying teenage depression—factors like family problems and abuse.

Kreinin may be right about that. But the study's authors did control for certain "social background factors," like "gender, race, age, and family income." Moreover, nearly two-thirds of the sexually active teenagers surveyed expressed regrets about having sex too early. This suggests "that early sexual activity leads to emotional stress and reduces teen happiness." And regardless of whether unhappiness causes early sexual activity or the other way around, they say, "teens should be told that sexual activity in teen years is clearly linked to reduced personal happiness."

You'd think everyone could agree about this. Unfortunately, nothing will deter some people from selling the "safer sex" message to kids. No matter what the data show, organizations like SIECUS and Planned Parenthood insist there's no way to stop kids from having sex and that the best we can do is to teach them to use condoms and other birth control methods.

The fundamental problem is one of worldview—whether we believe that we are designed by a loving Creator to glorify Him and enjoy His gifts, or that we are merely a biological accident with no transcendent moral law. If "human sexual relationships are predominantly emotional and moral rather than physical in character," as Rector and his team put it, we will teach kids to treat themselves and each other with care and respect, to recognize that sex is too important and valuable a gift to be taken lightly. If we ignore that emotional and moral aspect and tell kids to treat sex simply as recreation, we're creating a generation with no self-worth or respect for boundaries. And we ought to expect the unhappiness, depression, and even suicide that follows.

No matter how this link works, we need to acknowledge that it's there and what it's telling us about truth. As we keep reminding you here on BreakPoint, whenever we twist reality to suit our own desires and views, the consequences are serious—even deadly. But when we live as God intended, we find that it adds to, rather than subtracts from, our happiness.

[JardinPrayer]

Thanks for getting things back to a serious tone, Socrates.


But when we live as God intended, we find that it adds to, rather than subtracts from, our happiness.

That's a wonderful point to make. I'm interested in its juxtaposition with my post about how frustrating and difficult it can be for the faithful to live up to God's standards, especially in this area. Ultimately, I believe you are entirely correct. But, I also believe many people do not have the proper support system in place to help them stay on track.

For example, my church is notoriously bad at scheduling pastoral counselling. It can take up to 3 weeks to get an appointment with a pastor for 2 weeks further down the road, and then there's a chance you'll be cancelled on the day of the appointment with about an hour's notice. It's a long-standing administrative problem.

Worse, though, is that some pastors will actually say during service, "Hey, you people who have been whining about not being able to get a counselling appointment, you don't need me! You've got the bible and you've got Jesus! Go talk to Jesus." Personally, I find that reprehensible. That is certainly not going to help a depressed, sexually active teenager when she gets the results of her pregnancy test. Or a depressed, sexually active teenager who has just been diagnosed with an STD.

Even though I've described an extreme situation, even churches with the best pastoral counselling sometimes have limitations in their ability to counsel on matters that require more than just spiritual support. People like this (and the people I described in my first post) need some straight medical, psychological, and practical advice in addition to a relevent scripture, a prayer, and a reminder that God forgives them. That balance, I find, is missing in our society, and I think it would go a long way toward helping those with one foot off the path find their way again.

Sure, God can do it alone. But, can a sinner in a sinful world? God answers prayer when we line up with His will...I believe we need a whole lot of help lining up with His will and not all of that help is going to come from a prayer, a pastor, or a scripture. I'd love to see a blended approach to keeping people walking the straight and narrow - especially in the area of sexuality - and I'd love to see if the line of saved souls waiting to get in to Heaven doesn't go out the door and around the block!

Peace,
Jardin

[thundersbe]

Hi All,

I am part of the ministry at Family Dynamics. We train concerned Christians to lead marriage courses at their church. In addition to that, we conduct marriage seminars, and provide marriage and family resources. The article, "Sex and the Bible," was written by our president, Joe Beam.

We like to tell people that "Christians should be having the best sex of anyone."

Because God invented sex and blessed it, we should take it seriously and do our best to make it a mutually fulfilling event that we share with our spouse. It should be a constant and even consistent source of enjoyment, tenderness, and passion.

I'll be happy to take questions concerning sex in marriage or read comments by others on this subject. You've got me here, for free, so have at me.

-Lee

[JardinPrayer]

Hi, Lee.
I'd like you to comment on some of the issues I raised in the second post, if you can.

Thanks!
Jardin

[thundersbe]

Hi Jardin,

Thanks for your question(s). I'll try to address them.

Note: The information presented below should NOT be a substitute for professional couseling. The topics discussed below should not override the advice of your counselor or be used to treat a mental health condition.

The Bible tells us in 1 Corinthians 7, "Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."

It seems that the human need for sexual fulfillment is so great, the apostle tells us to be in prayer when we are not regularly in sexual union because we are very vulnerable to temptation.

Obviously, some people have differing levels of desire. Sometimes a woman's desire is somewhat lower than her husband’s. We've also found men whose desire is less than their wives. The cause of this can be the result of many things--poor nutrition, lack of sleep, emotional distress, traumatic past experiences, and situational difficulty. Whatever the cause, differing sexual desire is usually a great source of frustration--especially for the spouse with the stronger drive.

We should not ignore the needs of our spouse. Being tired, too busy, or disinterested does not prevent the temptation of the devil and does not diminish the desire of our spouse. Furthermore, NEVER is it appropriate for one spouse to deprive the other in order to punish. This is a form of manipulation and control. It should not be put into practice by loving husbands and wives who are imitators of Jesus Christ.

The human sex-drive is controlled by the same part of the brain that controls hunger. It is a recurring, constant need in both men and women. Excuses for not meeting a need can do great emotional damage to a spouse. One frustration we have is trying to explain to spouses that his or her spouse’s need for sexual fulfillment is as great as hunger and that any excuse stated for not meeting this need inadvertantly tells that spouse that convenience, feelings, or situations are more important than his/her needs.

In all honesty, the frustration seems to be most common in men. Their wives are too tired, busy, or disinterested to fulfill their sexual needs. One example that has been used by leading marriage therapists to explain what a spouse experiences when his need for sex is not met is the glass of water story. Let's say you are very thirsty--to the point of dehydration--and your spouse has a tall, cool glass of water. You beg for a drink. Your spouse says, "I'm too tired to hand it to you." Or, "Since you didn't clean the floor you aren't getting it."

Does that make your thirst go away? Does that take away the need? Does that excuse make you less thirsty or content? Does that excuse make you feel good or bad about your spouse? It would probably break your heart that your spouse would be so cruel and seemingly unconcerned with your very real need. You see, whether we like it or not, not presenting an excuse to a spouse for not meeting a need basically says, "I know you think you need this, but you don't." (The president of our ministry--Joe Beam uses that example often)

Another result of unmet needs, very common in men, is resentment. They feel that their wives are not attracted to them and that any sexual intimacy they do experience with their wives comes as a result of begging or because they have done favors for their spouse. Many men have experienced deep emotional hurt because they feel that their wives treat them as if they're gross and don't seem to enjoy having sex with them. Many wives don't give relevance to their husbands real need for sexual fulfillment.

Many marriage experts seem to "beat up" on men and make them the butt of jokes at seminars and conferences. I don't approve of being overly critical of either spouse. Men have their fair share of relationship shortcomings. For example: Some wives would enjoy sex as much as their husbands if their husbands had better technique, patience, and knowledge. But it seems that, in the case of sexual fulfillment, many wives fail to recognize or acknowledge that their husband has a deep, natural need that cannot be dismissed by excuses. Failure by his wife to meet this need place him in a terrible dilemma. Sadly, this is the most common road to an affair.

I don't have the space or time to comment further on this particular subject. We have a resource on our web site called, "The Love, Sex, and Marriage Home-Study." It goes into GREAT detail on this very subject. Sexual technique, environment, education on male and female anatomy, and practical ways to enhance your sex life (inside of marriage) are studied in GREAT detail--in the privacy of your own home. If you'd like to learn about the home-study, visit http://www.familydynamics.net/homeversion.htm

Lee Wilson

[JardinPrayer]

Interesting, that the point you focused on was the need men have for constant fulfillment of their sexual urges and the responsibility women have to understand and cater to it. I have heard that point made by pastors and secular counselors alike.
More interesting, that is the question that gets answered even if it isn't the question that was asked.

Even when the response turns to the unmet needs of women:


Many marriage experts seem to "beat up" on men and make them the butt of jokes at seminars and conferences. I don't approve of being over critical of either spouse. Men have their fair share of relationship short-comings. For example: Some wives would enjoy sex as much as their husbands if their husbands had better technique, patience, and knowledge. But it seems that, in the case of sexual fulfillment, many wives fail to recognize or acknowledge that their husband has a deep, natural need that cannot be dismissed by excuses. Failure by his wife to meet this need place him in a terrible dilemma. Sadly, this is the most common road to an affair.

it somehow comes back to women needing to understand men and emphasizes the consequences of failure on her part.

For couples trying to find real harmony...or for individuals in relationships where they may be the only one trying...this type of response is woefully incomplete and all too common. It doesn't address the needs of teenagers walking that tightrope between childhood and adulthood...between belief in God and Santa Clause and utter disillusionment with the world. It doesn't address how to handle sexual demands from a spouse who may not be physically hurting the other, but is emotionally and mentally traumatizing her by treating her like an object without considering her own needs and feelings.

I just don't think the pat respose covers it all. And, as I believe may have just been shown here, the answers are frustratingly unavailable to people who have been living in this particular hell and desperately need advice and counsel in this area.

Interesting trick of the devil...

Peace,
Jardin

[Alien]

Yesterday @ 09:32 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=133183#post133183)
themuzicman:
IMHO, having to marry the single woman you raped without ever being able to divorce her would be a fate worse than death, wouldn't it?

What about being forced to spend the rest of your life with some jerk that just raped you?

[thundersbe]

Today @ 06:27 PM
JardinPrayer:

Interesting, that the point you focused on was the need men have for constant fulfillment of their sexual urges and the responsibility women have to understand and cater to it.

For couples trying to find real harmony...or for individuals in relationships where they may be the only one trying...this type of response is woefully incomplete and all too common. It doesn't address the needs of teenagers walking that tightrope between childhood and adulthood...between belief in God and Santa Clause and utter disillusionment with the world. It doesn't address how to handle sexual demands from a spouse who may not be physically hurting the other, but is emotionally and mentally traumatizing her by treating her like an object without considering her own needs and feelings.

I just don't think the pat respose covers it all. And, as I believe may have just been shown here, the answers are frustratingly unavailable to people who have been living in this particular hell and desperately need advice and counsel in this area.

Interesting trick of the devil...

Peace,
Jardin



Jardin,

I don't appreciate my post being called the work of the devil. The fact that you described meeting a man's real need for sex as "the need men have for constant fulfillment of their sexual urges and the responsibility women have to understand and cater to it" tells me you may not be taking this need seriously.

As for it having anything to do with teenagers, God, and Santa Clause, I don't know how to answer that. My post was not intended to clear up all of life's problems. The article that is being discussed was about sex in marriage. That is what I addressed as was requested of me by an administrator of this board.

Women have needs in marriage and have just as much right to have their needs met as men--but not more. Wanting to have sex with someone and to experience different kinds of sexual experiences (such as touching, kissing, etc. in different ways and areas) is not treating them like an object anymore than wanting your husband to hug you is treating him like an object. Again, please see the prohibitions on sex listed in the article. Some things are inappropriate and the Bible is clear. But God made the body of our spouse to be enjoyed by the other.

This is not a man vs. woman issue. We have women on our staff who totally agree--most women don't understand their husbands real need for sex. Just as most men don't understand their wife's true need for affection. These two concepts (especially the first one) have saved many marriages from divorce. But affection wasn't the topic. Sex was.

My reply to you was not a previous article or reply. It was merely offering my thoughts based on the findings and experiences I've had while working at Family Dynamics.

I did not realize that you expected me to address anything more than what the article discussed--sexual practices and fulfillment in marriage.

Lee Wilson

[JardinPrayer]

I was not calling your post the work of the devil, and I most certainly beg your pardon if that is the way it came across. I was saying the difficulty in clearly communication across the sexes on this issue is a trick of the devil...and this seems further proof of that.

It was not my intention to provoke or insult you personally or your thoughts. I was expressing my long term frustration about this topic and reaching out in hopes that this would be a good place to finally get some satisfying idea exchange on the matter.


Women have needs in marriage and have just as much right to have their needs met as men--but not more. Wanting to have sex with someone and to experience different kinds of sexual experiences (such as touching, kissing, etc. in different ways and areas) is not treating them like an object anymore than wanting your husband to hug you is treating him like an object. Again, please see the prohibitions on sex listed in the article. Some things are inappropriate and the Bible is clear. But God made the body of our spouse to be enjoyed by the other.

I'm talking about men who reach for their wives' primary and secondary sexual attributes and behave like animals WITHOUT the touching and kissing and the women who live in dread for the next encounter because they NEVER get the kisses and caresses that might actually inspire them to give their husbands what they're taking anyway. I'm trying to raise the issue that sometimes everyone doesn't "play nice" and those are situations where people really need help!!! This is an issue very very close to my heart and I just don't think I can stand to read one more article or have one more discussion where people don't seem to want to deal with the reality that people are living with. The counsellors don't understand the biblical rules for sexual conduct...they counsel based on "modern psychology," telling women to stand up for their rights and say no, among other things. The pastors tell the women to submit. Hey, someone needs to help those people. I'm trying to start a discussion about how to help bridge the gap between walking in Christ and living in a sinner's world.


I did not realize that you expected me to address anything more than what the article discussed--sexual practices and fulfillment in marriage.

I specifically asked you to address the issues I raised in the second post. I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is, there.

Don't get me wrong...I think the initial article and your post were a fine representation of what the scripture says and how we should apply it in our lives....in an ideal world. But, what about the people in trouble? The adultering men, the neglected women, the pregnant teenagers? Where do they turn for help that doesn't further their existing frustration and confusion?

That question is open to everyone...not just you, Lee. This is not a personal thing, nor is it a men vs. women thing. It is a reality and spirituality thing.

Peace,
Jardin

[Ethos]

I'm hip to this :O) This is why I can't understand people who call themselves Christians but that engage in premarital sex, and think that this is fine for them to do.... A sin is a sin right?

[Ethos]

Jardinprayer:"I'm talking about men who reach for their wives' primary and secondary sexual attributes and behave like animals WITHOUT the touching and kissing and the women who live in dread for the next encounter because they NEVER get the kisses and caresses that might actually inspire them to give their husbands what they're taking anyway. I'm trying to raise the issue that sometimes everyone doesn't "play nice" and those are situations where people really need help!!! This is an issue very very close to my heart and I just don't think I can stand to read one more article or have one more discussion where people don't seem to want to deal with the reality that people are living with. The counsellors don't understand the biblical rules for sexual conduct...they counsel based on "modern psychology," telling women to stand up for their rights and say no, among other things. The pastors tell the women to submit. Hey, someone needs to help those people. I'm trying to start a discussion about how to help bridge the gap between walking in Christ and living in a sinner's world."


What pastors tell the women to submit to a man who treats her that way? Maybe in Jehovah's witness religion, but not today in true Christianity, at least not any pastor that I have encountered. The problem, it seems to me, with these marriages that you speak of is that they aren't based on the Lord. Any man that would treat his wife with such contempt is not a true disciple of Christ, and has no love in his heart.

That is why it is so important, upon choosing a mate, to choose one who lives for God, and holds much compassion and love in his heart. One who does not drink (heavily), and one who respects his own self (only through self-respect can we respect others)..

Once these needs are met, the risk of falling into a marital rut such as you speak of become null to void...

Also, I hold the belief in my heart that God loves us enough that he would forgive us for leaving a man who is abusive, mentally or physically, just so long as we don't engage in premarital sex or adultery whilst married into such callousness..

[Ethos]

"Don't get me wrong...I think the initial article and your post were a fine representation of what the scripture says and how we should apply it in our lives....in an ideal world. But, what about the people in trouble? The adultering men, the neglected women, the pregnant teenagers? Where do they turn for help that doesn't further their existing frustration and confusion?"

Jesus Christ :O)who else?

"Let the little children come to me and I will give them rest."

[Sher]

Yesterday @ 04:01 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=134460#post134460)
JardinPrayer:

I'm trying to start a discussion about how to help bridge the gap between walking in Christ and living in a sinner's world.

Hi Jardin,

I agree with you here. There are so many issues that cannot be pigeonholded as easily. I'd personally be interested in discussing this with you ... but I don't know that I have any of the answers you are looking for ... just more observations/questions.

Submission is a tricky subject. It is, of course, Biblical. However, I feel that it is often overlooked in counseling that there is a follow-up to those verses ... that the men are supposed to love their wives as Christ loves the church. I have seen far too many times where the person giving the advice forgets that part.

To borrow Lee's example, the man may indeed be dying of thirst ... but the husband should, perhaps, be a bit more understanding if the wife after also working a 40 hour week, cleaning the house, taking care of the children, and doing all the millions of other chores ... while he sat on the couch in front of the television ... sits down for a long deserved rest with a glass of water that she made ... and the man wants that too? Perhaps it is the duty of the woman to pass it over to him ... but the husband should also see that he could bring her one sometimes too ... or attempt to relieve some of the burden she carries.

OTOH, what of the wife that needs the water and the husband is perpetually tired? Or has issues of some sort and they don't communicate well? There has to be a process in place that addresses it from both sides ... not a lopsided apparent blame on the wife.

And the other issues you questioned ....

Sher

[Ethos]

06-26-2003 @ 09:32 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=133183#post133183)
themuzicman:

IMHO, having to marry the single woman you raped without ever being able to divorce her would be a fate worse than death, wouldn't it? :shrug: :hrm: :huh: :eek: :shocked: :dufus: :argh: :ddw:


UGH!

[themuzicman]

Yesterday @ 03:06 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=134332#post134332)
Alien:



What about being forced to spend the rest of your life with some jerk that just raped you?

Sounds like the perfect opportunity for revenge.

Michael

[Sher]

Today @ 09:11 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135156#post135156)
themuzicman:

Sounds like the perfect opportunity for revenge.

Michael

Although I know where you are going with this scripturally Michael, I have to disagree with this statement (as well as what scripture really says there, but I digress).

As Christians, are we really supposed to be looking to revenge?

And in this day and age, outside of the extreme honor society of ANE, doesn't a woman have more options than this now? Perhaps to marry for love later on ... to someone who would love her no matter what happened to her ... something not her fault.

Rape is a crime of power, not of passion ... and revenge could only be bittersweet ... without the passions that a good marriage brings.

I'm sorry ... but I frankly see this as a statement that only a man would make.

[themuzicman]

Sher,

I don't disagree. Personally, I'd consider rape a capital crime worthy of the death penalty, and I suppose we're no longer under that system of law, so we can do what we want.

I'm just trying to figure God's logic on this one, and that's the best I can do.

Michael

[Socrates]

Today @ 03:30 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135211#post135211)
themuzicman:

Sher,

I don't disagree. Personally, I'd consider rape a capital crime worthy of the death penalty,'

I wouldn't, as much as I agree that rape must be severely punished, because murder is also a crime worthy of the death penalty. It would be a great incentive for a rapist to murder his victim to try to avoid detection if there was no greater penalty.

[Sher]

Today @ 12:30 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135211#post135211)
themuzicman:

Sher,

I don't disagree. Personally, I'd consider rape a capital crime worthy of the death penalty, and I suppose we're no longer under that system of law, so we can do what we want.

I'm just trying to figure God's logic on this one, and that's the best I can do.

Michael

Please do forgive my harshness Michael. With a reread, I realize I was a bit rude ... not what I intended .. but this is a subject that rides near to my heart.

Emotionally, I'd agree with you about the extent of punishment ... but not in practice ... Soc's answer being one serious reason.

However, making the criminal marry the victim is not the answer either IMO. That only serves to futher punish the woman ... who has (again IMO) many more options available to her in today's society. Maybe I am just looking at it from a worldly viewpoint mixed with God's logic here, but I feel like on this side of heaven, that's "the best I can do" :smile:

What makes me sad is that too many times these women tend to wind up being treated like pariah by Christians ... and that makes me sick. We need to see who the victim is ... and act accordingly ... offering lots of prayer and heart-felt love ... reaching out to women in these situations.

Sher

[aebluff]

Edited by a moderator.

[JardinPrayer]

Just to let you all know, I'm still monitoring this thread, but have stepped away from posting. As I have experienced numerous times before, conversations on this topic seem to have the inherent characteristic of not staying on track. And, while I'm sorry to have to point this out, it certainly does seem to have come down to a men vs. women thing in terms of generalized point of view. I'd also like to note that I have not seen any women posting sophmoric, flip, or over-generalized comments here...that should tell us all something.

I'm disappointed that the questions I'm putting on the table are, once again, not answerable. Perhaps I should stop trying to find answers that require a blending of the spirtual and secular world. I just can't believe, though, that God can expect us to live in both and not have a way to cope with the schism.

Peace,
Jardin

[Socrates]

Yesterday @ 05:01 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135250#post135250)
Sher:

What makes me sad is that too many times these women tend to wind up being treated like pariah by Christians ... and that makes me sick. We need to see who the victim is ... and act accordingly ... offering lots of prayer and heart-felt love ... reaching out to women in these situations.

It really sux if the innocent victim is treated as the guilty party.

[Dee Dee Warren]

We have to remember that exceptions or tough cases are not the way to explicate general rules. Yes, there are devasting sexual issues, and situations, but I think we can come to an understanding of God's parameters and then use them to come to a good foundational understanding to help with the tough issues, for the fact is that most of the tough issues come out of one or more parties not obeying the foundational issues.

Also, the focus is a lot of times on the man's physical needs, because no matter how much we have tried to blur the lines and degenderize society. men have more really sexual physical needs. That is just a fact. Women's needs are different, and of course the man has an obligation to meet them, which is what I think Jardin was getting at. But speaking as a woman, I think married (of course) women underestimate and undervalue the man's physical drives. We take care of our families, we clean house, we cook, we etc., and those needs are put on the back burner and we think things like "well no one ever died from not having sex" and place higher priorities on more immediate, visible needs. I think that is mistaken, but probably not expressing it well. I am not saying we are to be slavishly obsessive with such things, but I think we need to respect this difference, and not make the man feel like a lech because he has greater sexual needs than us. Just my two cents.

[Sher]

I totally agree with everything you said Dee Dee. It is very important to a marriage to keep the husband happy :smile:

It is the exceptions, though, that are not being addressed that concerns me. Too often the women are told, basically, to suck it up ... and that is just wrong.

Sher, who is not going to admit to being the letch :no:

:teeth:

[Dee Dee Warren]

Well in all fairness though, I don't think the intent of just a primer article on marriage is meant to address the exceptions.... though of course we can explore them in this discussion thread.

[Alien]

Yesterday @ 11:49 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135244#post135244)
Socrates:
I wouldn't, as much as I agree that rape must be severely punished, because murder is also a crime worthy of the death penalty. It would be a great incentive for a rapist to murder his victim to try to avoid detection if there was no greater penalty.

Same argument for kidnapping .....

[JardinPrayer]

Actually, I believe the primer article was intended to be a blanket road map that is expected to work for all who employ it. Like most road maps, it lays out the yellow brick road in a very attractive (and valid) way. The problem is, what happens when you encounter the wicked witch of the west, a few flying monkeys, or a phoney wizard? Glinda gave Dorothy only one instruction: "Follow the yellow brick road." AND, she put a pair of shoes on her feet that were certain to get her into trouble and couldn't be removed!!!

My point here is that the good intentions of the author and his organization are not being questioned or challenged...at least not by me...and I regret they seem to have taken my reaching out to them as such and have seemingly disappeared from this thread. The issue is that road maps don't always apply in every situation. Or, sometimes there are some back roads that must be navigated before you can get on that main highway. If someone told me to get on I-95 but didn't tell me how to get TO I-95 and I had no other resources to find out...I'd never get there.

Dee Dee is correct in saying I was trying to say that women's sexual needs are different and require as much commitment from their partners as those of men. She's also correct in pointing out that our nurturing responsibilities are great and that sometimes when we get into bed at the end of the day we really would just rather get some rest. However, men have a lot of stress and responsibility during their day as well and many count on sex as a form of stress relief and decompression so they can get to sleep peacefully and wake up ready to take on the lions again. If that's their motivation, a woman who's been nurturing all day long (even at her job) isn't likely to feel fulfilled by simply having to take care of honey so he can get all his stress purged and fall asleep in 5 seconds afterward. If women are expected to understad what their men need at the end of the day, it seems only reasonable that men should understand and attend to the needs of their women as well.

All that aside, my real point is about what happens when one spouse is simply incapable or unwilling to respond to this plea for equality? What if a man is so sexually immature that he just doesn't know how to tend to a woman with grace and tenderness? What if a woman has built up so much dread of the next time she is simply expected to shut up and put up that she can do little more than submit and then cry in the bathroom for an hour later while her husband snoozes? Come on! Someone has to address that from a Christian perspective! It's going on in the world. A LOT! Sure, you can point to a scripture that talks about honoring each other, but if one partner will not...how easy is it for the other to continue to honor and submit day after day. The rest of our culture teaches us that women who do that are victims who should stand up and say no. How do you reconcile that and keep your sanity? That's my real question.

And, with a question like that on the table, having guys come in here posting little bits about how gross menstrual periods are or how terrific simplistic rules like being forced to marry your rapist are just make by blood boil.

For any biblical tenet regarding marriage to work, you must have two obedient partners. The bible tells us that if one spouse is not saved, we should stick around because they are made holy by our very presences, as are the children of that union. Okay, that's wondeful. But what the bible does not say is how to maintain grace under that kind of fire. Women are deeply emotional by nature and generally have a tremendous capacity to feel the pain and suffering of others almost as much as their own. It's a lot to hold inside with no comforting arm around their shoulder...no sweet words of encouragement in their ear...just another demand and another expression of disppointment if the demand is not met.

