lonelybird Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Do today's people think that sexual immorality is against God? Roman 1:18: For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. Roman 1:24: Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, 1:25: because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever 1:28: And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. 1:29: They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, 1:30: slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, 1:31: foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. After die, our soul go to a place, a place where seperate from God is no fun. Repent and get peace with God. Link to post Share on other sites
lovelorcet Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 what exactly is sexual immorality? It seems you just pasted a bunch of pointless babble here... Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share Posted June 13, 2007 oops Mostly Adultery, perverted sex that sex go against natural intercourse (according to Bible) and sleep around without serious emotional investment Link to post Share on other sites
a4a Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 So this thread is partially about homosexuality and stating that they are evil and wicked? Who created these wicked people....... god did of course.... ooopsy guess god is not so perfect then. -if you believe in that. And obviously god condoned incest when it suited his/her desires. (I am sure Moai can provide you with quotes for this). Preaching hate for groups of people is not godly. Those that do are appropriately described in the statement below. 1:29: They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, and if god did not want straight people to have anal sex he would have moved the pooper out of range of the vagina....... sometimes things slip into the wrong place. a obvious design flaw. Link to post Share on other sites
a4a Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Yes if you are a woman and wear pants..... you are one of the main causes of sexual immorality. http://www.dividedbytruth.org/women_pants.htm LB do you wear pants? Here are some wholesome bathing suits......... http://www.wholesomewear.com/page-4.html Thank goodness because I have a pool party to go to soon! No need to worry about a bikini line! or cottage cheese thighs. :lmao::lmao::lmao: Link to post Share on other sites
Enema Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I don't think most people who commit adultery are overly concerned how god will react to it. As for "perverted sex". Nobody but myself and my partner has the right to decide for me what is and isn't ok sexually. Link to post Share on other sites
InsanityImpaired Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 "The first and only principle of sexual ethics: the accuser is always in the wrong." - T. Adorno I doubt immorality differs that much among different groups of believers or atheists. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Adultry is wrong because it is dishonest and a betrayel of somebody that is supposed to be able to trust you. It has nothing to do with sexuality or any of that. There is nothing wrong with sexuality as long as it is honest and you are not deceiving anybody. Link to post Share on other sites
Topper Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Every society, culture and religion determines defines their own sexual morality. For Tantric cults sex was a way to be closer to God and tune into your spiritual side. Orgasm is a seen as a very spiritual act. Eskimos would encourage guest to sleep with their wives. It was considered rude not to make that offer. Before the discovery of the Pacific Islands by Europeans, many Polynesian cultures were very free with their sexuality. young men were taught how to make love to a woman by older woman of the tribe. For thousands of years the Greeks thought nothing of homosexuality. bi sexuality was very common. Roman often looked to the Greeks for religion and culture. Roman also for a couple of thousand years had vary relaxed attitude toward sex. even the Jews of the old testament practised polygamy. God even commanded Moses to take sexual slaves. What we in the west consider moral by others is seen as corrupt and disgraceful. I have talked to Islamic woman who will tell you that by dressing modestly and not dressing sexy. they feel freer then Western woman because they don't feel the pressure to be seen only as a sex object. who is right and who is wrong? Link to post Share on other sites
Star Gazer Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Basically Lonelybird is saying that anything other than procreative sex (intercourse) between a husband and wife is "wicked" and G_d's wrath will befall us all. Bascially anyone who's given or received head even is bound for the infernos down below. I don't appreciate the preaching. Link to post Share on other sites
Topper Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 It's All Gods fault. He gave humans mouths and sex organs and an active imagination. Some caveman looked over at a cave woman and thought I wonder if this will fit into that? The cave woman was thinking sure feels good when i rub that little thing down there, wonder if his tongue would feel good ? Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 14, 2007 Author Share Posted June 14, 2007 Love person, but dislike the deeds, that's my point. you only check for yourself and own conscience, or ignore. Evil deeds will bring bad things in life. Not just consider for now, but also consider a little bit longer, for yourself. Link to post Share on other sites
lindya Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Do today's people think that sexual immorality is against God? I'm not sure what you mean by sexual immorality. If it's a case of believing that anyone who has sex outwith marriage is hell bound, then I'm with the majority that that's not a very healthy outlook to have on life. For some people, the act of having/enjoying sex might seem wrong whatever the circumstances. I've suddenly got a mental flash of Piper Lawrie on her knees throatily yelling about how the devil had got into her and Carrie's father one night "...and I liked it!" In that film, as I recall, Piper Lawrie ended up nailed to the wall like Jesus, smirking at the daughter whose life she'd destroyed with her obsessive piety. Is that morality? Or is it just a condition that Freud would have a field day with? Where I live, drugs are pushed incessantly and mercilessly at the most vulnerable members of society. They're the ones who get caught up in prostitution. Is that immoral of them, Lonely Bird, or are they just unfortunate in their circumstances - and in the ability and means that they have to pursue other lifestyle options? To me, immorality - if it has to have a definition - defines the behaviour of those who are out for themselves and don't care who they hurt as long as hey get what they're looking for. Sometimes sex gets caught up in that kind of behaviour, as in people using their sexuality as a means of obtaining power which they intend to abuse. In those cases, maybe sex could be described as immoral - but I don't think it's the act itself; I think it's the "As long as I get what I want, I don't give a f*ck about anyone else" hardness that's....well, maybe not immoral (I hate that word). It is pretty ugly to watch, though. Link to post Share on other sites
Herzen Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I'm not sure what you mean by sexual immorality. If it's a case of believing that anyone who has sex outwith marriage is hell bound, then I'm with the majority that that's not a very healthy outlook to have on life. For some people, the act of having/enjoying sex might seem wrong whatever the circumstances. I've suddenly got a mental flash of Piper Lawrie on her knees throatily yelling about how the devil had got into her and Carrie's father one night "...and I liked it!" In that film, as I recall, Piper Lawrie ended up nailed to the wall like Jesus, smirking at the daughter whose life she'd destroyed with her obsessive piety. Is that morality? Or is it just a condition that Freud would have a field day with? Where I live, drugs are pushed incessantly and mercilessly at the most vulnerable members of society. They're the ones who get caught up in prostitution. Is that immoral of them, Lonely Bird, or are they just unfortunate in their circumstances - and in the ability and means that they have to pursue other lifestyle options? To me, immorality - if it has to have a definition - defines the behaviour of those who are out for themselves and don't care who they hurt as long as hey get what they're looking for. Sometimes sex gets caught up in that kind of behaviour, as in people using their sexuality as a means of obtaining power which they intend to abuse. In those cases, maybe sex could be described as immoral - but I don't think it's the act itself; I think it's the "As long as I get what I want, I don't give a f*ck about anyone else" hardness that's....well, maybe not immoral (I hate that word). It is pretty ugly to watch, though. Is yesterday's "immorality" today's "sociopathy"? By your definition it is. Sociopaths are often described as interested only in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behavior on others. It's this blithe disregard for the harm caused others that's the new immorality. We see it here, when unrepentant other women get attacked not for being "immoral" or for "sinning" but for being selfish and indifferent to the harm their behavior causes the betrayed spouse. In fact, the label "sociopath" is probably used on LS more than "sinner" to describe unapologetic adulterous behavior. Under this secular humanistic, medical model, sociopaths replace sinners as the out group. God's law isn't broken; standards of decency, integrity, mental health, maturity and humanity are flouted.One is not so much damned as labeled neurotic. Which model do I prefer: the Religious or Mental Health Model? Probably neither. It's vocabulary to me. Some types of extremely odious behavior need to be condemned, censored and trashed by the "community" and whether this is done in the name of God or Mental Hygiene makes no difference to me. Now Sharia (Iran wants to execute all the porn stars)does scare me, but that discussion is for another time. While we have a clash of paradigms--Minister vs.Therapist; Bible vs. DSM-- it's still all about normative standards. Link to post Share on other sites
lindya Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Is yesterday's "immorality" today's "sociopathy"? By your definition it is. I wouldn't necessarily agree with that part of your post. I don't think the fact that a person seems self-centred and disregarding of other people's feelings automatically makes them a sociopath. Some people will care a great deal about a few people close to them, and not at all about anyone else. To the others outside their immediate circle they might seem "sociopathic"...but those close to them might see a very different side. Nonetheless, to the people they don't care about they might continue to be/seem pretty sh*tty characters. People will often tend to label as sociopathic or narcissistic anyone who simply didn't care about them. I think the people who are trained to make those diagnoses would tend to take more of an objective approach and examine all aspects of a person's life, relationships and general functioning before thinking about applying those labels. We see it here, when unrepentant other women get attacked not for being "immoral" or for "sinning" but for being selfish and indifferent to the harm their behavior causes the betrayed spouse. In fact, the label "sociopath" is probably used on LS more than "sinner" to describe unapologetic adulterous behavior. Yes, I've seen that happen a few times. I see that as a defensive thing. If someone says something that you find upsetting and offensive, a way of dealing with that can involve adopting some clinical, professional stance. Diagnosing the person. I do it myself sometimes. It can be a useful coping mechanism - but not always a particularly honest one. Under this secular humanistic, medical model, sociopaths replace sinners as the out group. God's law isn't broken; standards of decency, integrity, mental health, maturity and humanity are flouted.One is not so much damned as labeled neurotic. Boils down to a similar thing though. "He/she has been taken over by the devil". From which can flow the reasoning "it's not their fault...they can't help it." Then people get to switch from persecutor ("that sociopathic bastard") to rescuer: "This poor, much misunderstood soul can be cured by God/a psychiatrist/Wonderful, unceasingly compassionate Me!". There's no end to the fun and drama to be had from such scenarios. Link to post Share on other sites
Herzen Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I see that as a defensive thing. If someone says something that you find upsetting and offensive, a way of dealing with that can involve adopting some clinical, professional stance. Diagnosing the person. I do it myself sometimes. It can be a useful coping mechanism - but not always a particularly honest one. Interesting: "Diagnosis" as a form of judgment and defense mechanism. Which do I dislike more:being condemned as a "sinner" or diagnosed as a "sociopath"? What stings more? That depends on which paradigm carries more meaning in my belief system. As a secular humanist, "sinner" has lost its sting. And since I'm no longer big into the medical model, so has "sociopath": Neither Priest nor Therapist. I'm in search of a new normative vocabulary and model. Link to post Share on other sites
pureinheart Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 So this thread is partially about homosexuality and stating that they are evil and wicked? No, not from what I read....it is concerning sexual immorality, no matter what the form. Who created these wicked people....... god did of course.... ooopsy guess god is not so perfect then. -if you believe in that. God created and still creates all things and people under the sun and above. People choose to be evil, God gave us a free will. And obviously god condoned incest when it suited his/her desires. (I am sure Moai can provide you with quotes for this). No Preaching hate for groups of people is not godly. Those that do are appropriately described in the statement below. 1:29: They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, and if god did not want straight people to have anal sex he would have moved the pooper out of range of the vagina....... sometimes things slip into the wrong place. a obvious design flaw. This is an un called for statement..... Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 15, 2007 Author Share Posted June 15, 2007 I'm not sure what you mean by sexual immorality. If it's a case of believing that anyone who has sex outwith marriage is hell bound, then I'm with the majority that that's not a very healthy outlook to have on life. For some people, the act of having/enjoying sex might seem wrong whatever the circumstances. I've suddenly got a mental flash of Piper Lawrie on her knees throatily yelling about how the devil had got into her and Carrie's father one night "...and I liked it!" In that film, as I recall, Piper Lawrie ended up nailed to the wall like Jesus, smirking at the daughter whose life she'd destroyed with her obsessive piety. Is that morality? Or is it just a condition that Freud would have a field day with? Where I live, drugs are pushed incessantly and mercilessly at the most vulnerable members of society. They're the ones who get caught up in prostitution. Is that immoral of them, Lonely Bird, or are they just unfortunate in their circumstances - and in the ability and means that they have to pursue other lifestyle options? To me, immorality - if it has to have a definition - defines the behaviour of those who are out for themselves and don't care who they hurt as long as hey get what they're looking for. Sometimes sex gets caught up in that kind of behaviour, as in people using their sexuality as a means of obtaining power which they intend to abuse. In those cases, maybe sex could be described as immoral - but I don't think it's the act itself; I think it's the "As long as I get what I want, I don't give a f*ck about anyone else" hardness that's....well, maybe not immoral (I hate that word). It is pretty ugly to watch, though. Freud's theory I feel desperation in it, no hope. Okay, many prostitutes have to do it because of unfortunate circumstances, they can NOT choose, that's not what I talked about. But those who can choose, it is good to change their job. we are all sinners, one sinner is not different than another. We ask God for forgiveness, He will do it. God always has compassionate heart for broken hearts. any person can call on God for mercy and forgiveness no matter what the past was, and God will answer them and love them no different than others. God loves a repentant heart. Lindya, you said as long as sex won't hurt others all sex are ok. You assume that there isn't a God. But there is, I know Freud's theory push God out of our lifes, but God does exist. and Freud is a human, his theory is NOT perfect. Sex within marriage are guaranteed "not sinful, rather godly", and Bible teach after marriage, husband and wife no longer has authority on their own body, but seek to please another, don't hold back if another ask for it. If a person have 100% energy, and he put most of energy on looking at porn or sleep around, or how to achieve *diversity*, then how many energy he left to consider spiritual things? Set mind on flesh, reap in flesh; but set mind on Spiritual things, reap in Spiritual things. Society changed, but God doesn't. People want to justify to suit themselves and less the guilty, but can they? God wrote his living laws in human hearts. that's where our conscience come from. As long as we do things against God's laws, we feel guilty. As best as we can cheat ourselves, in the end we cannot. Obey God and God's commandments bring peace, true rejoice and confidence to people's hearts that nothing those sex immority activity can bring. Why do some people easily be cheated by others all the time? because they cheat themselves often. they justify their deeds. God gave them the gift --clear conscience-- to discern what themselves and other people are, but they numb their conscience that they finally cannot discern others as well Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 I am sexually immoral...and I will burn in hell!!!! I am not a religious person... I also hate the 'preaching'. Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 15, 2007 Author Share Posted June 15, 2007 I am sexually immoral...and I will burn in hell!!!! I am not a religious person... I also hate the 'preaching'. Whoever call on Lord, she/he would be saved. Lord can forget and forgive all our sinns as long as we heartly repent. Link to post Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Whoever call on Lord, she/he would be saved. Lord can forget and forgive all our sinns as long as we heartly repent. why this bird's lonely. LB, it's all well and good to have faith and the power of your convictions but I believe the Lord was the one who claimed vengeance. Therefore, your rampant condemnations are not necessary. Seems to me He addressed casting stones as well. Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 15, 2007 Author Share Posted June 15, 2007 why this bird's lonely. LB, it's all well and good to have faith and the power of your convictions but I believe the Lord was the one who claimed vengeance. Therefore, your rampant condemnations are not necessary. Seems to me He addressed casting stones as well. The purpose of Casting stones is to put people to death. But warning the deeds that agaist God is SAVING, saving people from going to hell. Repentance is saving. And too many people got caught on "self-righteousness" Link to post Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 The purpose of Casting stones is to put people to death. But warning the deeds that agaist God is SAVING, saving people from going to hell. Repentance is saving. And too many people got caught on "self-righteousness" There's this little part in scripture that says something to the effect of, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." That was the allusion. Link to post Share on other sites
alphamale Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Do today's people think that sexual immorality is against God? If God exists then it probably is Link to post Share on other sites
Author lonelybird Posted June 15, 2007 Author Share Posted June 15, 2007 There's this little part in scripture that says something to the effect of, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." That was the allusion. Bible also teach "bless those who obey the commandments, and tell others to do so" :) Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts