The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
One thing that really astonishes me is the number of people who sleep around in the world today. For those of us among us who believe in the Bibile, sex outside marriage is forbidden, yet so many people, religeous and otherwise, see it their duty to have multiple sexual partners. Its only a symbol of social standing in some places in AFRICA. How can we call ourselves the civilised world when we see fit to stick our john thomas in every place we can think of. Its level with the animals, and even some of them have the decency to confine themselves to one partner. (i.e. swans)
Im not trying to push chastity and say all sexual acticity is WRONG outside marriage, but I really think that sex and similar acts are something that you should share with only someone special. The only purpose of one night stands is to get some POONTANG with whatever skank can be found on the street. (I dont mean to degrade women, I just have to write this from the male perspective, the same applies to women)
Chastity generally means that you dont do ANYTHING sexual at all outside of marraige. Personally I dont see whats wrong with a little frolic in the garden of eden if its legal, legal by the bible, and doesnt put your future in jeprody through inadvertant pregnancy. What happens if the chick you boned on a one night stand get knocked up? Its your obligation to raise the b*****d child, and wed the whench. lol. I just enjoy using biassed language. I'll stop now.
Since (as I have been informed by a good friend of mine whos a history guru) the general practise of prolific intercourse has been going on for millenia, were not really doing anything different, however if we didnt do anything different we'd still be eating leaves, not even using tools. Evolution and invention meant progress, technological and personal. Sleeping around like this means that sex isnt sacred. It becomes meaningless when you finally meet someone you marry, and all you can do is compare them to your previous partners.
I know Im on a losing side. Most of you are probably against me, but Id just like you to consider the idea of, not chastity, but, however hard it may be, not sleeping around. If you meet someone special to you, by all means, even if its not the first. At least then its actually meaningful. But having shallow, meaningless sex is....well...m**********g. YOU'LL GO BLIND SON!!
Im not trying to push chastity and say all sexual acticity is WRONG outside marriage, but I really think that sex and similar acts are something that you should share with only someone special. The only purpose of one night stands is to get some POONTANG with whatever skank can be found on the street. (I dont mean to degrade women, I just have to write this from the male perspective, the same applies to women)
Chastity generally means that you dont do ANYTHING sexual at all outside of marraige. Personally I dont see whats wrong with a little frolic in the garden of eden if its legal, legal by the bible, and doesnt put your future in jeprody through inadvertant pregnancy. What happens if the chick you boned on a one night stand get knocked up? Its your obligation to raise the b*****d child, and wed the whench. lol. I just enjoy using biassed language. I'll stop now.
Since (as I have been informed by a good friend of mine whos a history guru) the general practise of prolific intercourse has been going on for millenia, were not really doing anything different, however if we didnt do anything different we'd still be eating leaves, not even using tools. Evolution and invention meant progress, technological and personal. Sleeping around like this means that sex isnt sacred. It becomes meaningless when you finally meet someone you marry, and all you can do is compare them to your previous partners.
I know Im on a losing side. Most of you are probably against me, but Id just like you to consider the idea of, not chastity, but, however hard it may be, not sleeping around. If you meet someone special to you, by all means, even if its not the first. At least then its actually meaningful. But having shallow, meaningless sex is....well...m**********g. YOU'LL GO BLIND SON!!
Page:
By the by, I think that the fact that the two of you disagree shows that there isn't a God's word on it. Just individual belief's on what people think God want's for them.
Soul doesn't feel he should do anything remotely sexual until he's married. And fairplay to him.
Fozz feels that so long as saves the biggie until he's got rings on his fingers, then anything else is fine. That's good. Enjoy what you're doing and there's no rush to go further.
But can't you both see how what works so perfectly for you and for the other is so different. That everyone should have their own standards.
I know what you mean to say. Some people do over indulge so it all becomes meaningless. It can happen.
But marriage is irrelevant.
Just a social contract.
Sweetened with a spoonful of romance if you like. ;-)
Soul doesn't feel he should do anything remotely sexual until he's married. And fairplay to him.
Fozz feels that so long as saves the biggie until he's got rings on his fingers, then anything else is fine. That's good. Enjoy what you're doing and there's no rush to go further.
But can't you both see how what works so perfectly for you and for the other is so different. That everyone should have their own standards.
I know what you mean to say. Some people do over indulge so it all becomes meaningless. It can happen.
But marriage is irrelevant.
Just a social contract.
Sweetened with a spoonful of romance if you like. ;-)
soul101 wrote:
> Right. After readind fozz's latest post, i feel compelled to clear up
> the religion/christianity issue:
>
> I am a christian. I am not religious. "But how?" i hear you
> say. will start by defining religion: religion is a set of rules by
> which certain groups live, believing that following these rules will
> atone them and allow them entry to the afterlife.
That doesn't define religion. It's a good description by all means, but it can mean more than that. Perhaps the closest I can give to it is a massed shared belief. And Christianity of any sort is certainly an example of that.
> I'm sorry fozz, but worshipping the saints is an example of this, as
> is all of the chanting, the reading out of those little books, the
> confession box. Also included is doing "good deeds." that
> is not to say that we shouldn't do good, but that alone will not get
> you into heaven (unless you're a New-Ageist :-P).
Well nothing alone will get you into heaven.
I think God prefers rounded personalities... so much easier to live with...
> Christianity involves Christ. It is the belief that Jesus Christ was
> the son of God, that his death was the final living sacrifice, that
> he was the messiah which was prophesied at various points throughout
> the bible, and that no-one comes to God except through his son jesus.
So you're idolising Jesus instead. Isn't that more of what he was against.
Take what Bruce Lee said when he pointed at the moon in Enter The Dragon:
"If you focus on the finger, then you miss the full glory of the moon."
Christians who think that following Jesus' word is all about brown nosing his name certainly seem out of focus to me.
> The reason we as christians choose to attempt to follow those laws
> which were laid down by God through Moses, is because we believe God
> exists,
But perhaps a better way would be to see them as guidelines?
I mean, if the best way to live could be summed up by 10 laws then wouldn't everyone be doing it.
The fact is, Christians kill people. And the steal. And they've dishonoured parents. And broken other rules too. And still got God's blessing, because although they broke these laws they did good by doing so.
Do you think those countless soldiers who gave their lives to defend their countries and peoples by killing vicious invaders burnt in hell for it?
That God condemned them for killing those that would have otherwise killed them and their families?
The thing with so many of these "religious fanatics" is that they stick so rigidly to rules and laws printed in ancient books that were never designed to be a "Saint's guide for EVERY situation imaginable" because such thing could not exist.
That's why God gave us brains to think for ourselves.
And see these "laws" as guidelines that could perhaps help us live lives in a nicer way. I know I'd rather live in a world that people don't kill, don't steal or other nasty things, and where everyone respects everyone.
But that doesn't mean these "rules" work for every situation.
I guess you oculd say that your relationship with your girl is working great for you, but different people think and feel in different ways.
What might mean so much to you might mean nothing to someone else, and vice versa. It's compatability, and each have their own way of finding it.
So I think now... perhaps. :-)
> and that by following them we honour God, as this was one of
> the reasons we were created (ie to worship Him out of choice rather
> than force).
If God created us just to worship him then he's an egostistical nonse and a muppet for giving us free will. I know that's not exactly what you meant, but I guess I'm just pointing out what you just said there.
So easy to mince wording. :-)
> i would carry on but i've got to get to class.
THat's ok. You never have to say everything in one go.
And anysway, taking time away lets you mull things over.
I can't believe how much my idea's have changed since Forest Fan shook the board up, or going back to when I met April from America on MSN.
Thinking, debating and questioning your faiths and beliefs - you either wind up with stronger faith than before or you've found new light.
Either way, you're that little bit wiser than before.
> Right. After readind fozz's latest post, i feel compelled to clear up
> the religion/christianity issue:
>
> I am a christian. I am not religious. "But how?" i hear you
> say. will start by defining religion: religion is a set of rules by
> which certain groups live, believing that following these rules will
> atone them and allow them entry to the afterlife.
That doesn't define religion. It's a good description by all means, but it can mean more than that. Perhaps the closest I can give to it is a massed shared belief. And Christianity of any sort is certainly an example of that.
> I'm sorry fozz, but worshipping the saints is an example of this, as
> is all of the chanting, the reading out of those little books, the
> confession box. Also included is doing "good deeds." that
> is not to say that we shouldn't do good, but that alone will not get
> you into heaven (unless you're a New-Ageist :-P).
Well nothing alone will get you into heaven.
I think God prefers rounded personalities... so much easier to live with...
> Christianity involves Christ. It is the belief that Jesus Christ was
> the son of God, that his death was the final living sacrifice, that
> he was the messiah which was prophesied at various points throughout
> the bible, and that no-one comes to God except through his son jesus.
So you're idolising Jesus instead. Isn't that more of what he was against.
Take what Bruce Lee said when he pointed at the moon in Enter The Dragon:
"If you focus on the finger, then you miss the full glory of the moon."
Christians who think that following Jesus' word is all about brown nosing his name certainly seem out of focus to me.
> The reason we as christians choose to attempt to follow those laws
> which were laid down by God through Moses, is because we believe God
> exists,
But perhaps a better way would be to see them as guidelines?
I mean, if the best way to live could be summed up by 10 laws then wouldn't everyone be doing it.
The fact is, Christians kill people. And the steal. And they've dishonoured parents. And broken other rules too. And still got God's blessing, because although they broke these laws they did good by doing so.
Do you think those countless soldiers who gave their lives to defend their countries and peoples by killing vicious invaders burnt in hell for it?
That God condemned them for killing those that would have otherwise killed them and their families?
The thing with so many of these "religious fanatics" is that they stick so rigidly to rules and laws printed in ancient books that were never designed to be a "Saint's guide for EVERY situation imaginable" because such thing could not exist.
That's why God gave us brains to think for ourselves.
And see these "laws" as guidelines that could perhaps help us live lives in a nicer way. I know I'd rather live in a world that people don't kill, don't steal or other nasty things, and where everyone respects everyone.
But that doesn't mean these "rules" work for every situation.
I guess you oculd say that your relationship with your girl is working great for you, but different people think and feel in different ways.
What might mean so much to you might mean nothing to someone else, and vice versa. It's compatability, and each have their own way of finding it.
So I think now... perhaps. :-)
> and that by following them we honour God, as this was one of
> the reasons we were created (ie to worship Him out of choice rather
> than force).
If God created us just to worship him then he's an egostistical nonse and a muppet for giving us free will. I know that's not exactly what you meant, but I guess I'm just pointing out what you just said there.
So easy to mince wording. :-)
> i would carry on but i've got to get to class.
THat's ok. You never have to say everything in one go.
And anysway, taking time away lets you mull things over.
I can't believe how much my idea's have changed since Forest Fan shook the board up, or going back to when I met April from America on MSN.
Thinking, debating and questioning your faiths and beliefs - you either wind up with stronger faith than before or you've found new light.
Either way, you're that little bit wiser than before.
I have to say soul, I admire you. I know one or two people who believe in all out chastity, but I dont. I thinks its going to far down that whole sexual repression, but then that raises the question of how far is too far and then we end up decididnt different people have different limits. I think if total chastity were enforced then a lot more people would end up sleeping around just for a release. Being able to do SOME things with a partner at least lets you celebrate the love you have. And yet waiting till the wedding night is still a big deal. Sex is a lot more engaging than basic stuff and its still something you chare together. As my girlfriend put it, if you practise chastity where does it stop? how can you say whats allowed and whats not allowed? Heavy petting? Groping? Kissing even? But I really admire you for your strength of character and self control.
Believe me I would LOVE to move in with the other person, but it just so happens a) we're too young and b) shes the other side of the atlantic, however I plan to at the first chance possible.
"Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not telling us we're stupid and sad?" Im sorry if people are taking offense at me telling you my opinion and why it is my opinion.
Im not a member of any church either, I just know Im a christian. But I really dont like people complaining about the beliefs of their church. Sure there are some pretty outdated topics in the Catholic church, like masturbation for example, but I draw the line at sex. Could you give us some examples from the bible about premarital sex is you know any, soul? I dont think people should be able to customize their religeon, their faith, sure, but you can just live in disagreement with what you call YOUR church.
"Besides, it can't be that hard to pick up some drunk at the pub."
As Im sure SHEEPY has demonstrated many times, eh SHEEPY?
I should read the bible. I hear theres a plot twist near the start of the New Testament? I hear they kill of the main character. (jk)
I agree with you, soul, about religeon, thats not what I meant. Um, I was saying that if you call yourself a true member of a church, you shouldnt just agree with some of the beliefs of it.
oh crape, another truly gigantic post.
lol. ok not blame, attribute. My harsh choice of words was unfounded. I agree that equality was a good thing I just dont think it has anything to do woth sex.
