[akatch79]

Is it only lust if you're thinking about women?

Sweet, so that means straight women and gay men can go at it all day long and God doesn't give a ****. Awesome.

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by squeaky

Its amazing to me how contentious people who either cant grasp or refuse to understand something rage back at someone just because it doesnt make sense to them. Especially when it comes to Christianity. I dont know if they simply get a rise out of it or what. Or perhaps they want to see if they can ruffle the feathers of others by replying in such an irrate manner. My friend noone is trying to rationalize anything to you. Nor am I debating this with you either. If it sounds ridiculous to you than thats your opinion. You have to live with that. Dont rage at me because of it. But I know where that comes from anyway so I wont contend with you. I started out answering someone elses question. If this is your perception of God then unfortunately so be it. But wanton ignorance is the worst kind. You shake your fist at God and yet you probably havent even read the Bible with the intent to try and understand the fact that he loves all of us, and that Christ didnt come to judge the world over 2000 years ago. But that through him the world might be Saved. Thats biblical. But its our choice to accept him and his gift of eternal life or reject him and remain in a sinful state. But either way soon very soon, you will find out that hes as real as he said he was. And where will you be standing when he comes back ? I pray you will have made the right decision in your life someday before it tool late. "With loving kindness have I drawn you." Says the Lord. Remember this reply. Because someday it will revisit you. Believe it or not. I will no longer address any of your replies if they are full of frivolous rantings. Again Im not here to debate with anyone concerning God's Word. I am here to simply plant the seed.


What is your rage all about? If you are so secure in your beliefs or non-beliefs then why do you contest with believers whenever they share their faith with others? I know and understand the answer why.... Do you?

may you find real peace soon.

Are you seriously proselytizing to me right now? My point was that it's illogical, nothing more. You're the one making a big deal out of it. Take your preaching elsewhere. If you can't debate, you don't belong here.

[shaka zulu]

Originally Posted by akatch79

Is it only lust if you're thinking about women?

Sweet, so that means straight women and gay men can go at it all day long and God doesn't give a ****. Awesome.

Come now. You're smarter than that. It's lust.....period.

[RamboPreacher]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

I think I dissent from this opinion.

which part are you dissenting - or both?
that I don't think that sex is for procreation ONLY?
or
that sex should be ONLY within the confines of marriage?

two distinct and separate points that I made in one sentence.

[avacado man]

I'm a Christian and don't think it is a sin necessarily, as you need some way to give yourself pleasure and sustain from actual sex until marriage, but if viewing porn or thinking about the opposite sex (inevitable really) it is a sin..

So, maybe?

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

which part are you dissenting - or both?
that I don't think that sex is for procreation ONLY?
or
that sex should be ONLY within the confines of marriage?

two distinct and separate points that I made in one sentence.

I believe it should only be for procreation. That may or may not be what is taught, but it's my personal belief.

Originally Posted by avacado man

I'm a Christian and don't think it is a sin necessarily, as you need some way to give yourself pleasure and sustain from actual sex until marriage, but if viewing porn or thinking about the opposite sex (inevitable really) it is a sin..

So, maybe?

You mean abstain?

And hey.

[avacado man]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

I believe it should only be for procreation. That may or may not be what is taught, but it's my personal belief.


You mean abstain?

And hey.

Yeah, abstain. Whatever.

Hai.

[RamboPreacher]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

I believe it should only be for procreation. That may or may not be what is taught, but it's my personal belief.

so, a married couple should only ever have sex if they are trying to have a baby, otherwise they should abstain?

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

so, a married couple should only ever have sex if they are trying to have a baby, otherwise they should abstain?

That's just what I think. Don't ask me for proof, I don't have any. Like I said, it is a personal belief.

[markcheb]

Just for clarity's sake just for conception or not hindering conception?

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by markcheb

Just for clarity's sake just for conception or not hindering conception?

I think I'd say both. Like I said before, this is just my personal ideaology, and is not Biblically backed, so don't worry about it.

[markcheb]

No worries, just curious.

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Alright. I just don't want anyone to come in here and break it down and show me why my view is so wrong.

[RamboPreacher]

wasn't going to, just wondering. I do think it's a bit weird that heterosexual, monogamous, martial-sex should only ever happen when making babies, and not any other time, though. Would have never thought of any young man ever even having that kind of paradigm.

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

wasn't going to, just wondering. I do think it's a bit weird that heterosexual, monogamous, martial-sex should only ever happen when making babies, and not any other time, though. Would have never thought of any young man ever even having that kind of paradigm.

I can see where he's coming from...

I think It actually makes sense when you figure both society (upbringing) and addiction into the picture.

[RamboPreacher]

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

I can see where he's coming from...

I think It actually makes sense when you figure both society (upbringing) and addiction into the picture.

not sure I get you. I have heard it taught and peoples opinions that sex is for procreation (in the context of marriage again), but never that it should ALWAYS be abstained from unless procreation, until now. I hate to get graphic, but the example that comes to mind is a husband and wife have sex once, and then if there is fertilization, not again until 9-12 months later, maybe. or if there wasn't fertilization, perhaps a couple months later when it was discovered, give it another go.

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

not sure I get you. I have heard it taught and peoples opinions that sex is for procreation (in the context of marriage again), but never that it should ALWAYS be abstained from unless procreation, until now. I hate to get graphic, but the example that comes to mind is a husband and wife have sex once, and then if there is fertilization, not again until 9-12 months later, maybe. or if there wasn't fertilization, perhaps a couple months later when it was discovered, give it another go.

Well, I don't agree w/ abstinence when marriage is on the table, particularly from a Christian aspect, because that's basically contradicting. But, I can see why someone may choose to abstain for strictly procreation purposes -- should that individual choose to uphold natures intent -- as he/she may see it.

It seems that the point here though -- is that sex is (by the laws of nature?) first set aside for the purpose of procreation, and procreation only. Therefore, when procreation becomes necessary -- so shall the ritual deemed appropriate, such as intimacy.

Society, (in this case) is basically our own interpretation as a whole -- on whether intimacy offers an additional, or alternative purpose when performing such an act. It's not to say that any of this is pure by the laws of nature, but really more influence than anything, subsequently leading us to accept more over a great deal of time.

Addiction, (in this case) is what I would classify as a human characteristic that evolves through the likes of emotion. In which, it's only us humans that I have noticed who constantly find ways to manipulate natures ways for better or for worst. The idea that such is programmed into us from the beginning; is I think moot. I think what's important to take note on though, is how the idea of addiction gives motive to us humans to further justify what may, or may not exist as nature had originally intended.

Bottom line:

Love is not guaranteed through intimacy, yet we know for a fact that intimacy can lead to procreation. Therefore, lets practice what we know nature had in stored to begin with by excluding the rather superficial and alleged effects upheld by man from a factual stand point.

Now, let me be clear...

I'm not saying I fully agree, I'm just saying I think I get the gyst of why some people may claim such an opinion

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

Well, I don't agree w/ abstinence when marriage is on the table, particularly from a Christian aspect, because that's basically contradicting. But, I can see why someone may choose to abstain for strictly procreation purposes -- should that individual choose to uphold natures intent -- as he/she may see it.

It seems that the point here though -- is that sex is (by the laws of nature?) first set aside for the purpose of procreation, and procreation only. Therefore, when procreation becomes necessary -- so shall the ritual deemed appropriate, such as intimacy.

Society, (in this case) is basically our own interpretation as a whole -- on whether intimacy offers an additional, or alternative purpose when performing such an act. It's not to say that any of this is pure by the laws of nature, but really more influence than anything, subsequently leading us to accept more over a great deal of time.

Addiction, (in this case) is what I would classify as a human characteristic that evolves through the likes of emotion. In which, it's only us humans that I have noticed who constantly find ways to manipulate natures ways for better or for worst. The idea that such is programmed into us from the beginning; is I think moot. I think what's important to take note on though, is how the idea of addiction gives motive to us humans to further justify what may, or may not exist as nature had originally intended.

Bottom line:

Love is not guaranteed through intimacy, yet we know for a fact that intimacy can lead to procreation. Therefore, lets practice what we know nature had in stored to begin with by excluding the rather superficial and alleged effects upheld by man from a factual stand point.

Now, let me be clear...

I'm not saying I fully agree, I'm just saying I think I get the gyst of why some people may claim such an opinion

Where did you get such an idea? I'm reading a book right now that pretty much has the same premise. An interesting take on something I'd never questioned, which is another outlying theme in the book. Good book though.

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

Where did you get such an idea? I'm reading a book right now that pretty much has the same premise. An interesting take on something I'd never questioned, which is another outlying theme in the book. Good book though.

Are you referring only to what's highlighted?

Well...

Those two paragraphs was my own little add to the conversation as to perhaps, why -- in support of said theory. Neither the "society" or "addiction" argument was ever derived from your post(s); strcitly my thoughts on the matter

[avacado man]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

That's just what I think. Don't ask me for proof, I don't have any. Like I said, it is a personal belief.

Even though this is a personal belief, let me touch on it.
God created man and woman to love and be with one another, of course through marriage. Both were created with different reproductive parts to indeed reproduce (hence the name), but also to pleasure one another. As in the bible, specifically a book like Song of Solomon, it says that sex is meant to be a fun and enjoyable activity for both partners as well as an act of love. Sex was meant to be very enjoyable for married partners, not just there for reproduction.

[cryptic.paintball]

In the bible does it state Adam n Eve were married? I just cannot remember at the moment.