sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Aretha Franklin and Pink certainly thought so...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why are Christians so sexually insecure?
- Thread starter nnmartin
- Start date
McBell
Unbound
Wow.
You are like my youngest daughter.
She also suffers from moments of merely talking when she has no idea what is going on.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
...the kingdom belongs to such as these...Wow.
You are like my youngest daughter.
She also suffers from moments of merely talking when she has no idea what is going on.
Thanks for the compliment.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
We don't look at these as "restrictions." It's not some law we laid down to the other. These are mutually agreed upon parameters. All relationships have parameters.
These have nothing to do with how much or how little we trust each other. They have everything to do with how much we RESPECT each other.
We both have been married before to unfaithful partners. We know the slippery slope that led to the demise of those relationships all too well.
As I said, these aren't restrictions - but they are cautions put into place by both of us because we cherish our relationship and therefore feel protective of it.
Alceste - all sorts of things go into a relationship. Age, experience, history, the length of time people have been together, and the amount of time people spend together, or apart - all of these different dynamics come into play.
This is precisely why I don't spend much time trying to analyze, or pass judgment on, the relationships of others.
When a couple is apart more than they are together, this SIGNIFICANTLY changes the dynamics, and the expectation of how our time is spent together - and apart. Remember - my husband is gone at LEAST half the time - gone as in 1000 miles away.
One final note - we didn't decide on any of this in order to build trust and intimacy. We already have trust and intimacy down pat with each other. We are truly soulmates, and best friends - with benefits.
pwfaith
Active Member
Personally, I think that sex outside a religiously sanctioned union is more about not seeing the religion as special than it is about not seeing sex as special.
Speaking for myself, I consider sex (and sexuality in general, now that I think about it) to be special and important, but I don't give a rat's hind quarters about what any church thinks about my sex life, and I certainly don't feel the need to get a religious endorsement of my sexual practices before I engage in them.
When I was a practicing Christian, I was much more complacent about sex than I am now. :yes:
For me, that was what made me complacent. I was certainly insecure about how the beliefs I tried desperately to have went contrary to my sexuality, but the idea was that I would save myself for marriage, that I wasn't to see my sexuality as a "good" thing except within the bonds of a heterosexual marriage, and that I shouldn't give much thought to it.
I was a walking bag of hormones, though, and I struggled with my desires within the context of Bible study groups, countless masses and confessions, etc.
My complacency came from denying who I was attracted to, what my fantasies consisted of, and any and all pursuits until I left the Christian community at 22. And since I denied a HUGE portion of who I am and what I like....I wound up sleeping with whoever thought I was pretty or worthwhile.
That's complacency. Just couldn't continue living a life in relationships without value, care, attention, affection, and honesty.
Walkntune
Well-Known Member
Its not sex itself that creates any problems but its the intentions of the heart.There is a huge difference between acting out in lust and acting out in love.
To act out in lust is to take from the other person and to make love is actually a giving of yourself to the other person.The Bible speaks of married couples given of themselves to each other.Not taking from each other.
Last edited:
No God didn't make us that way, sin did, unless of course you do not believe in sin.
McBell
Unbound
So god di dnot make all...
Interesting.
Sin is nothing more than going against the will/wishes of your chosen deity.
abdul lateef
Member
God is Most Merciful and He knows what is good and what is bad for us. He knows that abundant fornication leads to abortions, unwanted children, single parents, sexually transmitted diseases etc. So He disallowed sexual relations without commitment.
A man, if he wishes to fulfill his desires as his "right" as a man , must also fulfil his responsibilities as a man. Otherwise women will be used and abused, with no consequence.
The vow of marriage is something that prevents the above, if adhered to.
Unfortunatly, even though the religion Jesus came with was not taken from pagans, nor was it an unjust religion, the Christians of the future went into extremes. They firstly placed the blame of Adam and Eve's fall on Eve alone. They then blamed all women as a result of this and saw her as something less than a complete person.
They celebrated the religiousness/piety of an individual if he was celibate even though God created man and woman with certain roles and responsibitlies. (They abandoned marriage for the "pious" and permitted it for those "less" pious. Already therefore filtering out "good seed". A number of things put women in a position different to that of man.)
Sex was forbidden to be talked about, and it became a taboo.
If people were given the correct "sex education" from a young age, meaning that you should guard your modesty and lower your gaze, and only engage in sexual relations with your wife, then fornication would not be so abundant.
A man, if he wishes to fulfill his desires as his "right" as a man , must also fulfil his responsibilities as a man. Otherwise women will be used and abused, with no consequence.
The vow of marriage is something that prevents the above, if adhered to.
Unfortunatly, even though the religion Jesus came with was not taken from pagans, nor was it an unjust religion, the Christians of the future went into extremes. They firstly placed the blame of Adam and Eve's fall on Eve alone. They then blamed all women as a result of this and saw her as something less than a complete person.
They celebrated the religiousness/piety of an individual if he was celibate even though God created man and woman with certain roles and responsibitlies. (They abandoned marriage for the "pious" and permitted it for those "less" pious. Already therefore filtering out "good seed". A number of things put women in a position different to that of man.)
Sex was forbidden to be talked about, and it became a taboo.
If people were given the correct "sex education" from a young age, meaning that you should guard your modesty and lower your gaze, and only engage in sexual relations with your wife, then fornication would not be so abundant.
abdul lateef
Member
God created everything both good and evil. He was the First, and He created everything when before it was not in existence.
By claiming that sin is something in existence, but God did not create it, you are indirectly claiming that there is something other than God who has the power to create. Who is this rival deity?
In reality, He (God) permitted man to do good and evil, and he legistlated that man should do good.