@ deep sight


you're talking at cross purposes here.

Nobody said intimacy isnt beneficial and natural.

But there's nothing wrong if someone decides not to have intimacy for a while. People have various reasons for doing things.

what's wrong with the picture is their playing with each other's emotions for 5 years.

davidylan:

the usual red herring we use to justify fornication. I'm no saint by any means but this does not wash. What if you find out you're not sexually compatible with the first 3-5 women you met? How many are you going to "test drive" before you finally decide on one?

As many as necessary. Marraige is a lifetime commitment and it makes no sense to take chances with it.

Sexual incompatibity has destroyed countless marriages. It is also a leading cause of infidelity.

If you are prepared to sign a transaction without conducting due-diligence beforehand, good luck to you.

what is sexual incompatibility?

more often than not that's a woman's complaint, not a man's. Meaning the woman will be the one complaining about the partner's lack of performance or whatever.

For the man, the only major problem is if he says the woman is relatively unresponsive. For most men, outside of that, they're home free and good to go.

Deep Sight:

As many as necessary. Marraige is a lifetime commitment and it makes no sense to take chances with it.

Sexual incompatibity has destroyed countless marriages. It is also a leading cause of infidelity.

If you are prepared to sign a transaction without conducting due-diligence beforehand, good luck to you.

And how many marriages where the partners are sexually compatible are still standing today?   If sexual compatibility was all it took to make a marriage then i guess porn stars would have the most successful marriages of all time.

Marriage is a lifetime commitment, it is also a spiritual relationship that does not revolve 100% around sex.

davidylan and a few others have hit the nail on the head.
@ the poster,5 years is too long to be engaged to a person or be with a person without marriage.
what are you folks waiting for?
any engagement longer than one year in my books is not worth it.
Get married and make it legal.

davidylan:

And how many marriages where the partners are sexually compatible are still standing today? If sexual compatibility was all it took to make a marriage then i guess indecency stars would have the most successful marriages of all time.

Marriage is a lifetime commitment, it is also a spiritual relationship that does not revolve 100% around intimacy.

DAVID - I NEVER said it was all about intimacy so don't misquote me Mister.

I said s.ex is a huge component for a successful marriage.

If you don't think so try marrying a frigid woman.

You never hala.

Deep Sight:

DAVID - I NEVER said it was all about intimacy so don't misquote me Mister.

I said s.ex is a huge component for a successful marriage.

If you don't think so try marrying a frigid woman.

You never hala.

But sexual incompatibility is enough to stop you from marrying someone you love right?

But it isnt all about sex right?

0hsisi:


Get married and make it legal.

What is the meaning of this? ? ?

Whoever told you that pre-marital s.ex is illegal? ? ?

Deep Sight:

WRONG - It was VERY unfair of you to bring something that is accepted as negative and harmful and compare that thing to intimacy. intimacy is altogether beneficial and natural.

Besides i could stretch the argument further. Anger is natural.

You yourself noted the element of provocation. It is natural to be angry whne provoked.

Let me offer you some provocation. You walk into your house and see Abuzola rapi.ng your six-year old daughter.

Will you resist the natural anger that arises withoin you?

If you would not resist that, then why should you resist the equally natural urge for intimacy? ? ?

Anger is natural. Whether it is positive or negative does not change that. Also, releasing anger is healthy . . and being healthy is positive.

So, technically, knocking a mother fuka out is healthy if you are angry.    Seduction may be form of provocation. The point isn't about what is felt, but how it is acted on.


But what it seems u are saying is that our natural instincts should not be suppressed as long as they are positive. .  whatever the consequences of acting on these "instincts" are. I think that is ridiculous.

There are benefits to intimacy, and there are benefits to abstinence. The individual must sort it out for him or her self. This your "natural" criterion for how humans should behave is nonsense, IMO, simply because we are rational beings. We are not slaves to instincts. We think things through and make decisions based on our individual values, motives, or whatever.

Like you said intimacy is important for relationships to be healthy so one might want to test drive the goods before a life-long commitment. But that is an individual choice. This "natural" argument u are making doesn't add up, and u seem to just be shifting goal post once an objection is made.

Your argument was that it is a natural urge and should not be suppressed. That has been shown to be ridiculous.

davidylan:

But sexual incompatibility is enough to stop you from marrying someone you love right?

But it isnt all about intimacy right?

Just go and try marrying a frigid woman. You will come back to me and confess pronto! ! !

What sort of love is that? A woman loves me and she can't get down with me?

Puhleaaase!

Deep Sight:

Just go and try marrying a frigid woman. You will come back to me and confess pronto! ! !

What sort of love is that? A woman loves me and she can't get down with me?

Puhleaaase!

makes no sense to me . . . so her frigidity is enough for you to throw her away? I dont think you ever loved her in the first place.

Krayola:


Anger is natural. Whether it is positive or negative does not change that. Also, releasing anger is healthy . . and being healthy is positive.

So, technically, knocking a mother fuka out is healthy if you are angry.    Seduction may be form of provocation. The point isn't about what is felt, but how it is acted on.


But what it seems u are saying is that our natural instincts should not be suppressed as long as they are positive. .  whatever the consequences of acting on these "instincts" are. I think that is ridiculous.

There are benefits to intimacy, and there are benefits to abstinence. The individual must sort it out for him or her self. This your "natural" criterion for how humans should behave is nonsense, IMO, simply because we are rational beings. We are not slaves to instincts. We think things through and make decisions based on our individual values, motives, or whatever.

Like you said intimacy is important for relationships to be healthy so one might want to test drive the goods before a life-long commitment. But that is an individual choice. This "natural" argument u are making doesn't add up, and u seem to just be shifting goal post once an objection is made.

Your argument was that it is a natural urge and should not be suppressed. That has been shown to be ridiculous.  

I cant really see that deepsight has anything left to say after this.

frigid woman= clueless man

Krayola:


Anger is natural. Whether it is positive or negative does not change that. Also, releasing anger is healthy . . and being healthy is positive.

So, technically, knocking a mother fuka out is healthy if you are angry.    Seduction may be form of provocation. The point isn't about what is felt, but how it is acted on.


But what it seems u are saying is that our natural instincts should not be suppressed as long as they are positive. .  whatever the consequences of acting on these "instincts" are. I think that is ridiculous.

There are benefits to intimacy, and there are benefits to abstinence. The individual must sort it out for him or her self. This your "natural" criterion for how humans should behave is nonsense, IMO, simply because we are rational beings. We are not slaves to instincts. We think things through and make decisions based on our individual values, motives, or whatever.

Like you said intimacy is important for relationships to be healthy so one might want to test drive the goods before a life-long commitment. But that is an individual choice. But this "natural" argument u are making doesn't add up, and u seem to just be shifting goal post once an objection is made.

Your argument was that it is a natural urge and should not be suppressed. That has been shown to be ridiculous.  

What are you on about, Krayola?

If a man is starving, would you advise him to shun food?

Simple!

Besides you have answered your own question when you stated -

But what it seems u are saying is that our natural instincts should not be suppressed as long as they are positive. .

- Which encapsulates a balance between passion and reason, so what else is there? ? ?

estrella:

I'm a young lady who loves God and is trying to walk with him as honestly as I can.

In truth - and if true - you are blessed and the recipient of grace. But there will be tribulations to all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus.

estrella:

I have one problem however;

Just the one? Envious looks all round

estrella:

i feel extremely carnal when I am around my fiance!

If you mean "feel carnal" as in "physically attracted to", that is to be expected and even welcomed if he is your fiance - that is you are engaged to be married no?

If you mean "feel carnal" as in you act on those feelings, that is another matter entirely.

estrella:

we have been together for over five years now and we are talking about getitng married.

So are you, or are you not engaged? Are you what is known as boyfriend/girlfriend, engaged, or courting? As has been noted, 5 years is a long time to be in a close relationship without completion. In all but extreme cases, it would be described as folly. Are you old enough and physically and psychologically mature enough to marry? Do you understand the institution, the expectations, the roles and responsibilities, the holiness and beauty of the God-given covenant? If so and if you are agreed, please send out invites.

estrella:

We made a vow to keep ourselves till we get married

Vow or no vow, that is the expectation as a god-fearing, Christ loving Christian. Non-negotiable

estrella:

and even imposed a no kissing rule, just hugs.

Given Christian licence, I wouldn't fault that, but if you are weak and it leads into "no go" areas, then you are just settng yourself up for a fall and the consequent problems.

estrella:

however,we have broken that rule a couple of times and its mostly because we both have mad chemistry. A peck can cause as much damage as a french kiss for both of us.

The chemistry does not alter the expectation. You should not allow it or use it as an excuse to alter the dynamic. As previous, don't set yourself up.

estrella:

The thing is,when he isn't around me,Im perfectly fine.I feel like Im making progress with God,I read my bible and Im on a lovely spiritual plane.

Fortify yourself here. My experience, was this;
1. Believe abstinence whilst single is what God expects
2. Renew your mind and let this be your express will - matching His
3. Trust God for the grace to resist and to change
4. Don't take the grace of God for granted or tempt Him (yourself) by being in settings that could make you stumble
5. Persevere

estrella:

The minute he comes around,I always have to fight the urge to sleep with him.

If that is an error you have made or repeatedly made, I would suggest you go back to my point above and even before.
1. Take a long hard look at yourself and consider "do you really love God"? That doesn't mean you love singing or any other a number of other things people tranlate loving God too mean. It means;

a. Trusting
b. Believing
c commiting
d. Obeying

2. Genuinely repent and commit the issue to God. Don't make promises - you mentioned a vow earlier, no? - just ask for forgiveness and help. Cast yourself on Him and ask for mercy and grace.

estrella:

I think thoughts that shock even me when i see him and it bothers me greatly.I don't feel this way for any other person except him

What should bother you are your actions as a result of those thoughts and if you are "seeing him" in settings that are conducive to those actions being the wrong one's. Flee temptation.

estrella:

As a christian, does this make me carnal?

Christianity is a journey. And every walk is individual. Until one becomes "as He was in this world" we are to a degree carnal/immature. You said earlier this was your "one problem", its a biggie, but not for Him. Recognising the desire to act on the urge as carnal is right though. If you try and sell yourself the notion that acting on it is godly, you could exacerbate things.

estrella:

does this mean I'm not really born again? Is it wrong for me to want him the  way I do? please I need the advice of mature christians,

1. There are varying understandings and uses of of born again, suffice to say you are a believer and put your faith in Christ?
2. The desire is God given and not wrong in itself. Satisfying it out of the God given context of marital union is.
3. What you need more is a true desire to follow and grace to obey. In taking advise, please seperate the wheat from the chaff.

Apart from the vow - which is not really operative - you said little about the man in question? Is he a believer? If I were to query him on maturity, understanding etc as I did you earlier, I would question his readiness as a man to be a husband. Men are supposed to take responsibility physically and spiritually. You have said nothing to suggest he is doing that?

Apologies is my replies come across as perfunctory or harsh. I am in no way condemnin or judging you, just giving my best response to the situation as outlined. But I wouldn't wan to wink at this weither. I would hope the counsel is to a degree generic.

I wish you well in your walk and a deeper love for The Lord. And I hope you are able to regularise the relationship however it develops.

God bless
TV

tpia.:

frigid woman= clueless man

That may be sometimes true, Tpia - but in reality there are many women who are actually and truly frigid.

What's to be done with such a woman/

Tell me her man would not definitely seek solace outside the marriage? ? ?

And would you blame him?

Deep Sight:

What are you on about, Krayola?

If a man is starving, would you advise him to shun food?

Simple!

Besides you have answered your own question when you stated -


- Which encapsulates a balance between passion and reason, so what else is there? ? ?

I dont think you are thoroughly understanding Krayola's point . . . perhaps that is deliberate on your part.

He is not saying that we shld shun our nature, he is only saying that being able to control our instincts based on whether they will have positive or negative consequences is what differentiates us from lower animals.

You brought up a false analogy, eating is not an instinct . . . it is a requirement for survival. I can be celibate and live a fully normal life . . . you cant refuse to eat or breathe and continue to exist.

tpia.:

frigid woman= clueless man

Well said.

Quote from TV01 -

Believe abstinence whilst single is what God expects

What is the meaning of this? ? ?

If God expected abstinence while single, why did he give the hormones that cause the powerful sexual urge? ? ?

ABSTINENCE IS UNNATURAL AND AS SUCH CANNOT BE SAID TO BE THE WILL OF GOD.

Deep Sight:

That may be sometimes true, Tpia - but in reality there are many women who are actually and truly frigid.

What's to be done with such a woman/

Tell me her man would not definitely seek solace outside the marriage? ? ?

And would you blame him?

never met any woman like that.

I've read of instances mainly related to different types of trauma, but in Nigeria especially, I've never in my life met any woman who was excessively frigid. Most times, the man simply has no idea what real intimacy entails.

In one of the instances I read about, the woman had medical help-maybe surgery- and got better, while in another, the man didnt seem to mind. Both were oyibo however.


btw, your starvation analogy is rather offbase because while you can starve to death from lack of food, you dont die from lack of or delayed intimacy.

davidylan:

makes no sense to me . . . so her frigidity is enough for you to throw her away? I dont think you ever loved her in the first place.

It is clear to me you have never come across a frigid woman before.

Deep Sight:

Quote from TV01 -

What is the meaning of this? ? ?

If God expected abstinence while single, why did he give the hormones that cause the powerful sexual urge? ? ?

ABSTINENCE IS UNNATURAL AND AS SUCH CANNOT BE SAID TO BE THE WILL OF GOD.

I dont think you are even bothering to reason through your own comments before posting. What does the above in highlights mean? So God shld have only given us the hormones AFTER the wedding?

Are you trying to indicate that man is an animal that cannot control his instincts?

Krayola:


Anger is natural. Whether it is positive or negative does not change that. Also, releasing anger is healthy . . and being healthy is positive.

So, technically, knocking a mother fuka out is healthy if you are angry.    Seduction may be form of provocation. The point isn't about what is felt, but how it is acted on.


But what it seems u are saying is that our natural instincts should not be suppressed as long as they are positive. .  whatever the consequences of acting on these "instincts" are. I think that is ridiculous.

There are benefits to intimacy, and there are benefits to abstinence. The individual must sort it out for him or her self. This your "natural" criterion for how humans should behave is nonsense, IMO, simply because we are rational beings. We are not slaves to instincts. We think things through and make decisions based on our individual values, motives, or whatever.

Like you said intimacy is important for relationships to be healthy so one might want to test drive the goods before a life-long commitment. But that is an individual choice. This "natural" argument u are making doesn't add up, and u seem to just be shifting goal post once an objection is made.

Your argument was that it is a natural urge and should not be suppressed. That has been shown to be ridiculous.  

Krayola I am witholding with considerable effort the kudos I was going to lavish on you for this solid response.

 TV, as usual you have provided a full course gourmet meal. Nuthin else need to added.

Deep Sight:

It is clear to me you have never come across a frigid woman before.

If you know what to do, you cant be with a frigid woman and leave her the same.

davidylan:


You brought up a false analogy, eating is not an instinct . . . it is a requirement for survival. I can be celibate and live a fully normal life . . . you cant refuse to eat or breathe and continue to exist.

tpia.:


btw, your starvation analogy is rather offbase because while you can starve to death from lack of food, you dont die from lack of or delayed intimacy.

YOU ARE BOTH WRONG:

1. Sex is just as integral to survival of the human race as food is. We would have been extinct eons ago without sex.

2.  The science of the human body shows us that if a man does not have sex regularly, he will suffer a build-up of semen within his scrotal sack and the body will contrive a force ejection of the semen usually through a wet dream.

THIS IS IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE THAT NATURE DESIGNED MEN TO HAVE REGULAR INTERCOURSE. THE VERY FACT THAT THIS HAPPENS THROUGH WET DREAMS FURTHER UNDERSCORES THE PSYCOLOGICAL HARM BEING DONE TO THE PERSON ON ACCOUNT OF THE MANIFESTLY UNNATURAL CONCEPT OF ABSTINENCE.

^^ nah, not so.

Build up of sputum culminates in its being ejected forcefully from the body- doesnt mean there's psychological harm done to the person in whatever event. Likewise sweat.

lack of intimacy isnt the same thing as starvation. You absolutely dont die from not having intimacy at a particular time.

The human race still survives since people have intimacy during and outside marriage, which is the reason for this thread in the first place.

we're arguing in circles now.

besides, ejecting semen from the body is all right for the man, but the person who has to receive all that nko? Do you know how much bodily fluid exactly is produced by the human body?

Its far easier to pour but not always as easy for the receiver.

davidylan:

I dont think you are even bothering to reason through your own comments before posting. What does the above in highlights mean? So God shld have only given us the hormones AFTER the wedding?

Are you trying to indicate that man is an animal that cannot control his instincts?

Be serious. Nobody is suggesting that.

I am saying that teh fact of the presence of the hormones is evidence that the desire which they spark was meant by the creator to be used. The idea that such NATURAL desires should be suppressed is nothing but a HUMAN MORALISTIC presumption.

God does not create things purposelessly. Thus is teh hormones are there; then nature is telling you to use them.

What can you say about semen build-up in men who are astaining? Irrefutable evidence that abstinence IS UNNATURAL.

Deep Sight:

YOU ARE BOTH WRONG:

1. intimacy is just as integral to survival of the human race as food is. We would have been extinct eons ago without intimacy.

Fallacy. Se.x is integral to the human race in terms of replenishing its own stock . . . it is NOT the same as food. Food is ABSOLUTELY important to the survival of the individual. A human can remain celibate for life and never suffer any negative consequences.

Deep Sight:

2.  The science of the human body shows us that if a man does not have intimacy regularly, he will suffer a build-up of semen within his scrotal sack and the body will contrive a force ejection of the semen usually through a wet dream.

And?   What does this prove? That man is designed in such a way that we eliminate what the body does not make use of? Build up of toxins in the body is also released through sweat or eliminated in the kidneys through urine. Do wet dreams kill anyone?

Deep Sight:

THIS IS IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE THAT NATURE DESIGNED MEN TO HAVE REGULAR INTERCOURSE. THE VERY FACT THAT THIS HAPPENS THROUGH WET DREAMS FURTHER UNDERSCORES THE PSYCOLOGICAL HARM BEING DONE TO THE PERSON ON ACCOUNT OF THE MANIFESTLY UNNATURAL CONCEPT OF ABSTINENCE.

This is BS dude.

Deep Sight:

Be serious. Nobody is suggesting that.

I am saying that teh fact of the presence of the hormones is evidence that the desire which they spark was meant by the creator to be used. The idea that such NATURAL desires should be suppressed is nothing but a HUMAN MORALISTIC presumption.

God does not create things purposelessly. Thus is teh hormones are there; then nature is telling you to use them.

What can you say about semen build-up in men who are astaining? Irrefutable evidence that abstinence IS UNNATURAL.

Does the fact that a 6 yr old boy has a functional pen.is mean its is naturally ok for a 6yr old to have se.x?

Deep Sight:

Be serious. Nobody is suggesting that.

I am saying that teh fact of the presence of the hormones is evidence that the desire which they spark was meant by the creator to be used. The idea that such NATURAL desires should be suppressed is nothing but a HUMAN MORALISTIC presumption.

God does not create things purposelessly. Thus is teh hormones are there; then nature is telling you to use them.

What can you say about semen build-up in men who are astaining? Irrefutable evidence that abstinence IS UNNATURAL.

no one has said hormones shouldnt be used.

You're imagining things, seriously.

tpia.:


lack of intimacy isnt the same thing as starvation. You absolutely dont die from not having intimacy at a particular time.

And who specified the "particular time" that is appropriate for s.ex?

Bingo - HUMANS.

The sexual hormones come on strong at about puberty. That is the time nature has specified.

CLEARLY - That is the time God has specified as being appropriate to commence s.exu.al actions.

It is YOU HUMANS that have criminalized natures dictates.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

Thus if Nature intended people to have s.ex only during marriage, puberty would probably arise at an age when people are mature enough for marriage!

You can thus see that marriage itself has no NATURAL CO-RELATION to the se.xual instinct.
neither you nor davidylan nor a million moralistic christinans can claim that!

davidylan:

Does the fact that a 6 yr old boy has a functional pen.is mean its is naturally ok for a 6yr old to have se.x?

Get serious. Sexual maturity sets in at puberty, and as a scientist you are fully aware of that.

Deep Sight:

And who specified the "particular time" that is appropriate for s.ex?

Bingo - HUMANS.

The sexual hormones come on strong at about puberty. That is the time nature has specified.

CLEARLY - That is the time God has specified as being appropriate to commence s.exu.al actions.

It is YOU HUMANS that have criminalized natures dictates.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

Thus if Nature intended people to have s.ex only during marriage, puberty would probably arise at an age when people are mature enough for marriage!

You can thus see that marriage itself has no NATURAL CO-RELATION to the se.xual instinct.
neither you nor davidylan nor a million moralistic christinans can claim that!

@ bolded- that's an individual choice. Not all Christians practice abstinence anyway, so no need to get upset. No one is forcing anybody not to have intimacy, as far as I know. However, if someone decides to delay intimacy for any reason, then that's not a crime. You dont have to be religious to be celibate.




@ the rest: intimacy hormones arent only for getting people Hot and having intimacy. They have other functions in the body.

i dont get your marriage example. Can you explain that.