Im afraid Im no expert on history, but as far as the amount of people having premarital sex and sleeping round, it hasnt changed much. As far as homosexuality, Ireland is sometimes seen as becoming a homosexual society, people have freedom to be gay in most countries now. The only thing that changed in that respect is the conduct of the church and state over the issue. (GO GAY BISHOP!) Isnt this somewhat off topic? Speaking of chuch approved relationships what about all these 'clerical abuse'rs. If thats not approved homosexuality I dont know what is. The church does NOTHING about it. Richard the Lionheart? thats news to me. Dont forget the good old Oscar Wilde.
"Ri-ight...so are you saying that the Church, with it's power to excommunicate and thus condemn a person (or an entire nation) to hell, didn't really figure in the lives of everyday people? So...what, people used to believe in sex only after marriage and the church happened to codify that? And then, one day, people decided to start rutting before marriage?" Again all Im saying is refering to the amount of people having sex before marriage. Its not like all of a sudden, and the newly baptised Romans stopped having sex outside of marriage. It was part of their culture, whether they liked it or not.
"Well, no not necessarily. You're assuming that sex was the only doctrinal reason for the many and varied splits in the church. The Orthodox church split because of an argument over the primacy of the pope. In fact, that's the main reason for most of the splits. The sex and prudishness tends to stay in any church because, like any good totalitarian group, they want to control their followers.
" Actually no Im not assuming that, but as premarital sex is such a big issue, with pretty much everyone doing it, I think its about time the church split. Whats the point of going to mass every sunday (or whatever religeous rituals your religeon may perform if any) reaffirm your faith and state your beliefs as those of the church when in fact theyre not? Its lying to yourself and to God.
lol. Will you join my cult? (I want THAT one....)
"As to the dismissal of sex as being about just fun (if you believe in sex before marriage) or being somehow better if you wait until after marriage...wow; how incredibly insulting to everyone who has had sex prior to getting married. Are you suggesting that their relationships aren't as good as someone who waited until after marriage?" OH...very sneaky. Im proud of you. I wasnt at ALL saying that (cough) All Im was saying is that I personally get much more enjoyment out of life this way. Every relationship is unique. You cant measure them on any scale. Id like to see more people consider it as an option, and I want people to know that not everyobdy wants to have sex before marriage.
"I'm not. I'm lecturing you about bragging that you've had no sexual partners, and how that seems to make you a better person. What, don't you like criticism? " I never accused you of anything, but it does happen. I never meant to point it at you, sorry if it seemed like I did. Sure, I like criticism, it gives me more to write about.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about me along the way, maybe you should be more careful about it in future.
Again, you assumed I didnt like you replying. Youre a great debater, its fun.
"Bwahahahahaahahaaaaaa! Yeah, I definitely wish I'd avoided having deep, meaningful, dirty, enjoyable sex. God, it would have been dreadful..." So you find sex meaningful and deep? Interesting. So youre not arguing that sex is just 'fun' like a lot of people who post here?
"think you're posting this topic for the exact reasons you mention; you want to identify yourself as someone who doesn't "follow the crowd". Most people your age just wear black T shirts to achieve that effect. But whatever makes you feel special, well you knock yourself out." lol. I used to wear pretty much nothing but black or dark blue. (sigh) those were the days.
"If you were just inviting comments about sex before and after marriage, then I wouldn't be accusing you of being a preachy, self important teenager who wants the world to see just what an individual he is." I really dont care what the world thinks, you should see my hair.. All Im saying is consider it, not every single person in the world wants or does have casual sex.
"Well, bully for you. I'm detecting a huge amount of resentment toward people who do brag about their sexual conquests. Did it ever occur to you that they might be...well, lying in order to look impressive?" Yes, of course, thats part of the problem. Why would I want to know what they did, or thought they did with some person I dont know? And its not even impressive. Ive had people brag to me about getting a handjob. You dont even need another person to do that. lol.
"Also, you do know it's possible to have sex before marriage WITHOUT turning into 'Hormono - Scourge of Virgins and Taker of Hymens', right? You seem to view this as either one extreme or the other" If you read my earlier posts you'll see I dont have as much a problem with pre marital sex as I do with casual sex. Most of the time Im talking about casual sex. Keep that in mind.
"And again, good for you. I don't care if you wait, or if you shove your meaty wand into every magic hole that takes your fancy. Really; whatever gets you through the night is A-ok (although trying to brag about and prove your masculinity via the internet is somewhat counter-productive). I'm fully aware that you don't WANT to get some random sexual partner. Are you fully aware that some people don't WANT to wait until after marriage because a 1,500 year old book told them to?" Whos bragging? I actually dont know if I COULD wait indefinitely for 'the one', but having found them makes it a lot easier.
"Hmm...I do find myself agreeing with that to an extent. I'd go further; religions have no right to tell anyone what to do. And yet here you are, telling me that because I don't follow your approach, I must be some kind soulless and empty man for whom sex has no meaning. ("ever active chomp bar"? Wha...?). Also, when does "guiding (and) pointing out wrong doing" turn into "Telling someone what to do"?" Where was I telling you that? All I said was that those of us who decide to wait generally find more meaning in sex. People have posted in here saying that sex is just fun. The chomp bar, well..I was running out of phrases for PENIS. AS for guidance, if people believe that, say, premarital sex is wrong, but find themselves tempted, then they can get guidance, or if they arent sure whether something is a sin, like goat slaughtering, I dunno.
"But that said, do you follow the other religious tenets I outlined, or not? Cos if not, aren't you picking and choosing the points of your faith you choose to follow?" Not really, I havent joined any one faither yet, I know SOME things I agree/disagree with but not enough to focus on any one faith I think suits me best. Do you think there is one true faith, or its all just whatever suits you best?
Believe me I would LOVE to move in with the other person, but it just so happens a) we're too young and b) shes the other side of the atlantic, however I plan to at the first chance possible.
"Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not telling us we're stupid and sad?" Im sorry if people are taking offense at me telling you my opinion and why it is my opinion.
Im not a member of any church either, I just know Im a christian. But I really dont like people complaining about the beliefs of their church. Sure there are some pretty outdated topics in the Catholic church, like masturbation for example, but I draw the line at sex. Could you give us some examples from the bible about premarital sex is you know any, soul? I dont think people should be able to customize their religeon, their faith, sure, but you can just live in disagreement with what you call YOUR church.
"Besides, it can't be that hard to pick up some drunk at the pub."
As Im sure SHEEPY has demonstrated many times, eh SHEEPY?