Sorry if this is not what the thread was intended to address. Seems like a recurring theme...the thread only addresses the ideal in this arena...the exceptions are left to flail in the mire.

Peace,
Jardin

[angeltread]

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
why do women marry sexually immature, selfish men?
why are these women NOT assessing the most important character traits of these men BEFORE marrying them?
shouldn't these issues be talked about BEFORE marriage?

[Alien]

Jardin,

I've been following this thread since it started, and almost replied to you a couple of times.

What you are saying rings a lot of bells with me and I'd like to discuss it with you, but I'm not sure if you want input from 1) a man or 2) a non-Christian. So I'll wait for your response before getting into it. You could note that I was the one that actually questioned the idea of forcing a woman to marry her rapist.

I would love to be able to say that I have some nice pat answers, but I don't. I'd like to kick it around a bit though.

[JardinPrayer]

Today @ 01:24 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136800#post136800)
angeltread:

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
why do women marry sexually immature, selfish men?
why are these women NOT assessing the most important character traits of these men BEFORE marrying them?
shouldn't these issues be talked about BEFORE marriage?

I'm going to bite my tongue really hard so I don't just blurt out "grow up," on this one...

How many couples find themselves saying to each other, "Gee, I didn't think that you were this or that when we met." The honeymoon ends, and the best behavior gets relaxed. In my case, I got married the first time before that had occurred. The second time, I had been engaged for a year and a half and married a year before we really started grappling with the issues that invariably come up when you snap out of the romantic reverie and realize you're going to spend the rest of your lives seeing the best and worst of each other.

Of all the pat answers I can imagine, this one may infuriate me the most.



Today @ 01:45 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136816#post136816)
Alien:

What you are saying rings a lot of bells with me and I'd like to discuss it with you, but I'm not sure if you want input from 1) a man or 2) a non-Christian. So I'll wait for your response before getting into it. You could note that I was the one that actually questioned the idea of forcing a woman to marry her rapist.

I would love to be able to say that I have some nice pat answers, but I don't. I'd like to kick it around a bit though.

While I have never been a man, I have been a non-Christian (for the majority of my years, in fact). I have no problem engaging in thoughtful, considered conversation with people who fit either category, so please don't hesitate to express your views. My problem is with people who don't think things through, who over-generalize, who won't take off their rose colored glasses enough to realize that people are suffering and for whom the standard bill just won't cut it, or who are outright sexist. If you fit any of those categories, you may find yourself face to face with my cranky side (which everyone is getting really familiar with here). Still, it's an open forum.

Just from this post alone, I have a strange premonition you may have the most valuable contribution to make to this thread of any male so far! Let's hear it!

Peace,
Jardin

(What's gotten into that girl?):eek:

[Alien]

Jardin,

OK, you asked for it!

I think jokes say a lot about what people feel to be true. Here's one.

Have you heard, they've discovered a food that totally destroys women's sexual urges?
No, what is it?
Wedding cake!

OK, not too funny to women, but men recognise the situation and laugh. I don't know if there's an equivalent joke against men, but I remember a scene from the sitcom "Married With Children". Peggy and friends are expecting a ride home from Al and he's forgotten about them. She says, "This is just like sex, only this time I can't reach into the drawer and get myself home".

Men and women seem to have a very real problem relating to each other's needs sexually. Men see women as being sexy until they've "caught" them then reverting to their "real" unsexy selves. Women see men as being romantic until they've "caught" them, then reverting to their "real" unromantic selves.

Is it all just a matter of communication? What if the communication is "I really don't feel sexy any more" or "All that romance stuff is just too much like hard work"? Women, with more complicated sexual "apparatus" tend to have more variable libidos than men. Men find this difficult to understand. Men are hunters and really don't have so much incentive to keep chasing after the quarry is caught. Women find this difficult to relate to.

I'm going to say that communication is important though. I quite seriously consider our society to be sick where sex is concerned. Parents hand down sexual embarassment from one generation to another, and institutions are not much better. I learnt almost nothing about sex at school and nothing at all from my parents. Actually, that's not quite true, I learnt that it was something not quite "nice" and certainly not something that should be talked about. I learned most of what I knew from kids my age, and that was largely inaccurate. I also learned that sex was something to be sniggered over and tell jokes about. I believe schools today have sex ed classes, but do these cover sexual techniques? Do they talk about the real problems of maintaining mutual interest over the years? I would guess not, though I'm open to correction. So, would we send our kids out on to the road with this little driving instruction? Isn't sex more important than driving?

So, here we have two people that have been subconsciously programmed that sex is not something to be talked about. They have had little instruction in sexual skills (at all levels). They marry in a romantic fog. When the inevitable disillusionment comes, we tell them to communicate and attend to each other's needs. Right! They have great difficulty in communicating in the first place and may not even be sure what would satisfy their needs anyway.

So whats the answer? Real knowledge, real communication and a real concern for each other would probably do it. But I said I didn't have any pat answers and this is certainly not one. Knowledge is easy to come by these days (much more so than when I was young) but it takes a willingness to accept what is learned. Communication can be hard work both for the communicator (who has to make him or herself vulnerable) and the listener (who may have to accept some hard truths about him or herself and also be willing to try something that may seem unattractive at first. "Eeeew I'm not doing that!"). Real concern may seem to be a given, but even if the couple still loves each other there may be problems that extend way past the sexual area. These other problems may even be the cause of the sexual disfunction. "Why should I put myself out for you in bed when you have this list of projects for me that you never seem to get round to?" "Why should I be romantic when you never seem to take any trouble with your appearance?" Or whatever.

I truly think that some cases may be hopeless, but lets not give up. The first step is to recognise that this is not a problem that will be solved with a couple of simple rules and a few platitudes. I agree with you that the level of professional help available is pretty poor. I've suffered under marriage counselling and I know whereof I speak.

Anyway, that'll probably do for a start. Lets see if it engenders any manifestations of your cranky side. :egad:

[JardinPrayer]

Oh my goodness....I just want to shout "Hallelujah!" for delivering a thinking man with perspective to this thread. But, that would be an inappropriate thing to say to an atheist, no?

Your post sounded almost like I wrote it...and coming from me, that's high praise!!! :lol:

I wish I could respond to the excellent points you made, but I would have to get a lot more personal than would be in my best interest in order to do so. Let me just say that I encourage every other male that has followed this thread to read Alien's post closely and see if you can pick up a little enlightenment. By that I mean, not just knowing how to point out what's wrong in a relationship, but bringing some real solution-oriented thinking and willingness to the table. Alien, if you're married, your wife must be a happy woman.

Thank you so very much for reviving my flagging faith in this thread and in the gender at large!

Peace,
Jardin

[angeltread]

Today @ 08:51 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136925#post136925)
JardinPrayer:
I'm going to bite my tongue really hard so I don't just blurt out &quot;grow up,&quot; on this one...


ah, but you did anyway... shame, though, that people don't "grow up" before getting married.


Today @ 08:51 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136925#post136925)
JardinPrayer:
How many couples find themselves saying to each other, &quot;Gee, I didn't think that you were this or that when we met.&quot; The honeymoon ends, and the best behavior gets relaxed. In my case, I got married the first time before that had occurred. The second time, I had been engaged for a year and a half and married a year before we really started grappling with the issues that invariably come up when you snap out of the romantic reverie and realize you're going to spend the rest of your lives seeing the best and worst of each other.

Of all the pat answers I can imagine, this one may infuriate me the most.


yes, i can see from your entire middle paragraph why you'd be infuriated. the question remains: who made the decisions you talked about in that paragraph? those decisions aren't anyone else's fault despite the hard time your giving most of the guys here.
and speaking of generalisations; i've got a better one for ya - i know lots of people, family and friends, and i know them very well - and i can group them into two categories: those who have been married for what seems like forever and those who are in one bad relationship/marriage after another. that's a generalisation worth it's merit. and it doesn't discriminate between Christian and non-christian either.

_______________________________
edit: yes, alien, that was a good post.

[JardinPrayer]

Actually, I'm not participating in this thread to generalize, accuse, lay blame, or otherwise create a bigger problem than already exists. I'm looking for some sympathetic responses to the poor folk that, for whatever reason, have found themsleves in these circumstances and genuinely want to improve them! Do you think you can raise yourself to that level long enough to contribute something that will actually help?

Oh, and since you thought enough of Alien's post to edit your own to praise it, let me suggest you also take my response to him to heart.

Gee, that may be the crankiest I've ever gotten on T-Web! Lord, forgive me.

Peace,
Jardin

[Alien]

Today @ 04:21 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137045#post137045)
JardinPrayer:
Oh my goodness....I just want to shout &quot;Hallelujah!&quot; for delivering a thinking man with perspective to this thread. But, that would be an inappropriate thing to say to an atheist, no?

The Invisible Pink Unicorn works in mysterious ways ..... :teeth:


Thank you so very much for reviving my flagging faith in this thread and in the gender at large!

You are most welcome.

[Sher]

Today @ 01:24 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136800#post136800)
angeltread:

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
why do women marry sexually immature, selfish men?
why are these women NOT assessing the most important character traits of these men BEFORE marrying them?
shouldn't these issues be talked about BEFORE marriage?

Angeltread,

Forgive me for saying so, but the "before marriage" caveat has to be one of the more idiotic things I've read this week. I can only shake my head that this has to be coming from a man :whack:

How would you suggest that women ... Christian women who are maintaining purity ... assess these things before marriage?

Seriously! We aren't talking about whether the family will want kids, whether they prefer dogs or cats, etc. No amount of talking before marriage will show the immaturity in the sex dept.
==========
That said, the issues *should* be talked about after marriage. Before marriage, one should make sure that the line of dialog is very open and honest ... after marriage, the woman needs to speak up in many instances so that the problems can be corrected.

Communication is key ... and that is something that is not being addressed often enough. Women need to learn how and when to communicate to men .. and men need to learn to share their feelings and need more ... and in a loving manner without condemnation.

For the woman who is crying in that bathroom, I'd say get out of there, wake the slob up and start teaching him properly! We women have to be submissive to our husbands ... but that doesn't mean being a doormat. As "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" says ... women are the neck ... they turn the head {the man} where we want them to go :wink: And this is a good analogy for what I am saying here.

Forgive me for being blunt :blush: but if something hurts or isn't proper speak up! If something is fantastic but sporatic ... speak up ... give compliments with the critical comments ... be kind but firm. Sometimes the man just needs some prodding in the right direction :poke:

Give a look in the Frat about how men are complaining that they aren't mind readers. This is a big issue, Ladies! How many times do we roll our eyes, or gently leave hints ... and whine and moan to each other when they don't pick them up? How effective is that? Does complaining to girlfriends, no matter how cathartic, really do *anything* to resolve the problem?

Yes ... there are many different needs that need to be met ... and I don't think that most of them are ... but on some of this ... we women need to pull up our bootstraps and take some responsibilty as well.

[Epoetker]

A few notes:

Back in the ANE coulture, the raped girl got the better end of the deal, at least as far as an assured husband and provider were concerned. Not like there were all that many opportunities outside of "wife" for women back then, so being guaranteed a husband's children and labor (absolutely necessary to ensure her economic survival and social status, since no man would have her afterward according to the customs of the time) was a lifelong benefit, or at least a very real blunting of the social penalties for victims of the act.

Sex for men in general: It be visual, it be something that improves for one willing to practice. Requires effort to uphold well. Work-type effort. I believe it was G.K. Chesterton who said you can ignore a man as long as you don't overwork him and can overwork a women as long as you don't ignore her. I'm not sure he was confining himself to describing businesses, either. That means that the likeliest way to get anything done in the confounded practice is to accede on the regularity front while increasing demands on the quality front. As long as a man knows he's going to get the payoff, he tends not to be overly concerned about the route required, even when tired (though too much work hours kills some of the creativity and energy required for the finer points of the procedure. Another issue, to be handled later.) The point is, YOU, THE WOMAN, HAVE CONTROL AT ALL STAGES OF THE PROCESS. A man ain't going to refine or revive his technique if he has nothing to practice on, and more importantly no one to continually encourage him to practice. What women have a tendency to do is deny all contact at the outset rather than go for gradual degrees of acceptance. This decision to 'submit' doesn't mean you confirm or accede and let the guy take over from there. They still tend to be susceptible to verbal or physical suggestion in the earliest to middle stages. But habits, good or bad, can only be formed through repitition. You will break no spiritual law by asserting what you wish for. Communication has to start somewhere...

*The number of people who had these problems and the degree to which they're talked about in our sex-saturated society enables even a virgin bachelor like me to assess the probable situation and solution. Sorry for the overuse of euphemisms, but this IS a semi-familial site*

[Socrates]

Today @ 12:46 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137203#post137203)
Sher:

Give a look in the Frat about how men are complaining that they aren't mind readers. This is a big issue, Ladies! How many times do we roll our eyes, or gently leave hints ... and whine and moan to each other when they don't pick them up? How effective is that? Does complaining to girlfriends, no matter how cathartic, really do *anything* to resolve the problem?

Ladies, listen to Sher! As far as we men are concerned:

Subtle hints don't work.
Normal hints don't work.
Obvious hints don't work!

Just ask us for what you want!! :bv:

[Alien]

Good points, Sher. But ....


Forgive me for being blunt but if something hurts or isn't proper speak up! If something is fantastic but sporatic ... speak up ... give compliments with the critical comments ... be kind but firm. Sometimes the man just needs some prodding in the right direction

.... be gentle with the prodding, OK? For all the macho image, we're very sensitive when it comes to this stuff. There's nothing that turns a man off quicker than a perceived rejection. If the prods work, then great, but if he seems to be resisting try praising the good stuff to build up his ego, then gently introducing the changes you want. If all this seems too much like hard work, or even demeaning to your pride, remember there could be a little boy inside that big lunk that is desperately afraid of failing at something that he has been told over and over again is essential to his manhood. You'll be well rewarded for your efforts.

(Or if this doesn't work, try a hefty kick in the .... :teeth:).


Give a look in the Frat about how men are complaining that they aren't mind readers. This is a big issue, Ladies! How many times do we roll our eyes, or gently leave hints ... and whine and moan to each other when they don't pick them up? How effective is that? Does complaining to girlfriends, no matter how cathartic, really do *anything* to resolve the problem?

Yah. We're not too big in the subtlety department, I'm afraid.

[Sher]

Today @ 11:50 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137606#post137606)
Alien:

Good points, Sher. But ....

.... be gentle with the prodding, OK? For all the macho image, we're very sensitive when it comes to this stuff. There's nothing that turns a man off quicker than a perceived rejection. If the prods work, then great, but if he seems to be resisting try praising the good stuff to build up his ego, then gently introducing the changes you want. If all this seems too much like hard work, or even demeaning to your pride, remember there could be a little boy inside that big lunk that is desperately afraid of failing at something that he has been told over and over again is essential to his manhood. You'll be well rewarded for your efforts.

Good points ... and good male perspective ... (but I did say "kind") ...

From the experience of open communication ... anyone can take or leave it ... but it works, believe me.

My main issue is that we are NOT teaching this to the ladies of the generations that are following us ... or the young men for that matter

... I've been very open with my son ... but find that this is unusual for some reason. Why in a society, so entrenched in sexual misconduct, are we not preparing our children to counter the erroneous things they will learn on the streets? Why aren't we giving them the benefits taught from our experience in these areas?


(Or if this doesn't work, try a hefty kick in the .... :teeth:).

Ow ... LOL! :rofl:


Yah. We're not too big in the subtlety department, I'm afraid.

:nc: :teeth:

[Alien]

Today @ 09:59 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137621#post137621)
Sher:
Good points ... and good male perspective ... (but I did say &quot;kind&quot;) ...

From the experience of open communication ... anyone can take or leave it ... but it works, believe me.

Oh yes, I'm sure this has worked for you in your marriage and I wasn't trying to be critical, just adding a small caveat. :smile:


And my main issue is that we are NOT teaching this to the ladies of the generations that are following us ... or the young men for that matter

... I've been very open with my son ... but find that this is unusual for some reason. Why in a society, so entrenched in sexual misconduct, are we not preparing our children to counter the erroneous things they will learn on the streets? Why aren't we giving them the benefits taught from our experience in these areas?

See my response to Jardin. I really couldn't agree with you more. And I applaud your speaking out so well. :thumb:

[JardinPrayer]

My sincere thanks to Alien and Sher for their insightful, thoughtful, genuinely pro-active comments in this thread. I have to wonder where the folks that intiated this thread have gone and whether they, perhaps, have benefited from what has been discussed here.

As for contributors who say things like "Women have control at all stages of the process," I just submit this: :doh:

Peace,
Jardin

[JardinPrayer]

Also, to Socrates:

These are well known facts in the female realm. But, when juxtaposed with the comments Alien made about the fragility of the male ego and the little boy inside, it can make for choppy waters to navigate!

As for Sher's comments about speaking up and teaching...I wish I could comment the way I really want to about this. Suffice it to say that sometimes there are obstacles to this process that even the best intentions on the part of both partners cannot overcome. T'would be a far better world if we were as good as the airlines at losing baggage.

