Christians help me with this...
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Where does THIS idea come from? It's no secret that many cultures of the ancient world, including Semitic ones, practiced arranged marriages that served a variety of purposes and romantic love was seldom a factor in these arrangements. But the Bible does NOT sanction arranged marriages.
"Based on sin" is a little harsh, too. Sexual relationships outside marriage or probably often based on love. Still doesn't make it right though. OT Law provides for reparations that can be made if the couple is in love. Our present day culture and society is very open and accepting of premarital sex, so it's obvious that OT does not apply to our lives today. That doesn't make it less sinful, but it is what it is.
There are some laws in place that attempt to remedy some of the problems of adultery. Most notably is age of consent laws and statutory rape. The older of the couple will be found in violation of these laws, and NOW we have sex offender registries that place an invisible scarlet letter on the offender. This is a lifelong thing and is not unlike the treatment of known adulterers back in colonial, theocratic times.
Another law that is of particular interest to me but probably unknown to others is called "alienation of affection." These laws allow a woman to, say, take her husband's MISTRESS to court in the event he leaves his wife in favor of the adulterous lover. My understanding is that these are civil cases and can result in financial ruin for the person that steals a husband or wife from his/her spouse.
Here's where I think the problem of adultery is in the our contemporary time: I happen to believe in "natural order" kinds of ideas because of the internal wiring of human beings--brains, hormones, etc. I think that kids grow up much faster than adults give them credit for and have more intense desires for lifelong partnership than older adults. The problem is caused by younger people being unable to marry and having to wait excessively long times before marriage. We are indoctrinated to believe that in order to get married and have children that we have to hold secure jobs and be independently wealthy (not Bill Gates wealthy, I just mean wealthy enough to want for nothing, perhaps with $10,000 in savings or something). In order to secure those jobs, we need years of experience. But we can't get years of experience without first getting years of education first, like, say, an MBA. And we can't get the education without going to college or university, and this MUST be done immediately after high school.
If you hold to the Christian ideal of no sex before marriage, we're talking about 8 to 10 years or even longer after high school before really having much at all to do with the opposite sex. Well, if all these kids are "ready" to begin having sex and making babies at 14 years old, how fair is it to expect them to wait so long? The only possible benefit I see to making someone wait so long is learning self-control and discipline, but even the NT writers (Paul, who was against marriage and sex because of the distraction, even said marriage was preferable to sinful life) promoted marriage if for no other reason than to avoid sexual sin--learning self-control and discipline ain't all that.
So if in the natural order of human life we are sexual creatures, marriage in addition to maintaining a normal family lifestyle complete with education and work experience should not be something people have to wait a third of their lives for. But it has created a situation that fosters sexual sin because it denies sex at the best time of a person's life. Modern-day institutions are not supportive at all of family structures, and it's no wonder the family unit is as weak as it is in our time.
I'm not saying it's right to go back to ancient practices of arranged marriage between a 14-year-old girl and a man who's 10 or 20 years older. I'm not even saying that there IS a solution in our time, because saying otherwise would be blatantly promoting pedophilia. What I am saying is we ought to be very understanding when it comes to the causes of sexual immorality in our day and time. I don't see how we can still be human and NOT give in to it.
Where does THIS idea come from?
It's right there, and was a direct response to that post.
But since we're here, and we're defining a Christian as a person who follows the teachings of Christ, and the teachings of Christ are defined as the contents of the New Testament, we can continue in jc6chan's enquiry and follow along in Matthew:
5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
So, we could take this in a couple of ways.
-Literally, as a Christian. There aren't any laws I'm aware of that prohibit commiting such acts upon yourself, so the religion can still practice freely. I'd uphold that right without hesistation, just like I do for anyone who wants to get a body mod that seems a little extreme, or whatever.
-Methaphorically, as I may liken my struggle against misinformation as to Ragnarök in the Poetic Edda. This would mean however that these particular followers of Jesus may have to call themselves "Metaphorical Christians" or Bible inspired religion.
-Partially Hit n miss, take out the parts you don't like, keep in the parts you do. This is where a lot of people claiming to be Chrstians are at the moment, with sprinklings of the point above, and more parts are being removed as society moves on. The problem here is the claim it's the word of God, I mean God's word doesn't become obsolete over time, does it?
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
Sexual contemplation and enjoyment of each other is proper only between a husband and wife. Within marriage, both members should enjoy sex. Outside of marriage, there should be no sex.
i dont need to justify my sex life im trying to justify christians lack there of. i thought you all were supposed to convert people, not doing a very good job selling me on being faithful
Sexual contemplation and enjoyment of each other is proper only between a husband and wife. Within marriage, both members should enjoy sex. Outside of marriage, there should be no sex.
Or thought of it, unless you plan on willingly losing lateral vision by plucking out your eye.
Where does THIS idea come from?
It's right there, and was a direct response to that post
I don't see anything in that post to support prearranged marriages either. What Zer0netgain was saying is that the idea is to cut the problem of lust off at the source. Admiring a women's beauty is not lust, nor is considering her as a potential mate.
Lust is focused on yourself; you want to get into her pants and don't really care if she in interested in what is in yours.
_________________
NobelCynic (on WP)
My given name is Kenneth
In their hearts, they were hypocrites. They didn't follow the law in their hearts nor did they adhere to the SPIRIT of the law.
.
I beg your pardon. What counts is what people do. Having goodness in ones heart and not doing good, means good is not done. Having evil in ones heart and doing good means good is done.
That snippet shows the essential anti-semitism and Jew hatred implicit in Christianity.
ruveyn
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Where does THIS idea come from?
It's right there, and was a direct response to that post.
But since we're here, and we're defining a Christian as a person who follows the teachings of Christ, and the teachings of Christ are defined as the contents of the New Testament, we can continue in jc6chan's enquiry and follow along in Matthew:
5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
So, we could take this in a couple of ways.
-Literally, as a Christian. There aren't any laws I'm aware of that prohibit commiting such acts upon yourself, so the religion can still practice freely. I'd uphold that right without hesistation, just like I do for anyone who wants to get a body mod that seems a little extreme, or whatever.
-Methaphorically, as I may liken my struggle against misinformation as to Ragnarök in the Poetic Edda. This would mean however that these particular followers of Jesus may have to call themselves "Metaphorical Christians" or Bible inspired religion.
-Partially Hit n miss, take out the parts you don't like, keep in the parts you do. This is where a lot of people claiming to be Chrstians are at the moment, with sprinklings of the point above, and more parts are being removed as society moves on. The problem here is the claim it's the word of God, I mean God's word doesn't become obsolete over time, does it?
Sounds to me like you're the one taking out the parts you don't like and keeping in the parts you do. Or perhaps I just don't understand as well as I think I do. Where in the Bible is arranged marriages sanctioned? I've THOROUGHLY read Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and I've found NOTHING to support any "rightness" of arranged marriage. We know from history that arranged marriages DID happen for a lot of different reasons. But NOWHERE does the Bible suggest that is the way it should be. There might be a story or two about one king giving his daughter to another king--not likely that love was involved. But that's like taking the newspaper headlines report about someone getting shot to death and taking it to mean that the newspaper is sanctioning murder. It doesn't make sense. The only thing the Bible has to say about it has to do with the fact that certain institutions did exist as a result of man's sinful nature. The law provides justice and relief within those purely man-made situations: The status and treatment of women and the institution of slavery. But establishing those institutions as such? I don't think you'll find that in the Bible. If it's there, let me know.
Now, admiring someone because of their beauty is not sin. Momentary temptation isn't sin either. It's the intent of the heart that makes it sin, which is a real desire to commit adulterous sin with someone. That's the root of the physical manifestation of the sin itself and reflects the sinful nature of the heart. That is something we'll all struggle with. Some people will find it easier to commit adultery or lust than others, especially evidenced by all the virgins on WP. And I think most people will find it easier to lust after someone in their heart than, for example, to murder someone. The Bible also mentions that, btw, the plotting of murder in one's heart is tantamount to murder itself.
One other thing, a minor detail about that particular passage, is that Jesus is using a figure of speech. This is an obvious hyperbole that should not NECESSARILY be taken as advice that we should cut off body parts if we're having problems living a sinless life. Jesus is just trying to make the point that the avoidance of sin is preferable regardless of any drastic measures a person might need to take. Looking at porn, for example, could likely be remedies by going blind. But being blind is not going to cure the lust that inspires one to look at porn. That's a matter of the heart. A blind person CAN still be guilty of lust.
Some people will find it easier to commit adultery or lust than others, especially evidenced by all the virgins on WP.
Also, I think that autistic people can lust more easily since they have trouble paying attention to people's conversations but instead stares at random things or people and so one would easily be intrigued by a woman's body for example. But I might be wrong. I'm just guessing here.
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Some people will find it easier to commit adultery or lust than others, especially evidenced by all the virgins on WP.
Also, I think that autistic people can lust more easily since they have trouble paying attention to people's conversations but instead stares at random things or people and so one would easily be intrigued by a woman's body for example. But I might be wrong. I'm just guessing here.
I think it all depends on the person. Going strictly based on a Biblical worldview, I think that sinful nature is an inherited condition. Wouldn't it be interesting if they found the sin gene? The most notable example, and certainly the most VOCAL example are gay rights activists or supporters. The trend now, it seems, is that homosexuality is not a choice, but rather something we can be born with. Because the Bible lists homosexuality among many other sinful behaviors, and because the Bible makes the case for sin being an inherited condition, it only makes sense that there very well could be a "gay" gene. I don't mean to sound "intolerant," and this should not be understood as a statement of hatred--just conclusions I've drawn from reading and the current socio-political climate. I think it would be REALLY interesting if the same gene was found to cause other Biblically aberrant behavior, such as predisposition to, say, womanizing, lying, bullying, and so on.
Still, sin is sin and not excusable as far as the Bible is concerned. If there IS a sin gene, and we are indeed NOT in control of our faculties, then it follows that pedophilia, polygamy, slavery (a condition that arises from sin, but not labeled by the Bible as itself as sin--and yet not promoted, either), even MURDER would also have to be acceptable behaviors worthy of "tolerance." Good luck, of course, getting the majority of any population agreeing to THAT one!
But getting back to the point: I think that autistics and aspies are more susceptible to fixations on different things. I get the impression that many of the aspies here are rather neutral on the issue of sex. I've read posts in other WP forums that suggest that there are many who are actually repulsed by sex and physical contact in general. If they feel that way about it, then it ought to follow that they are least interested in it. If you get an Aspie like myself who is particularly fixated on Biblical study, avoiding sin OUGHT to be a comparatively easy endeavor (it's not). I think aspies would be more apt to avoid a wide range of sins most of us are guilty of. But some of those same aspies that avoid adultery, idolatry, lying, stealing, and so on, I would guess would be more susceptible to sinful pride, maybe even self-righteousness. Jesus had no trouble at all debating with the Pharisees, for example, and some have postulated that Jesus Himself was a Pharisee. The trouble He ran into with them was how prideful they were of their own intellect, knowledge, and following the letter of the law. Offend someone's pride and self-assuredness and you're itching for a beat-down--though if one persists in speaking the truth, this may only be an unfortunate consequence of doing what is right.
I would think aspies are more prone to fixation of more specific physical features, studying them rather than trying to form some sexual fantasy from them.
Alas, I'm not one of THOSE. *sigh*
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
In their hearts, they were hypocrites. They didn't follow the law in their hearts nor did they adhere to the SPIRIT of the law.
.
I beg your pardon. What counts is what people do. Having goodness in ones heart and not doing good, means good is not done. Having evil in ones heart and doing good means good is done.
That snippet shows the essential anti-semitism and Jew hatred implicit in Christianity.
ruveyn
There are plenty of Christians who are antisemitic, however that is not necessarily the case with Christianity itself or with all of the believers either. The people zer0netgain is speaking about, although he incorrectly overgeneralized as "the Jews" were the Pharisees, a sect of Judaism at the time. Have you read the Talmud or the other commentaries on the Talmud of which the Talmud is a commentary on the Tanakh? You know all the fences that are built in order to prevent the actions from occurring and all that sort, it's what Jesus referred to in Luke 11:37-54,
(38 ) And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner.
(39) And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
(40) Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?
(41) But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
(42) But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
(43) Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets.
(44) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them.
(45) Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
(46) And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
(47) Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
(48 ) Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
(49) Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:
(50) That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
(51) From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
(52) Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
(53) And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many things:
(54) Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him.
Some people will find it easier to commit adultery or lust than others, especially evidenced by all the virgins on WP.
Also, I think that autistic people can lust more easily since they have trouble paying attention to people's conversations but instead stares at random things or people and so one would easily be intrigued by a woman's body for example. But I might be wrong. I'm just guessing here.
I would think aspies are more prone to fixation of more specific physical features, studying them rather than trying to form some sexual fantasy from them.
Alas, I'm not one of THOSE. *sigh*
Well, I do get boners from those fantasies.
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
There are plenty of Christians who are antisemitic, however that is not necessarily the case with Christianity itself or with all of the believers either. The people zer0netgain is speaking about, although he incorrectly overgeneralized as "the Jews" were the Pharisees, a sect of Judaism at the time. Have you read the Talmud or the other commentaries on the Talmud of which the Talmud is a commentary on the Tanakh? You know all the fences that are built in order to prevent the actions from occurring and all that sort, it's what Jesus referred to in Luke 11:37-54,
(38 ) And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner.
(39) And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
(40) Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?
(41) But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
(42) But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
(43) Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets.
(44) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them.
(45) Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
(46) And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
(47) Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
(48 ) Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
(49) Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:
(50) That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
(51) From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
(52) Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
(53) And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many things:
(54) Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him.
You're killing me, 'keet! King James English in this period of history is just bad for the eyes and the head.
My apologies to all the English language and literature scholars out there. It really is beautiful speech...
...but then, so is Latin.
Something that is interesting to note is the idea of washing one's hands. I'd like to point out that personal cleanliness has often been a virtue of different cultures, some more than others. I don't read that text to mean that Jesus and his disciples failed to wash their hands. It's likely that their hands were washed to sufficient cleanness to take part in a meal.
The real issue is the way in which hands were to be washed. I think what Luke is saying is that Jesus and the disciples did not wash their hands according to a hand-washing ritual, not that they failed to wash their hands at all.
I need to read back through the OT to be sure, but I never recall reading about a hand-washing ritual that had to precede meals. The only bathing and purity rituals I recall reading about had to do with religious assemblies and rites. There was an incident with one of Aaron's relatives (one of his sons, maybe?) in which the family member died--maybe it was the "offering strange fire" incident. Obviously, the bodies had to be disposed of, which could not happen without touching the corpse. The trouble is that touching a corpse makes a person "unclean." Moses inquired as to why the priests themselves were not offering sacrifices at the appointed time, and they said that they had to wait until they were declared clean again after ritual bathing.
Any man or woman who had just had sex in the morning could not go to an assembly. They had to take a bath and wait until sunset when they would be declared clean (somehow I doubt they actually needed a priest for this ).
A woman had to take a ritual bath at a certain time after her period was over. It's quite possible this is what got King David in so much trouble during Bathsheba-gate.
But ceremonial hand-washing before meals? I'm not a student of the Talmud. But I do have to wonder if there was any written hand-washing law in the OT. I honestly do not recall ever seeing it.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
(37) et cum loqueretur rogavit illum quidam Pharisaeus ut pranderet apud se et ingressus recubuit
(38 ) Pharisaeus autem coepit intra se reputans dicere quare non baptizatus esset ante prandium
(39) et ait Dominus ad illum nunc vos Pharisaei quod de foris est calicis et catini mundatis quod autem intus est vestrum plenum est rapina et iniquitate
(40) stulti nonne qui fecit quod de foris est etiam id quod de intus est fecit
(41) verumtamen quod superest date elemosynam et ecce omnia munda sunt vobis
(42) sed vae vobis Pharisaeis quia decimatis mentam et rutam et omne holus et praeteritis iudicium et caritatem Dei haec autem oportuit facere et illa non omittere
(43) vae vobis Pharisaeis quia diligitis primas cathedras in synagogis et salutationes in foro
(44) vae vobis quia estis ut monumenta quae non parent et homines ambulantes supra nesciunt
(45) respondens autem quidam ex legis peritis ait illi magister haec dicens etiam nobis contumeliam facis
(46) at ille ait et vobis legis peritis vae quia oneratis homines oneribus quae portari non possunt et ipsi uno digito vestro non tangitis sarcinas
(47) vae vobis quia aedificatis monumenta prophetarum patres autem vestri occiderunt illos
(48 ) profecto testificamini quod consentitis operibus patrum vestrorum quoniam quidem ipsi eos occiderunt vos autem aedificatis eorum sepulchra
(49) propterea et sapientia Dei dixit mittam ad illos prophetas et apostolos et ex illis occident et persequentur
(50) ut inquiratur sanguis omnium prophetarum qui effusus est a constitutione mundi a generatione ista
(51) a sanguine Abel usque ad sanguinem Zacchariae qui periit inter altare et aedem ita dico vobis requiretur ab hac generatione
(52) vae vobis legis peritis quia tulistis clavem scientiae ipsi non introistis et eos qui introibant prohibuistis
(53) cum haec ad illos diceret coeperunt Pharisaei et legis periti graviter insistere et os eius opprimere de multis
(54) insidiantes et quaerentes capere aliquid ex ore eius ut accusarent eum