I should read the bible. I hear theres a plot twist near the start of the New Testament? I hear they kill of the main character. (jk)
I agree with you, soul, about religeon, thats not what I meant. Um, I was saying that if you call yourself a true member of a church, you shouldnt just agree with some of the beliefs of it.
oh crape, another truly gigantic post.
lol. ok not blame, attribute. My harsh choice of words was unfounded. I agree that equality was a good thing I just dont think it has anything to do woth sex.
Im afraid Im no expert on history, but as far as the amount of people having premarital sex and sleeping round, it hasnt changed much. As far as homosexuality, Ireland is sometimes seen as becoming a homosexual society, people have freedom to be gay in most countries now. The only thing that changed in that respect is the conduct of the church and state over the issue. (GO GAY BISHOP!) Isnt this somewhat off topic? Speaking of chuch approved relationships what about all these 'clerical abuse'rs. If thats not approved homosexuality I dont know what is. The church does NOTHING about it. Richard the Lionheart? thats news to me. Dont forget the good old Oscar Wilde.
"Ri-ight...so are you saying that the Church, with it's power to excommunicate and thus condemn a person (or an entire nation) to hell, didn't really figure in the lives of everyday people? So...what, people used to believe in sex only after marriage and the church happened to codify that? And then, one day, people decided to start rutting before marriage?" Again all Im saying is refering to the amount of people having sex before marriage. Its not like all of a sudden, and the newly baptised Romans stopped having sex outside of marriage. It was part of their culture, whether they liked it or not.
"Well, no not necessarily. You're assuming that sex was the only doctrinal reason for the many and varied splits in the church. The Orthodox church split because of an argument over the primacy of the pope. In fact, that's the main reason for most of the splits. The sex and prudishness tends to stay in any church because, like any good totalitarian group, they want to control their followers.
" Actually no Im not assuming that, but as premarital sex is such a big issue, with pretty much everyone doing it, I think its about time the church split. Whats the point of going to mass every sunday (or whatever religeous rituals your religeon may perform if any) reaffirm your faith and state your beliefs as those of the church when in fact theyre not? Its lying to yourself and to God.
lol. Will you join my cult? (I want THAT one....)
"As to the dismissal of sex as being about just fun (if you believe in sex before marriage) or being somehow better if you wait until after marriage...wow; how incredibly insulting to everyone who has had sex prior to getting married. Are you suggesting that their relationships aren't as good as someone who waited until after marriage?" OH...very sneaky. Im proud of you. I wasnt at ALL saying that (cough) All Im was saying is that I personally get much more enjoyment out of life this way. Every relationship is unique. You cant measure them on any scale. Id like to see more people consider it as an option, and I want people to know that not everyobdy wants to have sex before marriage.
"I'm not. I'm lecturing you about bragging that you've had no sexual partners, and how that seems to make you a better person. What, don't you like criticism? " I never accused you of anything, but it does happen. I never meant to point it at you, sorry if it seemed like I did. Sure, I like criticism, it gives me more to write about.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about me along the way, maybe you should be more careful about it in future.
Again, you assumed I didnt like you replying. Youre a great debater, its fun.
"Bwahahahahaahahaaaaaa! Yeah, I definitely wish I'd avoided having deep, meaningful, dirty, enjoyable sex. God, it would have been dreadful..." So you find sex meaningful and deep? Interesting. So youre not arguing that sex is just 'fun' like a lot of people who post here?
"think you're posting this topic for the exact reasons you mention; you want to identify yourself as someone who doesn't "follow the crowd". Most people your age just wear black T shirts to achieve that effect. But whatever makes you feel special, well you knock yourself out." lol. I used to wear pretty much nothing but black or dark blue. (sigh) those were the days.
"If you were just inviting comments about sex before and after marriage, then I wouldn't be accusing you of being a preachy, self important teenager who wants the world to see just what an individual he is." I really dont care what the world thinks, you should see my hair.. All Im saying is consider it, not every single person in the world wants or does have casual sex.
"Well, bully for you. I'm detecting a huge amount of resentment toward people who do brag about their sexual conquests. Did it ever occur to you that they might be...well, lying in order to look impressive?" Yes, of course, thats part of the problem. Why would I want to know what they did, or thought they did with some person I dont know? And its not even impressive. Ive had people brag to me about getting a handjob. You dont even need another person to do that. lol.
"Also, you do know it's possible to have sex before marriage WITHOUT turning into 'Hormono - Scourge of Virgins and Taker of Hymens', right? You seem to view this as either one extreme or the other" If you read my earlier posts you'll see I dont have as much a problem with pre marital sex as I do with casual sex. Most of the time Im talking about casual sex. Keep that in mind.
"And again, good for you. I don't care if you wait, or if you shove your meaty wand into every magic hole that takes your fancy. Really; whatever gets you through the night is A-ok (although trying to brag about and prove your masculinity via the internet is somewhat counter-productive). I'm fully aware that you don't WANT to get some random sexual partner. Are you fully aware that some people don't WANT to wait until after marriage because a 1,500 year old book told them to?" Whos bragging? I actually dont know if I COULD wait indefinitely for 'the one', but having found them makes it a lot easier.
"Hmm...I do find myself agreeing with that to an extent. I'd go further; religions have no right to tell anyone what to do. And yet here you are, telling me that because I don't follow your approach, I must be some kind soulless and empty man for whom sex has no meaning. ("ever active chomp bar"? Wha...?). Also, when does "guiding (and) pointing out wrong doing" turn into "Telling someone what to do"?" Where was I telling you that? All I said was that those of us who decide to wait generally find more meaning in sex. People have posted in here saying that sex is just fun. The chomp bar, well..I was running out of phrases for PENIS. AS for guidance, if people believe that, say, premarital sex is wrong, but find themselves tempted, then they can get guidance, or if they arent sure whether something is a sin, like goat slaughtering, I dunno.
"But that said, do you follow the other religious tenets I outlined, or not? Cos if not, aren't you picking and choosing the points of your faith you choose to follow?" Not really, I havent joined any one faither yet, I know SOME things I agree/disagree with but not enough to focus on any one faith I think suits me best. Do you think there is one true faith, or its all just whatever suits you best?
soul101 wrote:
> I do. sexual acts are SEXual, as in involve sex. i don't think it's
> just about finding the right person. If that was all there was to it,
> why not just move in with the other person? why go through the effort
> and expense of marrying them?
Wow, I'll bet you're a riot at parties...
Yeah, okay; that was a cheap shot. Apologies.
> Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not
> telling us we're stupid and sad?
Umm...telling you that you're annoying and preachy? I don't give a damn if that's how you choose to live your life. I do give a damn when you try and tell others that they're bad people who will probably get cancer of the sphincter if they don't follow the exact same way of life you do.
>
> Hey light, i like the biblical quotes. Leviticus is the most annoying
> book in the bible, simply because non-christians feel that they know
> christianity once they've read it. Try extending your biblical
> knowledge beyond the old testament, eg reading Romans 3-5, which (i
> think) detail why us as christians don't need to follow the laws laid
> down in those first few books so dogmatically. Then, try reading
> 1&2 Corinthians, Colossians, and Hebrews, and see if you still
> agree with what you said. Bear in mind that a lot of the examples (eg
> 1 corinthians 11, about hair), are just that- examples. don't just
> skim them, read them through properly.
Heh. Nicely avoided! Actually, I've already had this discussion with Forest Fan but I'm always happy to have it again...
Tell me; whereabouts are the prohibitions on marriage? New or Old Testament? Also, why put the Old Testament in their if it's not meant to be followed? And finally, as you believe in the New Testament could you tell me...
1 - which of the 2 genealogies of Jesus you believe?
2 - If, as Paul says, we are saved by "Faith, not works" then why should anyone bother to follow some silly little rules put in place by a group of sexist old men 1500 years ago, just so long as one has faith in God?
3 - The kicker; it says in James 1:17 that " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." So how come he changes his mind and gives us the go-ahead not to be so dogmatic in Romans?
> EDIT- I think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like
> that indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist
> your penis.
Heh. Yeah, I thought that was funny too; it was nice of him to demonstrate so graphically that I was correct in my assumption that this whole celibacy thing is nothing more than an arrogant desire to prove oneself better than ones fellow man. I guess your agreement with him rather proves the same about yourself, eh?
> I do. sexual acts are SEXual, as in involve sex. i don't think it's
> just about finding the right person. If that was all there was to it,
> why not just move in with the other person? why go through the effort
> and expense of marrying them?
Wow, I'll bet you're a riot at parties...
Yeah, okay; that was a cheap shot. Apologies.
> Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not
> telling us we're stupid and sad?
Umm...telling you that you're annoying and preachy? I don't give a damn if that's how you choose to live your life. I do give a damn when you try and tell others that they're bad people who will probably get cancer of the sphincter if they don't follow the exact same way of life you do.
>
> Hey light, i like the biblical quotes. Leviticus is the most annoying
> book in the bible, simply because non-christians feel that they know
> christianity once they've read it. Try extending your biblical
> knowledge beyond the old testament, eg reading Romans 3-5, which (i
> think) detail why us as christians don't need to follow the laws laid
> down in those first few books so dogmatically. Then, try reading
> 1&2 Corinthians, Colossians, and Hebrews, and see if you still
> agree with what you said. Bear in mind that a lot of the examples (eg
> 1 corinthians 11, about hair), are just that- examples. don't just
> skim them, read them through properly.
Heh. Nicely avoided! Actually, I've already had this discussion with Forest Fan but I'm always happy to have it again...
Tell me; whereabouts are the prohibitions on marriage? New or Old Testament? Also, why put the Old Testament in their if it's not meant to be followed? And finally, as you believe in the New Testament could you tell me...
1 - which of the 2 genealogies of Jesus you believe?
2 - If, as Paul says, we are saved by "Faith, not works" then why should anyone bother to follow some silly little rules put in place by a group of sexist old men 1500 years ago, just so long as one has faith in God?
3 - The kicker; it says in James 1:17 that " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." So how come he changes his mind and gives us the go-ahead not to be so dogmatic in Romans?
> EDIT- I think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like
> that indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist
> your penis.
Heh. Yeah, I thought that was funny too; it was nice of him to demonstrate so graphically that I was correct in my assumption that this whole celibacy thing is nothing more than an arrogant desire to prove oneself better than ones fellow man. I guess your agreement with him rather proves the same about yourself, eh?
Fozz wrote:
> Ok light. you replied after Id started posting.
>
> Interesting post about the early church. You seem to know what your
> talking about. So now that we've been sexually liberated women have
> so much power through sex eh? The fact is that you can blame the
> recent rise in sexual equality
Blame? What an interesting choice of phrase...
What I'm saying is that women are no longer confined to nunneries, or burnt, or lobotomised for being sexually promiscuous. I'm suggesting that's a good thing.
> on the increase in sexual activity
> because this there hasnt been much chage in sexual activity for
> thousands of years.
Erm...what? So apart from the homosexual societies of the Greek city states (Sparta in particular), the polygamous societies of the early USA (best exemplified by the Mormons), the church approved homosexual relationships of the early medieval period (dear old Richard the Lionheart; when he wasn't killing Muslims he was bumming young boys...), and the countless other wild and differing variations of sexual activity, it hasn't changed much?
> I dont think that the Catholic church promoting
> sex AFTER marriage did anything to influence the people.
Ri-ight...so are you saying that the Church, with it's power to excommunicate and thus condemn a person (or an entire nation) to hell, didn't really figure in the lives of everyday people? So...what, people used to believe in sex only after marriage and the church happened to codify that? And then, one day, people decided to start rutting before marriage?
> Marriage HAS
> been used for other reasons throughout history as previous posts have
> discussed, such as for money, or for power, however when it comes
> down to it those of us who believe that there is more to marriage
> than a legally binding contract want to marry for the right reasons.
And as I say, good for you. I'm still at a loss as to why you wanted to share that though.
>
> If you really think that those are the only reasons that premarital
> sex isnt supported by most catholic church then I think youre wrong.
> If so then why wouldnt the modern breaks from the catholic church
> preach that premarital sex was ok? Anyway as previous posts have said
> there are a lot of things to consider when thinking about premarital
> sex and as always it comes down to whether you see more in sex than
> just fun.
Well, no not necessarily. You're assuming that sex was the only doctrinal reason for the many and varied splits in the church. The Orthodox church split because of an argument over the primacy of the pope. In fact, that's the main reason for most of the splits. The sex and prudishness tends to stay in any church because, like any good totalitarian group, they want to control their followers.
Although that said, if you look at a lot of modern cults, they do preach sexual openness and sharing partners (usually with the head of the cult. Funny really...).
As to the dismissal of sex as being about just fun (if you believe in sex before marriage) or being somehow better if you wait until after marriage...wow; how incredibly insulting to everyone who has had sex prior to getting married. Are you suggesting that their relationships aren't as good as someone who waited until after marriage?
> Theres nothing I hate more than some egocentric sl*t bragging about
> how many sexual partners hes had and who he was with last night so
> dont give lecture me about not telling anyone else.
I'm not. I'm lecturing you about bragging that you've had no sexual partners, and how that seems to make you a better person. What, don't you like criticism?
> This is what
> discussion forums are FOR. Discussing topics. Its not like Im forcing
> you to read or to comment. If you dont like me talking about it then
> why did you even bother to reply?
True enough. I'm not saying I'm being forced into comment. However, if you don't like me speaking my mind about what I think your motivations are for bringing the topic up in first place, aren't you being a teensy bit hypocritical in complaining about that? After all, no-one is forcing you to respond to me, are they?
My apologies if my admittedly aggressive approach to religion offends unnecessarily. Believe me, if I wanted to deliberately offend you, it'd be pretty clear.
> its just going to make me say more.
> Personally I dont care what my society thinks. In my last few years
> of secondary school I got more and more tired of the 'sheep' around
> me laughing at peers idiotic jokes and following the crowd. I really
> dont care what the society thinks of me. If I did care then Id hardly
> post something I KNEW there would be widespread opposition against. I
> think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like that
> indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist your
> penis.
Bwahahahahaahahaaaaaa! Yeah, I definitely wish I'd avoided having deep, meaningful, dirty, enjoyable sex. God, it would have been dreadful...
For the record, any anger in my response is due to my well known and well documented loathing of well meaning and ignorant religious types who want to boost their standing in the God Stock Index by telling everyone that their way of life is better.
I think you're posting this topic for the exact reasons you mention; you want to identify yourself as someone who doesn't "follow the crowd". Most people your age just wear black T shirts to achieve that effect. But whatever makes you feel special, well you knock yourself out.
>
> If this is preaching then the next time someone says some inane
> comment about the weather prompting a response thats preaching too.
> Then also the next time you see someone doing a survey, or someone
> campaigning for animal rights, or someone voting, that must be
> preaching, because by saying whats on their mind they're preaching.
> Obviously. (sarcasm)
No because, you see, you're trying to say that whenever anyone says anything then they're preaching. Now if someone was to say that they're disgusted at the lack of care about animal rights, and they personally always care for animals, then that WOULD be preaching. Same if someone tries to claim they're a better person for voting a particular way. If you were just inviting comments about sex before and after marriage, then I wouldn't be accusing you of being a preachy, self important teenager who wants the world to see just what an individual he is. But you're talking about it from the point of view that you're right, and everyone else is wrong. And that's being preachy. Christ, I ought to know; I do enough of it myself...
> And yes I WILL keep my penis in my pants because unlike some people I
> dont flaunt it around like Im Gods gift to women.
Well, bully for you. I'm detecting a huge amount of resentment toward people who do brag about their sexual conquests. Did it ever occur to you that they might be...well, lying in order to look impressive?
Also, you do know it's possible to have sex before marriage WITHOUT turning into 'Hormono - Scourge of Virgins and Taker of Hymens', right? You seem to view this as either one extreme or the other.
>
> If those of us waiting for the right gave up waiting I dont think it
> would be difficult to get some, as some people in this room have
> demonstrated. (jk guys. I couldnt resist) Waiting means we dont WANT
> to get some random sexual partner. Although the two ideas seem
> similar and difficult to tell apart, the only person it affects is
> whoever is lying to themself. If youre refering to me Im not waiting
> for the right one. I HAVE the right one already.
And again, good for you. I don't care if you wait, or if you shove your meaty wand into every magic hole that takes your fancy. Really; whatever gets you through the night is A-ok (although trying to brag about and prove your masculinity via the internet is somewhat counter-productive). I'm fully aware that you don't WANT to get some random sexual partner. Are you fully aware that some people don't WANT to wait until after marriage because a 1,500 year old book told them to?
>
> ok light so you have a problem with groups telling you what to do
> with your ever-active chomp bar. As they say if you cant stand the
> heat, get out of the oven. If youre religeon (and theyre the only
> people who should be telling you) is telling you what youre doing is
> wrong, but you disagree, then you should change your ways, or find a
> different religeon, one that you agree with. If youre not a member of
> a religeon that preaches that then youre shouldnt be preached at.
> Religeons have no right (in my opinion) to tell people of different
> faiths what to do. By all means they should guide their followers and
> point out any possible wrong doings, as people try to follow Gods
> laws, but other faiths are out of their jurisdiction. Thats just
> harrasment.
Hmm...I do find myself agreeing with that to an extent. I'd go further; religions have no right to tell anyone what to do. And yet here you are, telling me that because I don't follow your approach, I must be some kind soulless and empty man for whom sex has no meaning. ("ever active chomp bar"? Wha...?). Also, when does "guiding (and) pointing out wrong doing" turn into "Telling someone what to do"?
> (groan) ok. religeon is pick and mix in a lot of cases. What I meant
> to say is any one faith isnt. if you say youre a catholic you cant
> choose not to worship the saints etc. My bad. I should have phrased
> that better.
No problem. I'm impressed you're not so dogmatic as I first thought. But that said, do you follow the other religious tenets I outlined, or not? Cos if not, aren't you picking and choosing the points of your faith you choose to follow?
> Ok light. you replied after Id started posting.
>
> Interesting post about the early church. You seem to know what your
> talking about. So now that we've been sexually liberated women have
> so much power through sex eh? The fact is that you can blame the
> recent rise in sexual equality
Blame? What an interesting choice of phrase...
What I'm saying is that women are no longer confined to nunneries, or burnt, or lobotomised for being sexually promiscuous. I'm suggesting that's a good thing.
> on the increase in sexual activity
> because this there hasnt been much chage in sexual activity for
> thousands of years.
Erm...what? So apart from the homosexual societies of the Greek city states (Sparta in particular), the polygamous societies of the early USA (best exemplified by the Mormons), the church approved homosexual relationships of the early medieval period (dear old Richard the Lionheart; when he wasn't killing Muslims he was bumming young boys...), and the countless other wild and differing variations of sexual activity, it hasn't changed much?
> I dont think that the Catholic church promoting
> sex AFTER marriage did anything to influence the people.
Ri-ight...so are you saying that the Church, with it's power to excommunicate and thus condemn a person (or an entire nation) to hell, didn't really figure in the lives of everyday people? So...what, people used to believe in sex only after marriage and the church happened to codify that? And then, one day, people decided to start rutting before marriage?
> Marriage HAS
> been used for other reasons throughout history as previous posts have
> discussed, such as for money, or for power, however when it comes
> down to it those of us who believe that there is more to marriage
> than a legally binding contract want to marry for the right reasons.
And as I say, good for you. I'm still at a loss as to why you wanted to share that though.
>
> If you really think that those are the only reasons that premarital
> sex isnt supported by most catholic church then I think youre wrong.
> If so then why wouldnt the modern breaks from the catholic church
> preach that premarital sex was ok? Anyway as previous posts have said
> there are a lot of things to consider when thinking about premarital
> sex and as always it comes down to whether you see more in sex than
> just fun.
Well, no not necessarily. You're assuming that sex was the only doctrinal reason for the many and varied splits in the church. The Orthodox church split because of an argument over the primacy of the pope. In fact, that's the main reason for most of the splits. The sex and prudishness tends to stay in any church because, like any good totalitarian group, they want to control their followers.
Although that said, if you look at a lot of modern cults, they do preach sexual openness and sharing partners (usually with the head of the cult. Funny really...).
As to the dismissal of sex as being about just fun (if you believe in sex before marriage) or being somehow better if you wait until after marriage...wow; how incredibly insulting to everyone who has had sex prior to getting married. Are you suggesting that their relationships aren't as good as someone who waited until after marriage?
> Theres nothing I hate more than some egocentric sl*t bragging about
> how many sexual partners hes had and who he was with last night so
> dont give lecture me about not telling anyone else.
I'm not. I'm lecturing you about bragging that you've had no sexual partners, and how that seems to make you a better person. What, don't you like criticism?
> This is what
> discussion forums are FOR. Discussing topics. Its not like Im forcing
> you to read or to comment. If you dont like me talking about it then
> why did you even bother to reply?
True enough. I'm not saying I'm being forced into comment. However, if you don't like me speaking my mind about what I think your motivations are for bringing the topic up in first place, aren't you being a teensy bit hypocritical in complaining about that? After all, no-one is forcing you to respond to me, are they?
My apologies if my admittedly aggressive approach to religion offends unnecessarily. Believe me, if I wanted to deliberately offend you, it'd be pretty clear.
> its just going to make me say more.
> Personally I dont care what my society thinks. In my last few years
> of secondary school I got more and more tired of the 'sheep' around
> me laughing at peers idiotic jokes and following the crowd. I really
> dont care what the society thinks of me. If I did care then Id hardly
> post something I KNEW there would be widespread opposition against. I
> think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like that
> indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist your
> penis.
Bwahahahahaahahaaaaaa! Yeah, I definitely wish I'd avoided having deep, meaningful, dirty, enjoyable sex. God, it would have been dreadful...
For the record, any anger in my response is due to my well known and well documented loathing of well meaning and ignorant religious types who want to boost their standing in the God Stock Index by telling everyone that their way of life is better.
I think you're posting this topic for the exact reasons you mention; you want to identify yourself as someone who doesn't "follow the crowd". Most people your age just wear black T shirts to achieve that effect. But whatever makes you feel special, well you knock yourself out.
>
> If this is preaching then the next time someone says some inane
> comment about the weather prompting a response thats preaching too.
> Then also the next time you see someone doing a survey, or someone
> campaigning for animal rights, or someone voting, that must be
> preaching, because by saying whats on their mind they're preaching.
> Obviously. (sarcasm)
No because, you see, you're trying to say that whenever anyone says anything then they're preaching. Now if someone was to say that they're disgusted at the lack of care about animal rights, and they personally always care for animals, then that WOULD be preaching. Same if someone tries to claim they're a better person for voting a particular way. If you were just inviting comments about sex before and after marriage, then I wouldn't be accusing you of being a preachy, self important teenager who wants the world to see just what an individual he is. But you're talking about it from the point of view that you're right, and everyone else is wrong. And that's being preachy. Christ, I ought to know; I do enough of it myself...
> And yes I WILL keep my penis in my pants because unlike some people I
> dont flaunt it around like Im Gods gift to women.
Well, bully for you. I'm detecting a huge amount of resentment toward people who do brag about their sexual conquests. Did it ever occur to you that they might be...well, lying in order to look impressive?
Also, you do know it's possible to have sex before marriage WITHOUT turning into 'Hormono - Scourge of Virgins and Taker of Hymens', right? You seem to view this as either one extreme or the other.
>
> If those of us waiting for the right gave up waiting I dont think it
> would be difficult to get some, as some people in this room have
> demonstrated. (jk guys. I couldnt resist) Waiting means we dont WANT
> to get some random sexual partner. Although the two ideas seem
> similar and difficult to tell apart, the only person it affects is
> whoever is lying to themself. If youre refering to me Im not waiting
> for the right one. I HAVE the right one already.
And again, good for you. I don't care if you wait, or if you shove your meaty wand into every magic hole that takes your fancy. Really; whatever gets you through the night is A-ok (although trying to brag about and prove your masculinity via the internet is somewhat counter-productive). I'm fully aware that you don't WANT to get some random sexual partner. Are you fully aware that some people don't WANT to wait until after marriage because a 1,500 year old book told them to?
>
> ok light so you have a problem with groups telling you what to do
> with your ever-active chomp bar. As they say if you cant stand the
> heat, get out of the oven. If youre religeon (and theyre the only
> people who should be telling you) is telling you what youre doing is
> wrong, but you disagree, then you should change your ways, or find a
> different religeon, one that you agree with. If youre not a member of
> a religeon that preaches that then youre shouldnt be preached at.
> Religeons have no right (in my opinion) to tell people of different
> faiths what to do. By all means they should guide their followers and
> point out any possible wrong doings, as people try to follow Gods
> laws, but other faiths are out of their jurisdiction. Thats just
> harrasment.
Hmm...I do find myself agreeing with that to an extent. I'd go further; religions have no right to tell anyone what to do. And yet here you are, telling me that because I don't follow your approach, I must be some kind soulless and empty man for whom sex has no meaning. ("ever active chomp bar"? Wha...?). Also, when does "guiding (and) pointing out wrong doing" turn into "Telling someone what to do"?
> (groan) ok. religeon is pick and mix in a lot of cases. What I meant
> to say is any one faith isnt. if you say youre a catholic you cant
> choose not to worship the saints etc. My bad. I should have phrased
> that better.
No problem. I'm impressed you're not so dogmatic as I first thought. But that said, do you follow the other religious tenets I outlined, or not? Cos if not, aren't you picking and choosing the points of your faith you choose to follow?
AHA, FATAL MISTAKE. I'm now expecting some bloke with a massive line down the middle of their painted-on-hair to sneak up beind me and take advantage of me on a Saturday night.
HA.
HA.
Right. After readind fozz's latest post, i feel compelled to clear up the religion/christianity issue:
I am a christian. I am not religious. "But how?" i hear you say. will start by defining religion: religion is a set of rules by which certain groups live, believing that following these rules will atone them and allow them entry to the afterlife.