Peace,
Jardin

[Sher]

Today @ 12:28 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137646#post137646)
Alien:

Oh yes, I'm sure this has worked for you in your marriage and I wasn't trying to be critical, just adding a small caveat. :smile:

Heh ... I didn't misunderstand you ... I was just soapboxing :teeth:


See my response to Jardin. I really couldn't agree with you more. And I applaud your speaking out so well. :thumb:

Thanks! :smile:

[JardinPrayer]

We're all getting along so nicely now...at least Sher, Alien, and me (or is it "I?")

I think Soc is sorta in the club, too.

It's nice in here suddenly.

[Epoetker]

Maybe not all stages...I did add caveats there. But it's something that rather seriously effects the rest of the relationship. Socrates got most of the point I was trying to make anyway. The pernicious combination of outright denial or a variable list of minimicrohints will Simply.Not.Work. (Well, the latter might work if you do that whole practice thing I mentioned.) Until then, para-psychic communication only works on God. Verbalizing the exact reason for ones desire or lack thereof works much better. It's often a little harder than one thinks, but once you get into the habit of it, you can resolve the problems much easier. And I'm unfortunately not privy to your husband's general attitude, so every piece of advice I'm going to be offering is geared toward the female end anyway.

As far as male ego fragility goes, it's pretty easy to avoid as long as:
1. Statement of problem-reolution-of problem-sex follows contiguously.
2. No criticism of permanent attributes or area you're not fully prepared to suffer the economic and social consequences of changing immediately.
3. Never, ever, ever, EVER give another excuse after the first one expires due to solution or evaporation. See 1, section on complete verbal exposition of reasons.

I know it's not how the female mind is used to thinking, and there's bound to be rather tiresome status reports("Ready now?" "No." "Ready now?" "No." "Ready now?") But this sort of farcical minor embarrassment on the way to recovery is a much better condition than slowly freezing to death or divorce. He'll eventuially listen, especially if he still thinks you're cute when exasperated.

[Sher]

Today @ 03:27 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137892#post137892)
JardinPrayer:

We're all getting along so nicely now...at least Sher, Alien, and me (or is it &quot;I?&quot;)

"I" ... I believe ... a given verb there at the end ("am" if just I ... "are" if all three names) ... but I stink at grammar ... that's why I use a great curriculum ... wanna give me a math question instead :teeth:


I think Soc is sorta in the club, too.

It's nice in here suddenly.

Yeah ... I've enjoyed talking about this too :smile:

Epoetker, you're making my head hurt :smile: ... I'll come back to your post when I've waken up a bit more.

Sher

[JardinPrayer]

Today @ 05:09 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=137969#post137969)
Sher:
Wanna give me a math question instead :teeth:

If I were bright enough to come up with a math question, I would!


Epoetker, you're making my head hurt :smile: ... I'll come back to your post when I've waken up a bit more.

Yeah, I've gotta admit...he lost me there. I will say one thing that I think may be relevent to his post, though...one personal tidbit that I've been trying desperately to avoid in this thread:

If I try to explain patiently to my husband exactly what I would prefer in an intimate situation...to discuss it before we get into it so there's no misunderstanding or discomfort...he almost always whines, "Why do we have to talk about it all the time? Can't it just...flow?" My answer is almost invariably, "It can just flow when we don't have to talk about it any more."

Peace,
Jardin

[Epoetker]

Most excellent. :smile:

NOW we're getting somewhere. This is definitely the time to remind him that flow only comes with practice. Emphasize the practice aspect. Don't let up on it. Gently when you can, nag if you have to. If possible, try bringing up the practice at a time when he's not the one expecting or initiating it. Men tend to go for it when the women does unexpected things like that. But...next time he whines, tell him in no uncertain terms that the only way you WILL be able to go the extra mile with regard to quantity is if he stops ignoring you and proceeds to take steps toward quality. Make it clear that the willingness to follow his desires proceeds directly from his willingness to listen to you on the best way to go about it. This IS where his end of the deal comes up, and most definitely where he's gone wrong.

And let no other issue come between, around, or through the bargain, once understood. The trouble with the type of open-ended multi-sided 'contracts' like the frigidity/avoidance spiral is that attempts to mend them often get sidetracked into other domestic issues, these issues evolve into escalating rhetoric, these bouts of vitriol lead to domestic hatred, divorce, abuse, etc., ad nauseam.

Have faith. Have courage. Courage is the action of love, and prayer instills it in us when least expected.

[Sher]

Jardin,

I'd suggest open discussion when you are not in the midst of it as well. As I said before, communication is key. If you open dialog about many different things, and keep in mind that you have to be more "sensitive" to his emotional needs, it should be productive.

If he is frankly just one of those men who do not respond well to verbal suggestions ... seeing them all as "criticism" ... there are nonverbal ways you can learn to express yourself as well.

If you want more "details" from a female prespective, let's arrange a chat or PM session one evening or early morning. (We do have that chat room that rarely gets used). I'm not trying to be prudish ... just cautious. I'm trying to balance frankness with public forum here ... but feel free to pick my brain a bit more if you want.

Sher

[Sher]

Today @ 08:00 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=138166#post138166)
Epoetker:

And let no other issue come between, around, or through the bargain, once understood. The trouble with the type of open-ended multi-sided 'contracts' like the frigidity/avoidance spiral is that attempts to mend them often get sidetracked into other domestic issues

This point bears repeating! :no:

It drives me nuts ... and I have been guilty of this as well, unfortunately ... when a convo about one thing degrades into a whine session about others. Stay on-topic if you want the point to be well seated!

[$cirisme]

/me bumps thread, not because of any content but because of a systems bug. Please ignore this post. :smile:

[JardinPrayer]

Whoa! Didn't mean to turn this into a personal therapy session for moi, though I very much appreciate the comments you both made. One of the things I appreciate most about T-Web is the hunger we all seem to have for tackling an issue and relentlessly hammering at it until it gets as close to resolution as possible. Kinda like great sex, in a way... :brow:

For the record, my marriage is cool...that was one personal example that was safe and illustrative. Most of my hot buttons on this topic do not concern my personal situation...just those very very close to me. And some of them are from my past.

Both of you offered advice I employ regularly. I think what it boils down to is that people are bound to bump up against each other's soft spots when they decide to share a life. The trick is making that bumping as much fun as possible!

Have we exhausted the thread?

Peace,
Jardin

[Alien]

Sher: wanna give me a math question instead

This came for a kids' comic I read when I was about eight. Funny how things stick in your mind ...

If it takes seven men six seconds to slice a sausage, how long will it take nine nitwits to knit a gnat's nightshirt if kippers are fourpence* a pair?

(* That dates it - and me!)

[Sher]

Today @ 12:28 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=138678#post138678)
Alien:

If it takes seven men six seconds to slice a sausage, how long will it take nine nitwits to knit a gnat's nightshirt if kippers are fourpence* a pair?

:eek:

[Dee Dee Warren]

Whoa! Didn't mean to turn this into a personal therapy session for moi, though I very much appreciate the comments you both made. One of the things I appreciate most about T-Web is the hunger we all seem to have for tackling an issue and relentlessly hammering at it until it gets as close to resolution as possible. Kinda like great sex, in a way...

:nc:

[apple]

[Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body

What does it mean we were bought at a price? Who sold us and what was the price assuming God bought us?

[Socrates]

Statement: DR508
by Steven D. Thomas
This article first appeared in the Volume 24 / Number 3 / 2002 issue of the Christian Research Journal.
For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: www.equip.org/cstore

SYNOPSIS
There is presently a great deal of confusion and controversy over sexual morality. The challenges to a Christian view of life — in particular, the boundaries that should govern sexual relationships — range from casual dismissals to heated debates, and from informal disagreement to organized opposition. Much of the competition, philosophically speaking, finds its root in the form of a consent-only ethic, where “anything goes” as long as it happens between consenting adults. This vision of sexual relationships does not take into account, however, the profound significance of sex, which is identified perhaps most clearly in the case of rape; neither can it do justice to that significance once identified. This recognition of the moral gravity of sexuality opens the door to questions such as, “What is the proper response to the significance of sex?” A standard incorporating love and law arises logically out of our rejection of sexual assault as a heinous and debilitating act.

In tracing the moral implications of sexual relationships back to their origin — back to the foundational concepts of traditional marriage as a “one flesh” union of persons — we find a better explanation for the meaningfulness of sex, and correspondingly, the harm of rape. This understanding also suggests that human beings are made for monogamous relationships in a way deeply ingrained into their nature.

Rejecting the essential elements of marriage — of commitment in love, law, and monogamy — does real and lasting moral harm to the people involved. Even a brief investigation such as this one indicates that the standard of marriage, embraced by tradition for centuries, is part of that ancient body of wisdom that we ought to cling to, and never toss aside.

Full article www.equip.org/free/DR508.pdf

[hellznrg]

<quote>
Why did God give us the gift of sex?

God blessed the human animal above the other animals by placing within them a different sexual need and a different sexual fulfillment. Most other creatures participate in sex simply for procreation. When the female enters a period of fertility she accepts the sexual advances of a chosen male. </quote>

whoever wrote the above apparently hasn't heard of the sex lives of dolphins and bonobo monkeys...

<url>http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea.html</url>

<quote>Some homosexual animals have one-night stands and some have long marriages. Gay and lesbian geese stay together year after year. Bottlenose dolphins don't form male-female couples, but males often form lifelong pairs with other males. Some are interested only in males, but others are bisexual and happily indulge in beak-genital propulsion and more with male or female alike.</quote>

methinks ppl need to give up on 2000+ year old bankrupt worldviews and start living in the real world

[hellznrg]

The apostle Paul used that argument to dissuade Christians in the city of Corinth from hiring prostitutes from heathen temples to satisfy their sexual needs. He argues that joining oneself sexually with a prostitute makes a person one body or one flesh with her. He then says that the person shouldn't do that because he is already one with God-the Spirit lives in him. The implication is that the union of a Spirit-filled body with another human somehow carries spiritual dimensions. Therefore, the body bought by Christ should not participate in such behavior.

I don't think prostitutes are the problem, society's attitude towards prostitutes is the problem...

prostitution is legal and is a booming business in places like netherlands, and they have vastly fewer problems than "morally superior" (barf) countries like the US...

anyways, i think that people should pretty much freely have sex with anyone... friends, family, humans, animals, etc... of course, taking into consideration safe sex and all that...




For human beings, sex isn't just to make babies. It is to join two humans in the most intimate union possible. I believe that sexual love freely shared in marriage is the most beautiful way God gave us to say, "I love you."


well unfortunately for this argument, the only difference between humans and animals is the humans ability to put two and two together and figure out that sex = babies... so humans can take steps to put something between that equation like contraceptives etc...

animals enjoy sex as much as we do... dogs for instance are ready to go pretty much 24/7... the only problem is, animals don't consciously know that sex = babies...

I have another problem with the "For human beings, sex isn't just to make babies" line... firstly, the bible is against contraception... so sex IS in fact only to make babies... so "socrates" cannot preach that "sex isn't just to make babies".. perhaps his point was that only humans find sex pleasurable... well unfortunately for his argument, most animals find sex pleasurable... and there are several instances of gay relationships in the animal kingdom... what are these gay animals having sex for?





What does God teach about sex?

If you wish a wonderful picture of the positives about sex, read carefully the Bible book sometimes called the Song of Songs or the Song of Solomon. The love story there is extremely sexual and very graphic.


one shudders to think of what humans 2000 years from now will think of today's "mills & boon" novels... I think people would gain more from picking up & reading a mills & boon novel than from reading the "songs of solomon"




A great deal of what the Bible teaches about sex comes in the form of prohibitions. Don't let that make you think God is against sex. He made it! But He made it to be enjoyed in His design-not in any human aberration of that design.

we have only the christians word that Jesus "made" sex... :P unfortunately for them, people of pretty much all of the 10001 religions out their claim that THEIR god "made" sex... who to believe?

anyways, if "He made it to be enjoyed in His design-not in any human aberration of that design.", then why do dolphins freely have sex with each other? in dolphin society, parents have sex with children, males have sex with females, females have sex with females, dolphins frequently form amorous relationships with humans, etc... how does the christian explain this "bizarre" behaviour by one of "gods creatures"?

as for the "prohibitions" .... they're laughable...

1. incest... now in a society that practices birth control, there is no fundamental reason why a person should not have sex with family other than the christians' false claim that "it's a sin"..

2. homosexuality... well... i think humans should take a quick peek at the animal kingdom for inspiration... there's no reason why two consenting adults of the same gender should not have sex with each other.

3. rape... rape is bad, but perhaps rape wouldn't be so prevalent if people freely had sex with each other... without inhibitions and guilt etc... fine products brought to you by christianity (TM). several studies have shown that the more fundamentalist religious people are the most likely to commit sexual assaults... this is one reason why teens should be allowed to have sex... if they don't they're going to channel their energies into all kinds of bad deeds... countries with higher sexual "morality" are the countries where crime is the greatest.

4. consensual sex with one other than your mate
6. lust
the christian offers no explanation of why these should be "bad" other than the usual "because the bible says so"

5. adultery is bad, but why does it happen? one partner needs sex with someone other than the marriage partner. If the marriage partner knows about it and is ok with it, then where's the adultery? the only way for "adultery" to occur is if the marriage partner has feelings of jealousy... and IMO jealousy is the bad thing

7. bestiality... again, socrates doesn't give any reason why bestiality is a bad thing, other than the claim that "in the OT people who practiced bestiality were put to death"... well, in the OT, children who spoke against their parents were stoned to death... cmon christians, use your brains please...

9. sex during menstrual period.. well, some like it, some don't... some women feel highly sexual during their menstrual period, and sex can often help to ease the pains.... again socrates gives no reasons why sex during menstrual period is a bad thing other than "the bible tells me so"

10. harms the body... neither socrates nor the bible is even remotely clear on which sexual activities "harms the body"... this is apparently a generic template for priests to use when trying to get their flock to abstain from doing things which the priest personally doesn't like. masturbation, pr0n, sex toys, etc...

[hellznrg]

While the bible is clear, sometimes the minds and emotions of sinners are not.

damn that broke my bullshit-o-meter!



IMHO, having to marry the single woman you raped without ever being able to divorce her would be a fate worse than death, wouldn't it?

that is stupid.. why would a woman marry her rapist?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/937766/posts
Lethal Monogamy?
Posted by demlosers
On 06/29/2003 5:15 PM PDT with 16 comments

abcnews ^ | 18 June 2003 | By Amanda Onion
Study Finds Mammals That Sleep Around Stick Around June 18— Monogamy may seem romantic, but for some animals it could be a hazardous way of life. New research has revealed a surprising link among mammals living on reserves in Ghana: Those with fewer mates are at higher risk for extinction. The finding suggests that conservation efforts might be better focused on those more vulnerable animals that stick to one or a few mates. It could also mean that monogamy, which is already rare in the wild kingdom, may be a fading trait. "In avoiding extinction, it pays to be promiscuous,"...

[JardinPrayer]

Today @ 05:29 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=143595#post143595)
hellznrg:
I don't think prostitutes are the problem, society's attitude towards prostitutes is the problem...

prostitution is legal and is a booming business in places like netherlands, and they have vastly fewer problems than &quot;morally superior&quot; (barf) countries like the US...

anyways, i think that people should pretty much freely have sex with anyone... friends, family, humans, animals, etc... of course, taking into consideration safe sex and all that...

Hellznrg: I think you're missing the point. The original article and all of the posts thereafter have been from a Christian perspective...how to conduct oneself sexually if one is a practicing Christian who believes and respects what we are instructed to do in the bible. Your opinions on sexuality, social order, and what people should do has no relevence in that arena. I'm fairly certain (though you may want to take a poll) that most Christians hold Jesus' opinion above yours.

Peace,
Jardin

[Dee Dee Warren]

Hellnzr, please do not post back to back posts and do not use profanity. Also, in my discretion, your posts are borderline on being very disrespectful to the featured ministry who is our guest here. Please feel free to start a thread on your deviant views (and yes they are deviant, you can brizzle with outrage I said that as the springboard for your own thread) in Political Science.

[Alien]

Hellnzr:

I just want to address one thing in your post. Just because a certain behavior is right for one species doesn't automatically make it right for another. The female praying mantis routinely eats the male during copulation. The male's rear end continues with the sex act despite the fact that its head is gone! Should we adopt this practice ourselves? (Ladies, don't all shout at once). :smile:

I agree that the study of species that are closely related to us like chimps and bonobos may be instructive (bonobos seem to have evolved a method of getting along together using sex, sounds good to me!), but in the end we have to decide what the effect of any action is on humans, not other species.

[JardinPrayer]

Excellent point(s), Alien...but let me add one thing:

Actually, let me re-emphasize one thing: This thread is not about the species...it's about Christians.

Peace,
Jardin

[Alien]

Today @ 02:15 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=144701#post144701)
JardinPrayer:
Actually, let me re-emphasize one thing: This thread is not about the species...it's about Christians.

Absolutely. I just didn't want what I considered to be false reasoning to stand unchallenged.

I hope he does start a thread in a more appropriate place, as this could be interesting.

[JardinPrayer]

I'm not certain I would choose the term "interesting," but let me know if you find it so!

Peace,
Jardin

[Queen]

God blessed the human animal above the other animals by placing within them a different sexual need and a different sexual fulfillment. Most other creatures participate in sex simply for procreation. When the female enters a period of fertility she accepts the sexual advances of a chosen male.

Hmm...and I say....Bonobo...a very sexual active ape that has sex for pleasure.

And why is it that the female body has the same sort of anatomy in all mammals? (I don't want to be too explicit here). They can enjoy sex as well. How do we know that they only have sex for reproduction? (We have discovered this fact with the bonobo and the dolphins)


In the Old Testament God phrased it this way, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife." (Exodus 20:17) In the New Testament Jesus said it like this, "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matthew 5:27-28)

What is so wrong with being human? I can't stick out my eyes and shut down my fantasy, that gives us our creativity.....


If the woman could have summoned help but didn't, she was also to be executed Deuteronomy. 22:23-27)

Excuse me? This book has to be written by someone who hasn't been a victim of rape! You have no idea how frightening rape is, even if you could summon for help, fear can make you do the 'wrong' thing. How scary is this thought!!!! As if the woman wants to be raped, so it is her fault that he is guilty, because she didn't stop him....... :rant:


If a man raped a single, unengaged woman, he was not put to death. The penalty was to marry her with no possibility of divorce, ever. (Deut. 22:28-29)

So he can rape her over and over again?????? Who has written this nonsense? How cruel is this law!!!! The man isn't punished here...the woman is!! :rant:


Sexually unfulfilled people can be tempted through their lack of self-control. Remove that avenue of attack from Satan's forces by keeping your mate thoroughly sexually satisfied!

Well, it is a good thing all those single adults behave them selfs so well or the world would be filled with rapists and so on.... :whistle:. I believe in sex with someone you love, even if it is not your wife or husband.....

I am not getting into the whole homosexual discussion. You know my POV on that.

Of course not all is rubbish. Sex is wonderful and beautiful, but please let us place all the good things in life in a human perspective and in this day and age!

Lots of love and sunshine,
Queen

[geebob]

What is so wrong with being human?

we have rejected God and now suffer as God works to reconcile us back to him. In the meantime, we cope with a broken world and a broken nature that was originally created for perfect unity with God and community.




[quote]So he can rape her over and over again?????? Who has written this nonsense? How cruel is this law!!!! The man isn't punished here...the woman is!

this might be cruel in our day and age when folks do not care so much about virginity (which I think is both a good thing and a bad thing but far more a bad thing). But in the ancient culture, if the rapist did not marry the girl, no one else would. It was for her welfare so that she would be taken care of.

yes this had a brutality to it. But it softened the blow of a worse brutality. This law wasn't given to 20th century america where the woman could still go and get married and/or find a job and live independently. This law was given when family relationships were life and death when people struggled against nature just to earn a meager living.


I believe in sex with someone you love, even if it is not your wife or husband.....

yes but we have to stop viewing love as merely a selfish gratification of emotions that we let rule us and instead see an essential part as the commitment to take care of another's needs and desires regardless of our emotional fluctuations.


Of course not all is rubbish. Sex is wonderful and beautiful, but please let us place all the good things in life in a human perspective and in this day and age!

but we have a drive that desperately craves sexual fulfillment and when our only outlet for this is another person, how gratifying of the individual this is! From one partner to the other, it is the case that "you and only you make this part of my life rich and I value above others for this." The only human perspective appropriate here is the one that gratifies us for creatures created in God's image that we are.

This is such a powerful means of community between another persons to the extent that to squander it is a tragedy, like tossing diamonds into the garbage.

[Queen]

But in the ancient culture, if the rapist did not marry the girl, no one else would. It was for her welfare so that she would be taken care of.

:yes:

Finally we are getting somewhere. In ancient culture! So many things in the bible are not of this day and age. Peoples moral has changed over many years. Remember, I don't say all change is good. but then we have accepted the fact that we are sexual beings and that those feelings are part of who we are.

Thinking that sex is only for husband/wife and that it is only for male/ female is not of this day and age either. We have learned a great deal about human behavior in the last 2000 years. Through research of anthropologists ie.. We have fought so hard to accept our sexuality, especially women who didn't know how to enjoy sex and were not allowed to have the climax the female body can provide. Also the fact that a lot of homosexual people did hide their feelings away and lived in pain and anguish. Finally it is allowed to be honest about it, finally after all these years of struggle there is light at the end of the tunnel and still there are people who want to change it all back to the dark ages? We fought and are still fighting for our freedom and to be accepted as normal living human beings!

So, why use this as a guideline for sexual pleasure? It is not of this day and age.

Lots of love and sunshine,
Queen

[geebob]

Finally we are getting somewhere. In ancient culture! So many things in the bible are not of this day and age.

yes, in our day and age, Christ is our law.


Thinking that sex is only for husband/wife and that it is only for male/ female is not of this day and age either

on the contrary, it is just as much a part of this culture as immorality, sexual and other forms, is apart of every culture. if it wasn't, I don't know where Newsweek would get the statistics from that attest that couples who wait to have sex after marriage stay together longer than couples who shack up prior to marriage.

sexual purity is as much a part of our Western culture as the rampant sexual brokenness.

But as you already eluded to, what happens to be a part of a cutlure is not necessarily good, and if and when sexual purity ceases to have a place in our culture, it will be tragic.


We have learned a great deal about human behavior in the last 2000 years.

true, but competing hypothesis abound some of which confirm our tradition.


We have fought so hard to accept our sexuality

Humans have always accepted their sexuality. Just look at the Song of Solomon. Actually, it might be better to look at a commentary on it to get an idea of just how explicit it is.


still there are people who want to change it all back to the dark ages?

exalting our sexuality is going back to the dark ages?!? I would think that throwing it away to the unguarded, mundane and commonality as we are doing now would take us there.


So, why use this as a guideline for sexual pleasure? It is not of this day and age.

Christians use this guidline because God gave it to us. Because we are a corporate entity and not jus a collection of individuals. And this corporate entity extends back in time when God saved his people from slavery, gave them laws, spoke to them through the prophets, and finally came down to earth to share in our sufferings but also to begin the process of reconsiling all of mankind back to him..

[apple]

“What is the proper response to the significance of sex?” A standard incorporating love and law arises logically out of our rejection of sexual assault as a heinous and debilitating act.


They imply that our revulsion regarding sexual crimes is "evidence" that sex is special.

I read the full article. (http://www.equip.org/free/DR508.pdf) Here is another excerpt.

"....(if) talking about the most
private things is ‘no different from talking about an elbow,’ then they are that much more likely to see nothing
wrong in certain kinds of sexual violence. What’s really so terrible, after all, in making someone touch or kiss your
elbow?”
Shalit’s analysis indicates clearly the reductive consequences of adhering to a consent-only ethic. "

Regarding my excerpt it appears they are making the case that if we devalue the importance of sex we will also devalue the seriousness of sex crimes by their making the "kissing the elbow" comment. That is ludicrous.

As a society we do not put special emphasis on one's mouth or feet. Although a punch in the face, including the mouth, is considered a serious assault it is not considered a sex crime or a heinous and debilitating act. Similarily, if we stepped on one's foot the person would not call out sexual assault.

Now, let's work with the foot and mouth. A woman is passing a construction site and a construction worker pulls her behind some boards. He removes his boots, sweaty work socks and proceeds to put his foot in the woman's mouth. "Suck my toes because I have a foot fetish", he threatens. Gagging, the woman complies in fear of her life. Where does that crime fit on the scale?

Another excerpt:
"The call to limit sexual relationships exclusively to marriage, therefore, is simply an extension and fulfillment of that
indelible, archetypal pattern already within each of us. To throw sexual monogamy to the wind in behavior that is
blatantly promiscuous, or which implicitly denies the grounds of such exclusivity, is to create a deep-seated
contradiction in one’s own person."

I completely disagree. The so-called indelible, archetypal pattern is no different than the kid whom won't share the crayons. Why should the toughest, strongest share the crayon if he got it first? Does he suffer a deep-seated contradiction in his person if he is forced to share?

Many people experience a tremendous loss when their partner is unfaithful. Society validates those feelings increasing the person's hurt. "Yes, you were hurt. You should feel hurt."

People feel a loss when a family member dies and many union contracts have a berevement clause. As a pet owner I would certainly feel a loss if my cat died but society does not recognize that. I'm sure many people would also feel a loss if their pet died but the loss is tempered with what society deems is right or logical or legitimate. That, however, does not presuppose that society tolerates killing another person's pet. Simply put, so-called indelible, archetypal patterns can be changed and, contrary to the theme of the article, does not result in misunderstanding the seriousness of a crime.

The "crime" is doing something <i>against the will</i> of another person (or animal), not the doing of a specific something .