srigdon
Eucharistic Assistant
Posts: 214
|
Post by srigdon on May 6, 2008 18:51:43 GMT -5
youth today question the relevance of Christianity.
What is the support for this assertion?
Go visit some evangelical megachurches. There are gazillions of youth there.
The idea that somehow the conservatives are doddering old men of a previous generation is just absurd.
|
|
|
Post by seeker on Mar 8, 2009 15:09:39 GMT -5
It is best to wait. If you absolutely cannot wait, at least protect yourself and at least be somewhat prudent. Don't sleeper yourself around, but young couples who are in love and not married, but PLAN to marry each other will, for the most part, engage in sex before marriage. It is simply a matter of life. People are humans with emotions and humans are flawed. God knows this but still loves and understands and heals all wounds. Peace.
|
|
mewg
Acolyte
Posts: 27
|
Post by mewg on Feb 17, 2010 8:03:27 GMT -5
I have always wondered---why did Jesus apparently condone the living arragements of. the 'woman at the well" He never suggested she change them but rather asked her to tell people about Him. Telling her He knew all about her seems rather parentetical sort of like saying BTW you had kippers for breakfast.
|
|
srigdon
Eucharistic Assistant
Posts: 214
|
Post by srigdon on Feb 17, 2010 18:47:02 GMT -5
What the woman was doing was probably a capital crime, and Jesus revealed he knew about it. Think how it would feel to have somebody come up to you and tell you in detail about crimes you committed.
Jesus could have blackmailed her. But he doesn't. He immediately starts talking about HIS water. Why does he think she needs it? Does it seems reasonable that the water has something to do with what he was just talking about?
|
|
mewg
Acolyte
Posts: 27
|
Post by mewg on Feb 18, 2010 11:36:16 GMT -5
I'm sure Jesus did not think she needed His water more tham everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by askned on Mar 25, 2013 12:29:10 GMT -5
What answer are you expecting on a church forum? No of course premarital sex is not OK. But that is not to say that it isn't common or even prevelant.
The issue with premartital sex-other than premarital pregancy or venereal disease- is primarily Spiritual. Scritpure says that when one cleaves to another they become one in the flesh and one in the spirit. So add a few other sexual partners that you join with in the spirit and you get quite a spiritual mess going on. Many voices, many problems.
If you can stay pure until marriage you will be happy you did. I did not and am sorry about it....
|
|
|
Post by danieledozie on Oct 30, 2013 7:25:54 GMT -5
any one involve in such need not to be criticized but sympathized with and helped in prayers.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jul 24, 2014 8:13:24 GMT -5
I'm new to the church, and can't claim to speak for them, but I don't think it's right. But just because it isn't right doesn't give me the right to judge those that do it.
|
|
|
Post by Kels on Sept 8, 2014 21:23:30 GMT -5
Hello All,
I was raised Catholic and as you may guess pre-marital sex is a big fat NO. As an individual with my own thoughts, I don't fully believe that pre-marital sex is bad. I believe that it is wrong to run around and have sex with whomever you like whenever you like and there are probably some underlying issues; this goes for both men and women. It's not a matter of men taking advantage of women because often times the women are fully consenting to have sex with someone they hardly know, so maybe in some cases like these the women are really the ones who are taking advantage of the men? There is a flip side to this multi-faceted issue. I also think that pre-marital sex can be good for individuals who are in a serious or committed relationship, by committed I do not mean engaged or promised I mean something more along the lines of these couples have been dating for some time and both wish to have sex. Of course these two individuals should have safe sex and be aware of the possible consequences.
To make myself clear, I don't believe that teachings of the bible (which I have heard all my life) are wrong but they are not current or changing as society changes. For example, in the case of homosexuals, these people are not diseased and have nothing wrong with them. Science shows that individuals who are homosexual have brains that shaped differently and work differently, but people tend to turn a blind eye to this because it means that God has made these people this way and the bible does not have a direct answer to the issue. I believe that in these cases that we do as Jesus did, be tolerate and love everyone equally. Time as progressed and society is not as simple as it was back then. We have more knowledge and technology and so shouldn't we has people progress in our beliefs as well?
Do not hold so tight to one teaching that you forget all the others.
May love and peace be with you all.
|
|
|
Post by Curious Catholic on Aug 17, 2016 11:24:42 GMT -5
I myself am kind of curiously wandering between and amongst denominations at the moment. I was raised Roman Catholic and this taught that 1) The Bible is to be taken in context, for inspiration, not literally. 2) The Catholic Canon, specifically, the Catechism is the ONLY proper interpretation of how the Bible SHOULD inspire us.
It is clear from 1 COR 7, that St Paul the St Paul the epistle-writer - believed that the rapture was coming during his lifetime, and - therefore it is better that ancient Corinthian Greeks not marry, but IF - an amorous couple can't keep their hands, (or other body parts,) off each other, THEN - they should marry, so their sex acts will be allowed by God (Paul didn't believe in the whole schmuck about love, to romance, is and mutual trust,) AND - once married they should become each other's servile sex toys. "Honey,I've got a headache," doesn't cut it and the ONLY reason the hot-and-heavy bedroom play should ever come to a pause is because the happy and exhausted couple takes a timeout to pray to God.
Obviously, St Paul was incorrect about the timing of the rapture. Each the early Christian Church and many modern definitions have decreed that Paul was also wrong about the sex inside of marriage, but was correct about the sex outside of marriage.
I guess they are saying Paul is 1-for-3 in 1COR 7, but I have to admit, I tend to concur with Uriel and Holly. My conscience tells me there is nothing impious about loving, mutual, non-exploitative sex between unmarried adults and THAT part os St Paul's writings was a total strike out.
|
|
GratefulEpiscopalian
Guest
|
Post by GratefulEpiscopalian on Jan 3, 2017 13:40:54 GMT -5
I know this thread is from years past, but as people like me will still stumble upon it when searching...
I'd like to add a response. I have always known the Episcopal church as a safe space for people to search, to dialogue about issues, to experience humility and share stories and ideas and work through the messiness of scripture-meets-culture-meets-real-life together in community. This is what drew myself (and so many others I know) into the church, and so I want to make sure that others who stumble upon this page hear that other views - like that the bible is 100% all the time literally right, no discussion or interpretation allowed - are not the norm of Episcopal spaces.
I am grateful that there are spaces like this where people can explore the topic of sexuality (one that can be so hard to find safe spaces to talk about in churches!), and pray they will keep happening and maintaining their safety in humility and love.
|
|
|
Post by akeditotxux on Apr 24, 2019 2:19:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by alenakuviqeto on Apr 24, 2019 3:48:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michaelacefs on Sept 4, 2020 10:18:25 GMT -5
Hi, here on the forum guys advised a cool Dating site, be sure to register - you will not REGRET it bit.ly/2F0UICK
|
|
|
Post by Billiedug on Nov 12, 2020 4:50:50 GMT -5
Hi, here on the forum guys advised a cool Dating site, be sure to register - you will not REGRET it <a href=https://bit.ly/3l7MRDo>https://bit.ly/3l7MRDo</a>
|
|