I'm sorry fozz, but worshipping the saints is an example of this, as is all of the chanting, the reading out of those little books, the confession box. Also included is doing "good deeds." that is not to say that we shouldn't do good, but that alone will not get you into heaven (unless you're a New-Ageist :-P).
Christianity involves Christ. It is the belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God, that his death was the final living sacrifice, that he was the messiah which was prophesied at various points throughout the bible, and that no-one comes to God except through his son jesus. The reason we as christians choose to attempt to follow those laws which were laid down by God through Moses, is because we believe God exists, and that by following them we honour God, as this was one of the reasons we were created (ie to worship Him out of choice rather than force). i would carry on but i've got to get to class.
PS ineedsleep: soul101 wrote:
> i agree with fozz. sex belongs after marriage. I think it's especially
> sad that it happens in the church.
You can have sex in the church after you're married?
* adds to to-do list *
HAHAHAHA... didnt notice that
I am a christian. I am not religious. "But how?" i hear you say. will start by defining religion: religion is a set of rules by which certain groups live, believing that following these rules will atone them and allow them entry to the afterlife.
I'm sorry fozz, but worshipping the saints is an example of this, as is all of the chanting, the reading out of those little books, the confession box. Also included is doing "good deeds." that is not to say that we shouldn't do good, but that alone will not get you into heaven (unless you're a New-Ageist :-P).
Christianity involves Christ. It is the belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God, that his death was the final living sacrifice, that he was the messiah which was prophesied at various points throughout the bible, and that no-one comes to God except through his son jesus. The reason we as christians choose to attempt to follow those laws which were laid down by God through Moses, is because we believe God exists, and that by following them we honour God, as this was one of the reasons we were created (ie to worship Him out of choice rather than force). i would carry on but i've got to get to class.
PS ineedsleep: soul101 wrote:
> i agree with fozz. sex belongs after marriage. I think it's especially
> sad that it happens in the church.
You can have sex in the church after you're married?
* adds to to-do list *
HAHAHAHA... didnt notice that
Azul wrote:
> Flock wrote:
> i'm studying psychology.
>
> "How to get into the mind of the child"
Must be working, i've clearly got into yours.
> Flock wrote:
> i'm studying psychology.
>
> "How to get into the mind of the child"
Must be working, i've clearly got into yours.
Hedfix wrote:
> Flock wrote:
> Love's not illogical, it's biological.
>
> Is there a GAD prize for bumper sticker philosophy?
Read back and you'll find i've been saying that from the start just in more words, i really couldn't be bothered to repeat myself again.
> Flock wrote:
> Love's not illogical, it's biological.
>
> Is there a GAD prize for bumper sticker philosophy?
Read back and you'll find i've been saying that from the start just in more words, i really couldn't be bothered to repeat myself again.
Sorry fozz, but i must disagree with u on a couple of little points...
>I dont have a problem with people doing other sexual acts before marriage.
I do. sexual acts are SEXual, as in involve sex. i don't think it's just about finding the right person. If that was all there was to it, why not just move in with the other person? why go through the effort and expense of marrying them? i do agree with the rest of that paragraph, except the stuff about oral sex (i didnt really understand that).
>"Here's another thing; you don't get people who are in favour of sex before marriage telling those that aren't that they are somehow bad people for waiting until they get married before rutting away like God intended.
Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not telling us we're stupid and sad?
>So if you have a problem with waiting till marriage for sex then perhaps you should consider joining a different religeous group
ummm... that's a little pluralistic for my taste. I don't follow God because his ways fit in comfortably with my morals. I follow him because i think it's stupid not to (no offence :-P).
SHEEPY: I'm of firm beleive that when guys say they're just 'waiting for the right one' that it's just talk because they can't get any.
like i said, i have a girlfriend. She is the only girlfriend i have had, and i am the only boyfriend she has ever had. both of us are virgins, and both of us have had plenty of opportunities to lose that. Besides, it can't be that hard to pick up some drunk at the pub.
Hey light, i like the biblical quotes. Leviticus is the most annoying book in the bible, simply because non-christians feel that they know christianity once they've read it. Try extending your biblical knowledge beyond the old testament, eg reading Romans 3-5, which (i think) detail why us as christians don't need to follow the laws laid down in those first few books so dogmatically. Then, try reading 1&2 Corinthians, Colossians, and Hebrews, and see if you still agree with what you said. Bear in mind that a lot of the examples (eg 1 corinthians 11, about hair), are just that- examples. don't just skim them, read them through properly.
I hope that answers some questions.
EDIT- I think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like that indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist your penis.
HAHAHAHAHA
>I dont have a problem with people doing other sexual acts before marriage.
I do. sexual acts are SEXual, as in involve sex. i don't think it's just about finding the right person. If that was all there was to it, why not just move in with the other person? why go through the effort and expense of marrying them? i do agree with the rest of that paragraph, except the stuff about oral sex (i didnt really understand that).
>"Here's another thing; you don't get people who are in favour of sex before marriage telling those that aren't that they are somehow bad people for waiting until they get married before rutting away like God intended.
Yes you do... what do u think you're doing in this topic, if not telling us we're stupid and sad?
>So if you have a problem with waiting till marriage for sex then perhaps you should consider joining a different religeous group
ummm... that's a little pluralistic for my taste. I don't follow God because his ways fit in comfortably with my morals. I follow him because i think it's stupid not to (no offence :-P).
SHEEPY: I'm of firm beleive that when guys say they're just 'waiting for the right one' that it's just talk because they can't get any.
like i said, i have a girlfriend. She is the only girlfriend i have had, and i am the only boyfriend she has ever had. both of us are virgins, and both of us have had plenty of opportunities to lose that. Besides, it can't be that hard to pick up some drunk at the pub.
Hey light, i like the biblical quotes. Leviticus is the most annoying book in the bible, simply because non-christians feel that they know christianity once they've read it. Try extending your biblical knowledge beyond the old testament, eg reading Romans 3-5, which (i think) detail why us as christians don't need to follow the laws laid down in those first few books so dogmatically. Then, try reading 1&2 Corinthians, Colossians, and Hebrews, and see if you still agree with what you said. Bear in mind that a lot of the examples (eg 1 corinthians 11, about hair), are just that- examples. don't just skim them, read them through properly.
I hope that answers some questions.
EDIT- I think the fact that you added such an emotional reply like that indicated that you wish you had the personal strength to resist your penis.
HAHAHAHAHA
Page: