The case for sexual abstinance

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Slopeshoulder
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: San Francisco

The case for sexual abstinance

Post #1

Post by Slopeshoulder »

In another thread..
His Name Is John wrote: Sexual activity should be reserved until marriage (I can explain why if you so want).
I'd be curious to see that. I can't imagine why. Every argument I've seen for abstinance falls flat IMO. Joyfully, I've never been impressed by them. But bring it on...

Assuming consent exists, puberty is in the past, and laws are upheld...
What is the case for abstinance before, outside of, or between marriage(s)?
What is the case for abstinance for any reason at all?

Felix
Student
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:32 pm

Post #11

Post by Felix »

Quath wrote:For these, it is a risk assessment. It is a similar to the risk we take when we hang out in a crowd where there could be many diseases of which some are deadly.
When the hormones are boiling, risk assessment goes out the door.
Avoiding Hell (you're wagering our soul)
Different dogmas have different views on this.
Yes, and you're wagering, what?, that no matter what, your life will end with the annihilation of you.
It could go the other way into sharing a sex life based on inexperience which could lead to some bad results. I was once with a woman who had just divorced. I was the second person she had had ever been with. He husband was her first and they were married for many years. She said the sex was horrible and just got worse over time. Her husband did not feel comfortable talking about it to anyone and they found it easier to just drift apart. So I can see times where this could be a strong negative.
She, or her ex, were psychologically messed up. Probably her (I think women have more control over the quality of sex). Probably for years, she was trying to punish her ex by only providing lousy sex, even if she wasn't aware that this was what she was doing.
I think the desire many religious people have is they expected Hitchens to be sad and lonely and suffer for his life and beliefs. But I saw no evidence of it.
He was an alcoholic.

User avatar
Quath
Apprentice
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:37 pm
Location: Patterson, CA

Post #12

Post by Quath »

Felix wrote:
When the hormones are boiling, risk assessment goes out the door.
Not necessarily. I once had a defective condom. We just did other things instead.

In high school, my girlfriend wanted to use the rhythm method because one of her friends said it had worked for her sister for years. Luckily, I knew that it was a very bad risk and that led to her going on the pill later on.

So I agree that hormones can help people make bad decisions. But if they are well informed, they can usually find alternatives.
Yes, and you're wagering, what?, that no matter what, your life will end with the annihilation of you.
Well, that is what I consider most likely. But if for some reason it didn't, then I will just have to hope out of all the possible gods and afterlives that mankind have envisioned, that I luck out.
She, or her ex, were psychologically messed up. Probably her (I think women have more control over the quality of sex). Probably for years, she was trying to punish her ex by only providing lousy sex, even if she wasn't aware that this was what she was doing.
He was a fireman who had some kind of erectile dysfunction. He refused to go to the doctor or talk about it. She kept trying to get him to go, but he didn't want to talk about it. He didn't want for anyone to know he had a problem. She tried different things, but they always failed.

But she wasn't lousy at all. She just realized that she had never had a chance to really explore sexually and felt she had wasted a lot of joy out of ignorance.
He was an alcoholic.
I would not claim he was perfect or if I even agreed with him. But he did not die a miserable death. It was a very public one in which many people (atheist and theist) shared his end with him. As an example, Francis Collins from the National Institution of Health and a Christian said, "I will miss Christopher. I will miss the brilliant turn of phrase, the good-natured banter, the wry sideways smile when he was about to make a remark that would make me laugh out loud. No doubt he now knows the answer to the question of whether there is more to the spirit than just atoms and molecules. I hope he was surprised by the answer. I hope to hear him tell about it someday. He will tell it really well."

You don't die miserable and alone when people who heavily disagree with you will say such nice things about you.

Yahu
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:28 am
Location: Atlanta

Post #13

Post by Yahu »

Felix wrote:Avoiding sexually transmitted diseases (some kill)

Avoiding unwanted pregnancy (kill, or have a big responsibility)

Avoiding emotional traumas (sometimes causing people to kill themselves)

Avoiding Hell (you're wagering our soul)

Strengthening the bond between you and your spouse, and potentially having a level of intimacy that is impossible for others to have.
I agree for the most part about reasons not to get involved in casual sex but 'Avoiding Hell' is nonsense. Trying to restrain people's sexuality is probably the biggest reason people reject Christianity. If someone is in a committed relationship, you stay out of their sexual activity, if you meddle in it or operate as a meddlesome busybody in other men's matters, scripture ranks that evil right up there with murderer, thief and 'evil doer'.

Im not in favor of promoting unlawful sexual activity but few christians really understand the biblical position. What is actually forbidden by the biblical law is rape, taking a girl's virginity without taking her as your wife (before or after the event) and taking another man's wife. Taking a concubine, sexual partner outside of marriage is NOT forbidden unless she is another man's wife. Taking on more then 1 wife/concubine is NOT forbidden. Fornication 1st requires full sexual intercourse and has nothing what so ever to do with legal marital status.

Biblically a wife was a woman that had your children that could inherit. A man was also responsible for the children produced via a concubine as well. Visiting a prostitute is spiritually dangerous and is discouraged. A sexual relationship with a non-virgin with a woman only in relationship with a single man is NOT forbidden.

Phariseeism as presented biblically was the error of expanding on the laws of Yah and trying to impose that expanded traditions of man on others. Yah considers it pure evil. Even Yeshua was attacked for violating the 'traditions of men' but did not violate the actual biblical law. This is an error that the majority of christianity falls into and they will stand in judgement for that behavior.

IMO Yah's position on sexual activity is to be responsible with your sexual activity and not to harm anyone. Attacking someone for sexual activity between betrothed individuals is just plain EVIL.

User avatar
SilenceInMotion
Banned
Banned
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:16 pm

Post #14

Post by SilenceInMotion »

Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.

Because of it, there is: jealousy, deception, depression, unplanned pregnancies, lower prohibition, extreme inclination of the spread of STD's, revenge and general social calamity.

Biblical morals go a lot deeper then some may think. Face it, there is no real defense in positing that it actually points anywhere 'good' on the moral compass. Because we are fallen individuals, almost all of us are guilty of it, but that is no reason to condone it either.

User avatar
Slopeshoulder
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post #15

Post by Slopeshoulder »

SilenceInMotion wrote:Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
Could you share some of them? What follows below sas it may be unwise, but not immoral per se.
Because of it, there is: jealousy, deception, depression,
These are psychological symptoms of immature people. Why blame sex for it? Why not say grow up or OK it's not for you (these people)?
unplanned pregnancies, lower prohibition, extreme inclination of the spread of STD's,
Technology is available to greatly reduce this if peole are responsible. Why abstain? Why not just use birth control/condoms/tests?
revenge and general social calamity.
Again, human failings. Why blame sex?
Biblical morals go a lot deeper then some may think.
How do you know what i think? ButI can tell you that the bible is only one source of discernment for me among others. I see the bibleoffering thematic wisdom like compassion, respect for persons, justice, etc, not a list of do's and don'ts.

[Face it, there is no real defense in positing that it actually points anywhere 'good' on the moral compass. [/quote]
Face it? I disagree. I think unbridled libertinism and repression are both to be avoided. But a healthy responsible and robust sex life is a moral good.
Because we are fallen individuals, almost all of us are guilty of it, but that is no reason to condone it either.
Because we are fallen, we should strive to be good in all we do, including the sex we have. Why is abstinance the goal? Why not empathy, compassion, mutuality, consent, respect, expression, intimacy, enjoyment? I suggest that God cares about these things.

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24068
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 2 times

Post #16

Post by McCulloch »

SilenceInMotion wrote: Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
On what basis do you decide what is moral and what is immoral?
SilenceInMotion wrote: Because of it, there is: jealousy, deception, depression, unplanned pregnancies, lower prohibition, extreme inclination of the spread of STD's, revenge and general social calamity.
Because of premarital sex there is jealousy. Because of CEO's high pay packages, there is jealousy, therefore high pay is immoral, right?
Because of premarital sex there is deception. Not so. Because of the taboo on premarital sex, there is deception.
Because of premarital sex there is depression. Huh?
Because of premarital sex there are unplanned pregnancies. Actually, there are unplanned pregnancies because of poor planning, ignorance and stupidity. The happen to married and to unmarried people.
Because of premarital sex there is lower prohibition. Huh?
Because of premarital sex there is a spread of STDs. Actually, this is because of promiscuous unprotected sex.
Because of premarital sex there is revenge. No, again because of the taboo on premarital sex coupled by a paternalistic attitude about sexual ownership, there is revenge.
Because of premarital sex there is general social calamity. The society that I live in cannot be accurately described as being in a state of general social calamity.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
SilenceInMotion
Banned
Banned
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:16 pm

Post #17

Post by SilenceInMotion »

Slopeshoulder wrote:
SilenceInMotion wrote:Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
Could you share some of them? What follows below sas it may be unwise, but not immoral per se.
Because of it, there is: jealousy, deception, depression,
These are psychological symptoms of immature people. Why blame sex for it? Why not say grow up or OK it's not for you (these people)?
unplanned pregnancies, lower prohibition, extreme inclination of the spread of STD's,
Technology is available to greatly reduce this if peole are responsible. Why abstain? Why not just use birth control/condoms/tests?
revenge and general social calamity.
Again, human failings. Why blame sex?
Biblical morals go a lot deeper then some may think.
How do you know what i think? ButI can tell you that the bible is only one source of discernment for me among others. I see the bibleoffering thematic wisdom like compassion, respect for persons, justice, etc, not a list of do's and don'ts.

[Face it, there is no real defense in positing that it actually points anywhere 'good' on the moral compass.
Face it? I disagree. I think unbridled libertinism and repression are both to be avoided. But a healthy responsible and robust sex life is a moral good.
Because we are fallen individuals, almost all of us are guilty of it, but that is no reason to condone it either.
Because we are fallen, we should strive to be good in all we do, including the sex we have. Why is abstinance the goal? Why not empathy, compassion, mutuality, consent, respect, expression, intimacy, enjoyment? I suggest that God cares about these things.
What came first, the deviant deed or social chaos?

Believe it or not, this is actually where moral relativity takes a mighty blow. If premarital sex was ever good in the first place, it would have never created such grievances in society.
And so it is inherently fallacious to call it good.

The whole of biblical morals is fixed on this notion alone. Whatever hurts a brother is a sin. It is tentamount to basic moral wisdom, something which moral relativism completely ignores.

I feel that it is literally one of the most supreme ironies of mankind at large. Biblical wisdom also tells that such is a petty justification for man's actions, and with enough critical thought, that's precisely what it is. What further adds to this injury is that vanity is the original sin, and so it can in fact be proven that moral relativity is justifying deviance with deviance.

The wise come to find out, eventually, that such morals are only relative to necessity. That is perhaps why there have been more martyrs in Christendom then any other religion or cause in history.

There is a reason why Scripture speaks on sexual immoralities more then any others. If you open up the Bible, you will realize this more and more. Even Jesus puts adultery, specifically, on the chopping block.
Everywhere you look, sexuality is everywhere. It is hardly restrained anymore in society, and it is because of the lacking prohibition I spoke of in my list of things I posted that comes from premarital sex. Because of that, we have to provide condoms, birth control, and funding for unplanned pregnancies and STDs. I think, where moral relativists go wrong, is the fact that these things are seen as 'cures' rather then *drum roll* justifying deviance with deviance. These things only promote it more, and so you just have a larger amount of all I listed to go with these proactive gambits.
Vanity, you see. It's the crux of sin.

Yahu
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:28 am
Location: Atlanta

Post #18

Post by Yahu »

SilenceInMotion wrote:Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
I'm afraid you don't understand biblical sexual law. Taking a concubine (having a sexual relationship with a non virgin that isn't your wife) is NOT forbidden. It was actually common.

Basically what is condemned is 'casual sex' or a woman having multiple partners. Fornication has nothing to do with marital status. It means 'unlawful sex'. You have to go back to the Law to see what is actually forbidden. Most of the problem with 'pre-marital' sex in those days was done in the worship of the pagan gods. That is what is being condemned.

A couple living together in a sexual relationship is not condemned in scripture. It is even considered a 'common law' marriage in many states. A couple engaging in sexual activity between betrothal and the actual wedding isn't sin either. The covenant starts at the betrothal anyway.

User avatar
SilenceInMotion
Banned
Banned
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:16 pm

Post #19

Post by SilenceInMotion »

Yahu wrote:
SilenceInMotion wrote:Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
I'm afraid you don't understand biblical sexual law. Taking a concubine (having a sexual relationship with a non virgin that isn't your wife) is NOT forbidden. It was actually common.

Basically what is condemned is 'casual sex' or a woman having multiple partners. Fornication has nothing to do with marital status. It means 'unlawful sex'. You have to go back to the Law to see what is actually forbidden. Most of the problem with 'pre-marital' sex in those days was done in the worship of the pagan gods. That is what is being condemned.

A couple living together in a sexual relationship is not condemned in scripture. It is even considered a 'common law' marriage in many states. A couple engaging in sexual activity between betrothal and the actual wedding isn't sin either. The covenant starts at the betrothal anyway.
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (NIV, Galatians 5:19-21)

Sex before marriage is a root cause cause of: impurity, debauchery, idolatry, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, factions, and envy.

And then you simply have the self-evident truth that anyone with an ounce of honesty can admit- sex before marriage is nothing but disruption for the sake of vanity. Something that God must be able to see if any humble man can, lest He not be God at all but rather someones wishful idea of God.

Therefore, I see no argument thus far that really suffices for the contrary. Just adding some irony to the OP which states that they have never seen such from my side.

Yahu
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:28 am
Location: Atlanta

Post #20

Post by Yahu »

SilenceInMotion wrote:
Yahu wrote:
SilenceInMotion wrote:Premarital sex is immoral for many reasons.
I'm afraid you don't understand biblical sexual law. Taking a concubine (having a sexual relationship with a non virgin that isn't your wife) is NOT forbidden. It was actually common.

Basically what is condemned is 'casual sex' or a woman having multiple partners. Fornication has nothing to do with marital status. It means 'unlawful sex'. You have to go back to the Law to see what is actually forbidden. Most of the problem with 'pre-marital' sex in those days was done in the worship of the pagan gods. That is what is being condemned.

A couple living together in a sexual relationship is not condemned in scripture. It is even considered a 'common law' marriage in many states. A couple engaging in sexual activity between betrothal and the actual wedding isn't sin either. The covenant starts at the betrothal anyway.
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (NIV, Galatians 5:19-21)

Sex before marriage is a root cause cause of: impurity, debauchery, idolatry, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, factions, and envy.

And then you simply have the self-evident truth that anyone with an ounce of honesty can admit- sex before marriage is nothing but disruption for the sake of vanity. Something that God must be able to see if any humble man can, lest He not be God at all but rather someones wishful idea of God.

Therefore, I see no argument thus far that really suffices for the contrary. Just adding some irony to the OP which states that they have never seen such from my side.
Don't you see what kinds of problems Pharisees like you cause by expanding on the actual law? The Pharisees of Yeshua's day did the same thing, they expanded on the law and attacked him for healing on the Sabbath and for allowing his disciples to pick grain to eat on the Sabbath.

Go back to Leviticus and actually read the sexual law! It forbids rape, taking a girl's virginity without marrying her. It places a fine on a man that takes a girl's virginity without having the father's blessing and must take her as wife. It forbids sex with close relatives. It forbids sex with another man's wife. It forbids having sex with a woman and her daughter.

That is about all it does cover. It has NOTHING to say about sex outside of marriage but there are laws concerning a concubine. A concubine was NOT a wife. The children of the wife inherit. It was a different status for the woman because often she couldn't become a wife because she had already lost her virginity.

Now I'm going to give you a situation. I went through a non-sexual Gothard courtship. We were ready to get married. I asked her father's blessing to marry his daughter. He gave it but needed 6 months+ to sell an investment property to pay for his eldest daughters wedding. We were ready to marry then and were both on our own in the Military. He gave his permission to exchange vows and take his daughter as my wife and we would have the family wedding when he sold the property.

Do you have any idea how many Pharisees have attacked me saying we were in sin? I am tired of being slapped in the face by morons that don't understand biblical law. Is there anything wrong with waiting until a full marriage ceremony? Of course not. But it is VERY wrong to attack someone for violating the traditions of man when they are NOT part of the law of Yah!

All Yah is interested in is our temperance. That is controlling our sex drive to prevent us from doing something EVIL. What he considers evil is rape, ruining virgins, stealing other men's wives.

Now I can show you places where sex outside marriage is allowed in the law. For example a Levirate situation of a childless widow is allowed to have sex with a close relative to gain a child that could inherit the family property due her dead husband. That is part of the law. Both Tamar and Ruth fell into that situation. It did NOT require marriage, just sex with a near relative of the dead husband. Ruth is even instructed by Naomi to go uncover Boaz's penis and have intercourse with him. Of course you have to read it in the original Hebrew to see that. That was specifically covered in my Hebrew class at bible college. The english translations tries to hide it in how it is worded. Tamar even dressed up as a prostitute to have sex with Judah to get the child she was due. Judah didn't marry her.

Other places sex outside of marriage is presented in scripture is Abraham and Hagar. Jacob and both his wives handmaidens. They were concubines, not wives. A man could have multiple wives and concubines in scripture.

Post Reply