Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 kissmekindsir
Joined: 11/16/2008
Msg: 59
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?Page 2 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
All one has to do is go to www.biblegateway.com and research 'keywords' relating to pre-marital sex and chasity and this will end; the absurd argument!
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 60
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/9/2009 9:05:02 PM
All one has to do is go to www.biblegateway.com and research 'keywords' relating to pre-marital sex and chasity and this will end; the absurd argument!


Alll one has to do is cut and paste the actual biblical verses to join the discussion. I believe the question was;" where can we find it in the bible?" If you want to go there and search it, and bring back the verses; that would be helpful.

Csonka has shown us a precise restriction involving virgins. The question has effectively been answered.
 kissmekindsir
Joined: 11/16/2008
Msg: 61
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/10/2009 11:44:20 AM
Problem is that there are people who are very bigoted against the copying of Bible Verses on POF, some moderators have deleted profiles because they didn't honor neither the 1St admendment by Americans nor England's Magna CartaProbly why nobodys posting verses here!
 SAguy_06
Joined: 12/29/2005
Msg: 63
textual support?
Posted: 6/10/2009 7:31:05 PM
OP...I think you having a proble seeing the tree through the forrest.

In ancient times a girl/woman was either a Virgin, Wife, or Whore...

She went from her Father's house to her husbands...I copied and pasted this from another post, but these two passages deal with pre-marrage, other deal with a Wifes obligation in her marriage, andher duties to her Husband...Marrital Sex and Adultry.



<div class='quote'>
Exodus 22:16-17~ If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21~ If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you.


Or do you have the modern notion of Sock-Hops, Pizza and a Movie, and a Tumble in the back of the Trans-Am...

Do you think all those Ancient "Dads" were just let there little girls to go "Out" with you...

Look at arranged marriages still practiced in societies in Africa, Mid and Near-East...the young bride is usually betroved and Married off by her 15th birthday...
 lovinvixen
Joined: 9/10/2008
Msg: 64
textual support?
Posted: 6/11/2009 2:23:30 PM
O.K., a very worthy moderator with great education from other debates says one can post Scriptures relavant to the topic, namely one like a 'Angry Violinist'.

2 Chronicles 21:11
Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication, and compelled Judah thereto.
2 Chronicles 21:10-12 (in Context) 2 Chronicles 21 (Whole Chapter)
Isaiah 23:17
And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
Isaiah 23:16-18 (in Context) Isaiah 23 (Whole Chapter)
Ezekiel 16:15
But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.
Ezekiel 16:14-16 (in Context) Ezekiel 16 (Whole Chapter)
Ezekiel 16:26
Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger.
Ezekiel 16:25-27 (in Context) Ezekiel 16 (Whole Chapter)
Ezekiel 16:29
Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied therewith.
Ezekiel 16:28-30 (in Context) Ezekiel 16 (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 5:32
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Matthew 5:31-33 (in Context) Matthew 5 (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 15:19
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
Matthew 15:18-20 (in Context) Matthew 15 (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 19:9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Matthew 19:8-10 (in Context) Matthew 19 (Whole Chapter)
Mark 7:21
For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
Mark 7:20-22 (in Context) Mark 7 (Whole Chapter)
John 8:41
Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
John 8:40-42 (in Context) John 8 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 15:20
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
Acts 15:19-21 (in Context) Acts 15 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 15:29
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Acts 15:28-30 (in Context) Acts 15 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 21:25
As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
Acts 21:24-26 (in Context) Acts 21 (Whole Chapter)
Romans 1:29
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Romans 1:28-30 (in Context) Romans 1 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 5:1
It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
1 Corinthians 5:1-3 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 5 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 6:13
Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
1 Corinthians 6:12-14 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 6 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 6:18
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
1 Corinthians 6:17-19 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 6 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 7:2
Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
1 Corinthians 7:1-3 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 7 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 10:8
Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
1 Corinthians 10:7-9 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 10 (Whole Chapter)
2 Corinthians 12:21
And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.
2 Corinthians 12:20-21 (in Context) 2 Corinthians 12 (Whole Chapter)
Galatians 5:19
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Galatians 5:18-20 (in Context) Galatians 5 (Whole Chapter)
Ephesians 5:3
But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
Ephesians 5:2-4 (in Context) Ephesians 5 (Whole Chapter)
Colossians 3:5
Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
Colossians 3:4-6 (in Context) Colossians 3 (Whole Chapter)
1 Thessalonians 4:3
For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:
1 Thessalonians 4:2-4 (in Context) 1 Thessalonians 4 (Whole Chapter)
Jude 1:7
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:6-8 (in Context) Jude 1 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 2:14
But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
Revelation 2:13-15 (in Context) Revelation 2 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 2:20
Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
Revelation 2:19-21 (in Context) Revelation 2 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 2:21
And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.
Revelation 2:20-22 (in Context) Revelation 2 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 9:21
Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Revelation 9:20-21 (in Context) Revelation 9 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 14:8
And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Revelation 14:7-9 (in Context) Revelation 14 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 17:2
With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
Revelation 17:1-3 (in Context) Revelation 17 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 17:4
And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
Revelation 17:3-5 (in Context) Revelation 17 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 18:3
For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Revelation 18:2-4 (in Context) Revelation 18 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 18:9
And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
Revelation 18:8-10 (in Context) Revelation 18 (Whole Chapter)
Revelation 19:2
For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
Revelation 19:1-3 (in Context) Revelation 19 (Whole Chapter)

From www.biblegateway.com check it out for research!

POINT is look at the different references to FORNICATION and read them in context to what they are addressing and one can see that Biblically Fornication is a NO, NO!

What is Fornication?

See:

http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/fornication.html.
WebBible Encyclopedia

GenesisExodusLeviticusNumbersDeuteronomyJoshuaJudgesRuth1 Samuel2 Samuel1 Fornication
Hebrew: zanah / Greek: porneia

Fornication is voluntary sexual intercourse between a man and woman who are not married to each other. Adultery is one type of fornication.

In every form, fornication was sternly condemned by the Mosaic law among God's people, the Israelites (Lev. 21:9; 19:29; Deut. 22:20-11, 23-29; 23:18; Ex. 22:16). (See ADULTERY.)

Fornication is also mentioned many times in the New Testament (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; John 8:41; Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25; Rom. 1:29; 1 Cor 5:1, 6:13, 18, 7:2; 10:8; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:3; Jude 1:7; Rev. 2:14, 20-21; 9:21; 14:8; 17:2,4).

“The Greek word for ‘fornication’ (porneia) could include any sexual sin committed after the betrothal contract. …In Biblical usage, ‘fornication’ can mean any sexual congress outside monogamous marriage. It thus includes not only premarital sex, but also adultery, homosexual acts, incest, remarriage after un-Biblical divorce, and sexual acts with animals, all of which are explicitly forbidden in the law as given through Moses (Leviticus 20:10-21). Christ expanded the prohibition against adultery to include even sexual lusting (Matthew 5:28).” (Dr. Henry M. Morris)

The word “fornication” is sometimes used in a symbolic sense in the Bible, for example, meaning a forsaking of God or a following after idols (Isa. 1:2; Jer. 2:20; Ezek. 16; Hos. 1:2; 2:1-5; Jer. 3:8-9).

Does that define Biblical Pre-marital sex as a sin?
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 65
textual support?
Posted: 6/11/2009 2:48:47 PM
Does that define Biblical Pre-marital sex as a sin?


What it does is show how much importance the actual meaning of the word "porneia" has. I would suggest perusing other sources for the definition, and comparing its usage among greek Philosophers and authors. such as Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, and others. Dr. Morris might have great credentials among notewothy Christians. Do any Philosophers recognize him?

You will find that it almost always explicity defines a relationship where money is exchanged. Perhaps "pornography" would be a better and more useful translation than the word "fornication?" It certainly involves sex and money, and the spelling is so similar. Do you think it might mean "prostitution?"
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 66
view profile
History
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/12/2009 7:16:55 AM


Does that define Biblical Pre-marital sex as a sin?
What it does is show how much importance the actual meaning of the word "porneia" has. I would suggest perusing other sources for the definition, and comparing its usage among greek Philosophers and authors. such as Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, and others. Dr. Morris might have great credentials among notewothy Christians. Do any Philosophers recognize him?

You will find that it almost always explicity defines a relationship where money is exchanged. Perhaps "pornography" would be a better and more useful translation than the word "fornication?" It certainly involves sex and money, and the spelling is so similar. Do you think it might mean "prostitution?"
A prostitute is called a Zonah, as in Genesis 38:15, and a Kedeishah, as in Genesis 38:22. The word Zenut in Hebrew, comes from Zan, to feed, to fulfil your hunger. In the context of sex, it refers to fulfilling your desire to have sex, what we would call casual sex. The word Kedeishah comes from the word Kodesh, to be separated and put apart for a specific purpose. In the context of sex, a Kedeishah is someone who specifically trades in sex. Zenut is not quite as specific, as it focusses on the satisfying of the John, and so, it can refer to casual sex, with money exchanged, or casual sex, without any money exchanged, but it can even mean to have adultery, like in Judges 18. As far as pornography goes, I have not seen any verses in the Hebrew that even discuss the issue of naked imagery, either of women or men. That would be a secondary issue of the general principle against Zenut, satisfying your desire for sex by simply "eating", just having sex with no thought as to the consequences.

As far as the whole subject goes, in Biblical Law, one could marry someone by giving money, or a document, or by having sex. Sex does make you married to the person, provided the intent is there to be in a relationship. Other than that, it's considered being similar to using a person for your personal use.

However, because of the likelihood of abusing the ability to get married via sex, the Rabbis ruled that anyone that got married though having sex, would be punished, because this would just increase people having casual sex.

I would say that the whole feeling and overview of the Bible, is that people get married, and have sex, or don't get married, and don't have sex, and anything else, is Zenut, casual sex, or prostitution, or adultery. Even concubines are treated as being married, and there is little difference between them and a full wife.

However, that really is much, much clearer from the actual language of the text, in the Hebrew. In the English translations, there is a lot of ambiguity and quite a few mistranslations, that don't match the Hebrew.

Now, the real question is WHY?

Why is there such a problem with casual sex in the Bible? After all, sex is just a desire, isn't it? What's wrong with fulfilling your desires? Also, if fulfilling your desires is OK, then what's wrong with prostitution? After all, everyone gets something from it, don't they? What's wrong with anything to do with sex? How can sex be wrong?

Well, sex isn't wrong, the same as eating isn't wrong, the same as drinking isn't wrong. But, abuse of sex, or eating, or drinking, can cause much harm. Abuse of eating, can lead to bulimia and anorexia. Abuse of drinking can lead to alcoholism. In sex, the problem is far worse, because people kill over sex. In France, it's so common for someone to kill someone else over sex, that such crimes get their own special category, a "Crime of Passion", in the law. They have been supposed to even be a cause of war, such as in the Trojan War. People kill because they believed or found that their girlfriend was cheating on them with someone else. Women often get abused because of sex, because many women are forced into prostitution because of sex. Even FWBs almost always result in someone getting very, very hurt.

So how can we live responsibly when it comes to sex? Can you have casual sex and still not end up caught up in it, and hurting others as a result? Well, provided you can keep all of your emotions out of it, then yes. If no-one lets sex affect their emotions, there is no problem. Even so, if sex affects our emotions, but no-one lets those emotions generated via sex to affect their actions, then at least no-one gets seriously hurt. But it seems that this is almost impossible for us as a society. Some individuals keep their emotions out of sex, but almost always one person in almost every sex act does not. Moreover, it's pretty clear that when one person is having casual sex and enjoying it responsibly, then others get jealous and also want the same, and so copy them, and have sex, but don't act responsibly. Really, with the amount of people getting hurt via sex, if we wanted society being responsible with sex, we'd have to vet everyone to determine who can have sex without being irresponsible about it, by issuing emotional tests, and issuing licenses to only those who pass. The problem with even that, is that almost everyone will fail in controlling their feelings when it comes to at least some people, as even the toughest and most controlled of players say that they fell for some people.

Plus, the other problem is that keeping your feelings out of sex is habit-forming, and this makes it far more difficult to form relationships. This is true to such an extent, that psychologists now call nymphomania, addiction to sex, as not an addiction to sex at all, but a "fear of intimacy". Modern psychological thinking, is that really, none of us want casual sex all that often, and we really all just want "intimacy", the emotional parts of a relationship, and we only regularly pursue casual sex in order to avoid having to get involved.

The Biblical approach appears to me, to be to address the problem, by forcing us to confront our fears, but discouraging casual sex, and encouraging lasting relationships. Both are needed, because we are so afraid of getting hurt, that our tendency is that when we have a "fear of intimacy", we bury our heads in casual sex. So, if casual sex is not discouraged, then it presents too easy an option to avoid having relationships. But for those of us who have a "fear of intimacy" and don't have casual sex, but go the other way and refuse to get involved with anyone, the Bible encourages us to get married as well, so that those people don't spend the rest of their lives in fear, just like the Bible discourages people in casual sex to overcome their fear of intimacy, so they don't spend the rest of their lives in fear.

However, why can't we just have casual sex, AND relationships? Well, it's really quite simple. Biology teaches us that either we are hungry, or we are not. Sex is the same. It matters very little biologically who we have sex with. It only really matters who we love, to our hearts. At the end of the day, if we screw one person for most of our lives, or 1000 people, we've still had the same sex. So there really is no need for casual sex at all, only regular sex, and that's a lot easier if you have one regular person, the same as it's a lot easier to get paid for work, if you have a regular job, than lots of temporary jobs. So where is the desire for casual sex from? Well, that's why psychologists say it's a "fear of intimacy". Sex logically would be more satisfying with someone whose body you know, and who knows your body. Sex logically is going to be far more frequent with someone who you have sex with regularly. Sex logically doesn't need more than one person. So the ONLY reason left to have sex with multiple people, is psychological, either to "prove" you are successful, by proving you can convince someone else to do things to serve you, or to avoid having to deal with one person who knows you well enough that you cannot lie to them easily, and so with them, you have to face up to your real feelings.

The system works for the most part. We all agree that if we find someone to love, there is no solid reason to split, and usually, it is either psychological problems that make us unable to form relationships, or things like money worries or feelings of inadequacy make us feel inadequate, and lead to arguments, that make us think that things are hopeless, and that we'd be better off giving up. All in all, our need for casual sex, is really an indication that our society is just not giving enough support to singles to feel themselves worthy of finding a partner who they love and respect and who loves and respects them, and is just not giving enough support to couples to feel themselves worthy of the relationship that they'd found and to support and encourage them to persevere to work on our relationships to make them better, rather than just giving up and trying a relationship with someone else, without solving the problems that made the last one break down. This shows that our society would be far off improved if only it would acknowledge that people's emotional needs are just as important as their physical needs, for it is our emotions that make us motivated to succeed, and so we would be far better off if our society had a solid commitment to support the right of everyone to self-confidence, and happiness, as part of our Bill of Rights. This has yet to occur. But it will, and when it will, then we will stop feeling a need for casual sex, because we will be getting what we need to make a relationship work. That is the system of the Bible.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 67
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/12/2009 8:30:43 AM
So, to boil your post down to a nutshell, and answer the question; you would say that pre-marital sex is not restricted because it doesn't exist. Once you have sex, you are married under the Hebrew Law.

You also forgot to mention another problem, which I believe was part of the superstition which Rabbis agreed was harmful, and therefore restricted sex:STD's

It is my solid belief that Jesus used Silver Nitrates in balls of clay to "heal the blind." He put the clay in babies eyes, to cure the effects of being born to a mother with Syphilis.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 68
view profile
History
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/12/2009 7:07:36 PM

So, to boil your post down to a nutshell, and answer the question; you would say that pre-marital sex is not restricted because it doesn't exist. Once you have sex, you are married under the Hebrew Law.
Actually, what I said was, that it is possible for 2 people to become married through sex, if that is both their intent. But if either person is not of that intent, then it's casual sex, and that's not OK with Biblical Law.

You also forgot to mention another problem, which I believe was part of the superstition which Rabbis agreed was harmful, and therefore restricted sex:STD's
According to Traditional Jewish Biblical Law, you're not allowed to have sex with anyone, especially your wife, if you have an STD, and they don't have it, as that would be causing harm to another person. Even if they have AIDS, and you had the clap, you STILL couldn't have sex with them, because you'd be increasing their harm. As I said, this applies to your wife, just as much as anyone else. So banning sex with anyone outside your wife, would NOT make a difference.

It wouldn't even guarantee stopping the spread of disease, because the Bible is clear that everyone apart from a High Priest can marry a widow, and if a man had syphilis and died of it, that would not be a good thing to let his widow marry someone else, now, would it?

It is my solid belief that Jesus used Silver Nitrates in balls of clay to "heal the blind." He put the clay in babies eyes, to cure the effects of being born to a mother with Syphilis.
I have no idea about that. I don't even hold by the NT.

The only thing I'd heard that was used to cure Syphilis was Arsenic.

This is what I have found on Silver Nitrate with syphilis:
The eye can be infected also and for many years when syphilis was a bigger problem all newborns were treated with silver nitrate in each eye to prevent infection.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Syphilis---A-Bacterial-Infection-Called-the-Great-Imitator&id=1417369

But when I've looked further, this isn't used any more, and instead antibiotics are now used. So, I looked to the history of syphilis, to find out when and where Silver Nitrate was supposed to have been used. Problem is, that all I found was used over history, was:
1) Mercury by the Persian physician, Ibn Sina in 1025,
2) The herb Guaiacum by the Spanish priest Francisco Delicado in 1525,
3) Arsenic in the drugs Salvarsan and Neosalvarsan by Sahachiro Hata and Paul Ehrlich in 1908-1909.
4) Malaria, by Julius Wagner-Jauregg, for which he won the Nobel Prize in Medicine, in 1927.
5) Antibiotics.

I just don't have a source for where and when Silver Nitrate was even used, let alone if it is in any way effective enough to suggest that earlier healers even considered its use. Do you?
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 69
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/12/2009 7:22:35 PM
I just don't have a source for where and when Silver Nitrate was even used, let alone if it is in any way effective enough to suggest that earlier healers even considered its use. Do you?


I can't cite the source directly, but Silver Nitrate was listed in a pre Christian Greek Pharmacoepia. It is just a piece of trivia I picked up. As an antibiotic, it prevents the eye infection (from syphilis) which occurs in newborns and causes blindness. It does not cure syphilis in a mature human. The key for me, was reading the NT on the blindness cure. Jesus used "clay" and placed in the eyes of a "man-child" who was blind from birth. Very poor translation. Such is the lousy prose of the Christians. Any old Doctor should verify that the cure is correct.

I think that many Jews should be proud of their prodigal son. He was a Doctor.


According to Traditional Jewish Biblical Law, you're not allowed to have sex with anyone, especially your wife, if you have an STD, and they don't have it, as that would be causing harm to another person. Even if they have AIDS, and you had the clap, you STILL couldn't have sex with them, because you'd be increasing their harm. As I said, this applies to your wife, just as much as anyone else. So banning sex with anyone outside your wife, would NOT make a difference.


It is a great tradition. The problem is that many STD's have been undetectable until modern science.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 70
view profile
History
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/13/2009 7:04:07 PM

I can't cite the source directly, but Silver Nitrate was listed in a pre Christian Greek Pharmacoepia. It is just a piece of trivia I picked up. As an antibiotic, it prevents the eye infection (from syphilis) which occurs in newborns and causes blindness. It does not cure syphilis in a mature human. The key for me, was reading the NT on the blindness cure. Jesus used "clay" and placed in the eyes of a "man-child" who was blind from birth. Very poor translation. Such is the lousy prose of the Christians. Any old Doctor should verify that the cure is correct.
Mmm...hmmm. But Jews know Hebrew, and Aramaic, and many Jews of the time knew ancient Greek, including all of the Sanhedrin. Possible translations are considered reasons to investigate the text more thoroughly. Nothing more. Besides, clay is clay. Jewish texts are clear to distinguish between iron, bronze, gold, silver, copper, clay, and mixtures of them, as you can see in the Book of Daniel. So unless the text said it was a mixture of clay and silver, there is no proof it was anything more than clay.

I think that many Jews should be proud of their prodigal son. He was a Doctor.
Jews already had plenty of doctors, "Rofeyim", who were not considered any form of spiritual leader. If Jews saw this being done, and it worked, they'd want to investigate it. If they found it worked every time, then it's a medical cure. But to be a doctor, he'd have been called a "Rofeih". Is he ever called a "Rofeih"?

Anyway, I don't know that we'd be THAT proud. After all, Maimonides was the chief physician to Saladin, the ruler of Egypt, Israel, Syria, and much more. We have Beth Israel. We have the inventor of Polio, Jonas Salk. At best, Jesus would be one of many at best. Really, there is not enough evidence for Jews, to say that he was much more than another Jew.


According to Traditional Jewish Biblical Law, you're not allowed to have sex with anyone, especially your wife, if you have an STD, and they don't have it, as that would be causing harm to another person. Even if they have AIDS, and you had the clap, you STILL couldn't have sex with them, because you'd be increasing their harm. As I said, this applies to your wife, just as much as anyone else. So banning sex with anyone outside your wife, would NOT make a difference.
It is a great tradition. The problem is that many STD's have been undetectable until modern science.
Jewish law goes into great lengths to discuss discharges from the genital area, in women, and in men, in great depth. Because the laws of ritual purity make a huge distinction between how discharges that are due to illness, and discharges that are of Jewish spiritual significance, have to be treated, it was necessary to distinguish between the two. Because there is a tremendous emphasis on this laws, and because they carry a heavy accountability, if they are broken, men and women had to know these laws in depth before they had sex, and in any case where they were not sure, they had to refer the discharges to Rabbis who were expert in distinguishing in these matters. Details go into colour, texture, thickness, and every hue and dimension one could imagine. Even today, Jewish orthodox women have to be very careful when they go to the Mikveh, to carefully come the genital area, to make sure that every hair is separated, to ensure the ritual water gets to every part of the area, however small, and they have to check themselves very, very carefully for even the slightest drop of blood. If there is any possible question of disease, then they are not allowed to sleep with their husband, just to be safe to not pass on disease, until the matter is cleared completely, and in this regard, any chance of disease is taken very, very seriously. So quite simply, the only way for you to catch STDs in this way, would be if you had a disease that had absolutely no genital symptoms whatsoever. AFAIK, only AIDS has this attribute, and that has only appeared recently.

Admittedly, it would probably help to lessen the spread of STDs if everyone only sleeps with their spouse. But as I explained above, even if one were to not know if one had an STD, then this precept would not be a guarantee, because it was quite common for a woman to lose her husband young, and to marry more than once, causing the spread of disease. Likewise, divorce is allowed by Jewish law, and there is no waiting period required like in Western law, except for 3 months for the woman between partners, to ensure that she is not carrying another man's child, to establish paternity. So while it would have lessened STDs, it would not have had anywhere near the same effect to lessen them as the laws and values of 50s Americans. However, that issue was resolved, as I stated, by carefully checking yourself, to ensure that you had no disease, and to refer to an expert, if there was any doubt. Remember, one of the big Mitzvot in Jewish Law, is Pikuach Nefesh, preservation of life, which includes health. It overrides almost all other laws. IMHO, the details of the laws indicate this cannot be the main reason for the laws against marriage.

However, I won't deny that many who have not studied Jewish Law in great detail, are of the opinion that many of these laws were implemented as preventative health. However, I have studied some of Jewish Law, and IMHO, the details don't match up to what we would need for preventative health, excepting those details that are expressly stated to be carried out for health reasons, of which there are many. This is not one of them.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 71
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/14/2009 9:06:23 PM
Mmm...hmmm. But Jews know Hebrew, and Aramaic, and many Jews of the time knew ancient Greek, including all of the Sanhedrin. Possible translations are considered reasons to investigate the text more thoroughly. Nothing more. Besides, clay is clay. Jewish texts are clear to distinguish between iron, bronze, gold, silver, copper, clay, and mixtures of them, as you can see in the Book of Daniel. So unless the text said it was a mixture of clay and silver, there is no proof it was anything more than clay.

Had the NT been written by Jews in a timely manner, I would not argue the point. They barely started the writing some 40-60 years later, most likely because of the oppression, and by that time had clearly separated from the Jewish mainstream.

The rest of your post clearly illustrates the difference between the Christian and Jewish perspective. Jews require strict adherence to Law. Jesus advocated the breaking of Law to accomplish peace and Justice (as in eating without hand washing, and healing on the Sabbath) The Christians became much less focused on Law, and more focused on Faith. In the process of losing the OCD for Law, they lost the ability to write good prose, and we get the NT with so many text errors that nobody can tell the difference between medicine and miracle. To many of the time, It might have seemed a miracle for a Jew to read Greek and Speak Aramaic. These days it seems a miracle for anyone to understand the Greek.

You might also note that Jesus "Cleansed" the lepers. Good hygiene and antibiotics have nearly wiped the disease from the planet. These days, the FDA and the AMA would come after him for practicing without a license. In those days, it was the Rabbis. These days it is about medical costs and drug sales. In those days it was about the shiny coins of the money changers. You might think I am making a serious political statement, but even today, those with ears to listen do not hear.

You will find the Silver Nitrate in the Greek Pharmacoepia.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 73
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/14/2009 10:36:12 PM

I'd like to suggest that the prohibitions against fornication may also have less to do with the prohibition against "casual sex" per se than the prohibitions against worshiping foreign gods which as far as I can determine is of far greater concern in Judaism.


You have my vote. It fits the contemporaneous usage of the Greek word "porneia." You would certainly have to exchange some cash for that service.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 74
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/15/2009 7:51:33 PM
^^

The topic of the conversation is pre-marital sex references in the Bible, not the opinion of preachers regarding the holiness of the body temple and/or what would cause such a temple to be defiled. I am sure that the meaning of Paul's words can be construed in several different ways, and each way could be argued in Greek, Latin, or English; by preachers of different denominations.

Now, I understand that many Christians think of Paul as a very high saint within the Church, but still consider Jesus to be the leader. Therefore, I default to Jesus whenever a dispute arises:

Be not concerned with what you should eat or what you should wear, for it is not what enters the body which defiles it, but that which comes from the heart, and proceeds over the lips which defiles. (paraphrase)

It is those who think of sex as dirty whom are dirty. It is the darkness of the heart which makes blackness.

NEXT!
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 75
view profile
History
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/16/2009 3:22:19 PM
RE Msg: 113 by 2hi-iq-4u:
Had the NT been written by Jews in a timely manner, I would not argue the point. They barely started the writing some 40-60 years later, most likely because of the oppression, and by that time had clearly separated from the Jewish mainstream.
Traditional Jews are not of the opinion that they wrote the Gospels, as Xianity seems to advocate a break from the traditional faith, that has more in common with perspectives of divergent groups who chose to interpret the Bible as they wished, of which there were many at the time, and of which, Xianity would have been only one. So if anything, only those Jews who had already abandoned traditional Judaism and embraced Hellenistic ideals would have been swayed, and those Jews who were so disheartened by the Roman oppression, that they would be inclined to accept any saviour in order to believe that things might become better.

The rest of your post clearly illustrates the difference between the Christian and Jewish perspective. Jews require strict adherence to Law. Jesus advocated the breaking of Law to accomplish peace and Justice (as in eating without hand washing, and healing on the Sabbath) The Christians became much less focused on Law, and more focused on Faith.
Jews have far more adherence to the attributes of peace and justice than one might imagine, which is why so many Jews become doctors, civil-rights advocates and lawyers, to pursue peace and justice for all. The main difference of view, is that in traditional Judaism, one cannot expect to abandon the law and automatically find peace and justice just by doing so. Jewish thinking is that it must be shown that revolution leads to a better way of living, because revolutions rarely change much, except to increase oppression for at least one group in the short term, and often for the majority in the long term. A few times Jews have ignored this and supported revolution, such as the Jewish support for the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution. It was believed that the Bolsheviks would be less tyrannical than the Cossacks, who were quite brutal. Time has shown this was not the case, and those Jewish religious leaders who supported them, later came to recant their views.

In the process of losing the OCD for Law, they lost the ability to write good prose, and we get the NT with so many text errors that nobody can tell the difference between medicine and miracle. To many of the time, It might have seemed a miracle for a Jew to read Greek and Speak Aramaic. These days it seems a miracle for anyone to understand the Greek.
It might indeed seem to us, to be a miracle for a Jew to read Greek and Speak Aramaic. But not for Jews. Being multi-lingual, is extremely common for Jews. For instance, I can speak English, bad French, reasonable Hebrew, and have few problems reading Aramaic. My father spoke French and Arabic natively, taught Hebrew, and spoke English perfectly without even an accent. He was also familiar with Portugese, and Russian. Just the other day, I met a Jew who grew up in America, but was working in Libya, and is fluent in English, Arabic, and Italian. Then you have to consider that all the Israeli kids learn Hebrew from growing up in Israel, and English either from their parents, if their parents are English-speaking immigrants, or learn it in school, or moved abroad to England or America, and picked it up there. Then you need to consider all the Chassidic Jews in England and America who speak Yiddish with their friends, and English with everyone else, and the Chassidic Jews in Israel who speak Modern Hebrew and Yiddish. Not forgetting the Russians who immigrated to Israel, who speak Russian and Hebrew, and often English too, or the Ethiopians who speak their native language but picked up Modern Hebrew as well. Yes, we Jews are multi-lingual. Got to be, to cope with not having a home for so many centuries.

You might also note that Jesus "Cleansed" the lepers. Good hygiene and antibiotics have nearly wiped the disease from the planet. These days, the FDA and the AMA would come after him for practicing without a license.
I'd love to know how he did this, because the medical disease leprosy was still rampant over a thousand years from after his death. So if he did this, the secret died with him.

In those days, it was the Rabbis.
Rabbis didn't practise medicine. That was the job of a doctor. Although it was possible for a Rabbi to be a doctor too, it was taught that to be a Rabbi took 40 years, and most professions required several years of tutelage, often running into a decade or more. So it was very rare for anyone to have 2 professions.

This is very clear in Jewish law. Jews are forbidden to eat on Yom Kippur, even if they are very ill, unless a doctor rules that they are in Sacanot Nefashot, in serious danger of losing their life if they do not eat. The Talmud states that if a doctor rules that a pregnant woman must eat on Yom Kippur, then we do what the doctor says. But if the pregnant woman says that she must eat, even if the doctor says that she doesn't need to, then she must eat, because "Lev Yodeia Marat Nafsho", only the heart of a person knows the bitterness of their soul, meaning that there are some things that no-one knows about a person but them, and so, it might be that she knows that she is in more bitterness and suffering than anyone else, even a doctor, and where life is at potential risk, we don't take the chance. For a doctor to be a Rabbi, that would imply that a Rabbi must rule against himself.

One could choose to interpret that to mean that one Rabbi can be overruled by another. But that is already discussed elsewhere, and as both Rabbis would be of equal weight, that would be Rabbi vs Rabbi, and as the rule is that you side on the major side with Biblical Law, that would normally override, forbidding her to eat.

The only way this law works, is if one Rabbi hears one pregnant woman say that she needs to eat, and an expert, a doctor, who is not a Rabbi, says that she doesn't. Only then does the law make sense.

This clearly shows that doctors were not Rabbis back then.

In those days it was about the shiny coins of the money changers.
The money changers at the Temple were already explained in the Talmud. The Bible states that before one can eat of one's fruit and other produce, one must take Masser Sheini, 1/10th of them, and bring them to be eaten in purity within the Temple grounds. As they are holy, to not do so carries a heavy sin, like eating sacrifices in impurity or outside the Temple.

However, there is a leniency given with Masser Sheini that is not given to sacrifices. Maaser Sheini may be exchanged for money, with the holiness passing from the produce to the money. The produce is then non-holy and can be eated anywhere, even in impurity. However, the money remains holy, and must be taken to the Temple and the cities closest to it such as Jerusalem, where it can be exchanged back into holy produce, which can be taken to the Temple and eaten in purity.

This leniency is considered to be granted by G-d, because you have to take the Trumot and Maasrot as soon as you bring it in, and you cannot use any of the produce you've brought in, until you did so. When you grow fruits, vegetables and grains on your land without pesticides, you have to pick it when it is ripe, because once any produce becomes ripe, the bugs eat it very quickly. So you would have to pick some produce every day, to avoid it all rotting. So you would not get much time off to take the Maaser Sheini to the Temple, especially if you lived far from the Temple, and the journey would then be long. So before advanced portable refrigeration machines, the Maaser Sheini would probably all rot by the time you got it to the Temple. The option to exchange it for money meant that the produce of Jerusalem was mostly used for Maaser Sheini, with the produce of the rest of the land being used for regular food, with no problems of the Maaser Sheini going bad. This was especially important to an agricultural society where every bit of produce was considered valuable.

However, there was still a problem, as you needed to exchange the coins for produce that had been kept pure, and the priests needed to know for sure that the produce brought on the Temple grounds was indeed holy. So you could only buy from certian Chaverim, who were known to be extremely conscientious in keeping the laws of purity. This had to apply to everyone, as everyone back then grew their own produce.

So in order to make everyone's lives easier, certain people elected to become money-changers, to trade in holy coins, and to trade with the Chaverim for holy produce, who would themselves need to be always pure, to ensure that they never brought any impurity into the Temple. These men would trade all day, and so could not do a regular job, and so were usually very wealthy.

A similar system was used with the sacrifices. In order to ensure they were pure, if you wanted or needed to bring a sacrifice, you would go to the money-changers, exchange your money for a token, with which you could buy an animal raised entirely in purity.

But the coins would rub off a little with their use, and so would the tokens. As money was valued in its weight, with the number of people coming to the Temple, this meant a great loss to the money-changers. In order to ensure that they would not feel so hard done by their loss of earnings, both to being unable to do a regular day's work, and carrying the cost of the rubbing off of the coins in their continual use, the priests ordered that a small portion of the money would count as profit for the money-changers.

This profit is perfectly permissible within the laws of Maaser Sheini, the holiness of many coins of greater value can be transferred to a single coin, even a coin which is worth far less than the originals, with no loss of holiness. It was also perfectly permissible with the laws of trading, because Jewish law holds that a man may make a profit by charging more than the market price, as long as it is no more than a man would pay to have the convenience of not having to traipse all around to look for a better buyer. This amount was deemed to be 1/6th of the market price, as that was what they estimated based on business practice in the marketplace.

So the money-changers were allowed and encouraged to make a profit, because if they didn't, they'd probably end up giving up their voluntary help to the community, and millions of people would end up having to find produce kept in purity themselves and would have to prove their produce was pure to the priests, when they often didn't know the laws of purity, being simple farmers, making their lives much, much harder.

One of the fundamental rules of the Rabbis was never to enact any decree, even something that would help the people, unless the majority would be able to stand it. So even with something that was given by G-d as law, the Rabbis did whatever they could to make things easier for the people.

The money-changers performed a valuable service to the community. Something needed to be done to make sure they were not seriously out of pocket, to avoid them all giving up, and the solution was to allow them to make a small profit, to offset their costs in their work for the community.

You might think I am making a serious political statement, but even today, those with ears to listen do not hear.
On the contrary, the issue was already considered very important back in the First Temple, hundreds of years before. The money-changers were set up there, in order to help the people. Without them, things would have been far, far worse.

You will find the Silver Nitrate in the Greek Pharmacoepia.
Thanks for the information.

RE Msg: 114 by themadfiddler:
I'd like to suggest that the prohibitions against fornication may also have less to do with the prohibition against "casual sex" per se than the prohibitions against worshiping foreign gods which as far as I can determine is of far greater concern in Judaism.
This is very accurate. Many times in the Old Testament, the Jew are warned against "marrying the daughters of other's peoples", and against "giving their daughters to marry other people's sons", in case they would come to worship the idols that were worshipped by the women of those peoples. Apparently, women seemed more immune to temptation to idolatry than men, as the times when idolatry is mentioned as a temptation to copy one's partner, it is almost always described as Jewish men copying their non-Jewish wives and girlfriends to worship non-Jewish idols, and not usually the other way around.

It seems to me, that in the Old Testament, idolatry was considered as part of the culture, as much as rock'n'roll, or a secular education, is considered part of our culture. Pagan gods and goddesses were often referred to by name in the OT, in terms of the tribe of people who worshipped them. So it seems to me, that if you wanted to belong to a community, then you worshipped their gods, and without that, you would not be accepted, and quite possibly considered as insulting their gods, which to their minds, could lead to their gods being angry with them, and causing them a bad harvest or a plague, both of which could cause deaths in the thousands. So it was a big deal that if you belonged to a community, that you had to worship their gods. So, if you married someone who was already part of an idolatrous community, then she had to leave the community and go far, far away, or you would have to join, and worship their gods. So there is much to say that the law against idolatry would not be practical if the Children of Israel could marry not of their kind.

You could even see this numerous times in the OT, and in the Talmud, because many times, it was described that once the people started marrying out, they started worshipping other idols.

Temple prostitution, or the act of engaging in "sexual communion" with the goddess made incarnate in her priestesses is a common feature of many of the pagan religions of the Near East - except for Judaism. It was also still practiced by several faiths at the time of the writing of the New Testament.
That's definitely true. Fertility rituals were known particularly for this. In some cultures, there is a tradition that women danced naked to the new moon in fertility rites for many years. Sex was a sign of fertility, and so often, fertility rituals ended in a mass orgy. I believe that such ferility rites and orgies were practised in Africa and the South Sea Islands even in the last millennium, and were observed by European explorers.

The very idea of a temple prostitute is anathema to Judaism. I can think of 2 reasons why temples had prostitutes. One was for fertility rites. The other was to serve the priests.

Fertility rites imply that you can somehow persuade G-d to make women and animals pregnant, simply by dancing round a fire, or the moon, and having sex. Jews believe that you cannot persuade G-d to do anything, as G-d is not human, or even superhuman, but the entirety of existence. One could no more make a woman pregnant with a fertility rite to the monotheistic G-d, than one could make Gravity send a meteor away, with a Gravity rite.

Second, the Jewish view is that if you want sex, you get yourself a wife. End of. Even the High Priest had to be already married to officiate on Yom Kippur, even though no Jew can have sex that day, and if he wasn't, then another priest would have to replace him on Yom Kippur. There's not even any idea that priests get perks, as the High Priest must clean out the menorah every day, and the ashes and rubbish of the altars too, and no-one else could do this but the High Priest. The top job is G-d's cleaner. So, I expect that this shows that the top jobs in Judaism are what you gain in being a shining example to others, not taking advantage of others.

I'd like to propose that this is very likely the prohibition being warned against. Comments? Scorpiomover?
The two are connected, because the Jewish people are compared to G-d, as being G-d's bride, in allegorical and spiritual terms. Idolatry is considered like the Jews committing adultery against G-d.

As I wrote above, Jews dating idolators, led to Jews becoming idolators themselves. So casual sex can lead to idolatry. But the Talmud also states that people only ever turned to idolatry, to give themselves permission to date "Arayot", forbidden relations, such as incestous partners or adultery. So casual sex is the reason for idolatry as well. The 2 go hand in hand.

There is a very good reason for this. To understand the connection, it is helpful to look at sex. If you want quantity of sex, the most logical way is to have a regular girlfriend who you can be with every night. If you want quality of sex, then the most logical way is to be with someone whose body you know well, and who knows your body well, as the essence of that pleasure is touch, and greater accuracy in touch requires greater knowledge of the shape of things. So quality of sex also requires a regular girlfriend.

Thus, psychologists are now of the opinion that addiction to sex, cannot be a true addiction, and is instead an over-compensation to avoid addressing a fear of intimacy, like a superiority complex is just an over-compensation to avoid addressing an inferiority complex. Addiction to sex is just a fear of intimacy, and since intimacy is just about letting someone get close enough to see through your walls and BS, and to see the real you, a fear of intimacy is just a fear of spending enough time with someone for them to see all that, which makes it a fear of commitment, of being long enough to be considered committed, that they start to analyse you for what you as a person in the long time, and not just a plaything for a short while.

In Judaism, one believes that everything is connected and derives from one source for everything, and that this source is the source for all existence and all laws. In Judaism, everything that has power is simple a conduit for that source's power. Idolatry represents worshipping a conduit for G-d's power, like the Sun, as if the Sun has power of its own, when it simply acts as it must. However, it still requires that you know that the power from the Sun comes from a higher source, for if not, then the Sun would rule all, and the Moon could not have its sway, and then there could be no such thing as a Solar eclipse.

Another thing is common with ancient polytheist religions, that when you upset one god, say you cheated on your partner and so upset the god of love, then by offering sacrifices you could appeal to the god of fertility, or the god of ambition, or the god of war. You could get away with doing what you wanted in many ancient polytheistic religions, by appealing to the gods you weren't upsetting at the moment.

It matters little how you perceive G-d, or what name you call G-d. What matters, is that you believe the universe is run by a set of consistent rules, that is consistent both internally and externally.

The universe must be consistent externally, in that there must be a set of rules, that govern all aspects of the universe. You cannot declare the universe to just be like a machine that you can manipulate. You cannot manipulate the universe. It runs according to its rules. You are part of the universe, so the universe manipulates you.

The universe must be consistent internally, in that the rules must be consistent. There can only be one set, and they must all act in accordance with each other. You cannot have 2 sets of rules to govern the universe, that you can pick and appease to one set, when you want to ignore the rest. There is only one set of rules, and you cannot choose to ignore any one of those rules, just because you'd like things to be different.

To keep to that principle, you have to agree to stick to a single set of rules, and to consistent with them, by being committed with them. By being committed to them for your life, those rules get to know you, and you them, over time, and so they become more intimate with you, the longer you live. So fear of commitment, fear of intimacy, is the real driving force behind idolatry, the desire to be able to put your head in the sand, and concentrate on other things, just because there are some things in life that you'd rather not face.

So the 2 go hand-in-hand.

Ironically, we can see that this idea of internal and external consistency, of commitment and intimacy, is the source of all secular and religious morality, for we know it by another name, integrity, to keep one's word, to do as one intends and as one says. External inconistency is the hallmark of the despot, the psychopath, and the narcissist, for they all lack the quality of keeping what they do, in line with how the rest of the world needs and wants to be treated. Internal inconsistency is the hallmark of the neurotic, the addict, the sucidial, and the mentally ill, for they all accept that they need to be in line with how the rest of the world behaves, and to be in line with their own beliefs, but nevertheless vacillate between the two, between extremes of people-pleasing, and extremes of narcissistic self-analysis.

I've been reading a few very famous self-help books that quote many psychologists and medical doctors, and so seem to me, to be very grounded in science. Yet they all seem to say that the thing that make us the least successful, and the most unwell, are to make a decision without thinking, but then to worry about it endlessly once one has arrived at a decision and need to simply carry it out. This reversal of when it is rational to think about things, to not think when it can be of benefit, and to think when it cannot help you, seems to be the most dangerous and insidious of habits. The ability to think when at the start of a task, and to not think at all once it is time to carry it out, is considered one of the most beneficial qualities, for curing everything from a lack of success, to a lack of happiness, or neurosis, worry, anxiety and depression, according to everyone from William James, the dean of American Psychologists, Dr William Osler, the founder of Johns Hopkins, Bertrand Russell, who wrote that he suffered terribly in his youth from anxieties until he found this cure. Even Charles Darwin wrote that this same technique was the way he resolved the issues he had while developing the theory of evolution.

This is the exact same idea. Self-consistency. Think when you need to, and then when you need to do, don't think. Don't vacillate between 2 decisions. Don't start without any thought at all. Have a thought, a set of rules, but then once you are sure of them, stick to them, and don't switch between 2 sets.

Have a G-d. Have a set of rules that you think describe how you must act, to achieve happiness and success in your life. Then, once you have that set of rules, and only one, stick to them like glue. Don't even think for a second of switching to another "god" just because things get hard. Everything gets difficult in the middle. Those of us who succeed, merely saw things through to the end.

This might seem like you are inventing your own god, as you are defining your own set of rules. But really, a god you create, is a god that you create. That's when you make up any old rules, just because you'd rather they were true. Seeking G-d, is just seeking those set of rules that are not made up to please you, but are those rules that the world and the universe run by, that dictate to you how to act, that you know you cannot escape from, that you will be forced to obey, whether you like it or not, and which you would be wise to follow, and foolish to ignore. It was in this vein that Newton sought out G-d in science. The laws of the universe were the laws that G-d set for everything in the universe to obey, whether it wants to or not.

G-d is when we seek out how the universe acts on us, and on everything else. Ego is when we seek out how we may manipulate the universe like a tool, or a weapon, against our fellow man, our fellow creatures, against the Earth, the very universe itself, and eventually, against ourselves.

Belief in a single G-d, in that vein, is no more or less than being rational in accepting that the universe runs according to one and only one consistent set of rules, and committing to living one's life in accordance with that, for our benefit, and everyone else's.

Belief in a single partner, is the same, in that it is being rational in accepting that we really only need one partner for sex, and if we want to maximise our quantity and quality of sex, we're much better off with sticking to our partner.

This is quite a deep concept, so I do not expect anyone to accept it at first glance.

Any specific difference in the Hebrew for temple prostitute that you know of? Does this seem like a possibility?
Only that if a prostitute is specifically designated for an idoatrous temple, then every act of sex with her is like idolatry itself, just as a broom designated specifically for use in an idolatrous temple, would be idolatry to use anywhere, and the same for every type of object set aside for use for idolatry.

Is the differentiation made between "sacred" and "profane" or run of the mill sex for hire?
No. Selling sex is selling sex. It cannot be holy in itself. Even in marriage, when you marry with money, which is the origin of marrying with a gold ring, gold being the highest currency of value, even a Shevah Perutah, the smallest currency of value, makes the marriage as valid, as a million tons of gold. It's not the amount that matters. It's the intent.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 76
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/16/2009 7:31:01 PM

Jews have far more adherence to the attributes of peace and justice than one might imagine, which is why so many Jews become doctors, civil-rights advocates and lawyers, to pursue peace and justice for all. The main difference of view, is that in traditional Judaism, one cannot expect to abandon the law and automatically find peace and justice just by doing so..


I am sorry if my words were construed as attack message against Jews in general. Jesus was more opposed to elitists of the time who happened to be Jewish, and broke from there adherance to (possibly even minor) additions to law which corrupted the whole. He mentioned the "leaven" in the flour, and how it had corrupted the whole. I would bet that many of today's Jews have abandoned some of the ancient practices as well, but certainly don't align with the cause which Jesus flagshipped.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 77
view profile
History
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/17/2009 7:12:38 AM
RE Msg: 119 by 2hi-iq-4u:
I am sorry if my words were construed as attack message against Jews in general.
I didn't think you were anti-Jewish. But most people don't study the history of the time in any great depth, and the facts are therefore blurred to many.

Jesus was more opposed to elitists of the time who happened to be Jewish, and broke from there adherance to (possibly even minor) additions to law which corrupted the whole. He mentioned the "leaven" in the flour, and how it had corrupted the whole. I would bet that many of today's Jews have abandoned some of the ancient practices as well, but certainly don't align with the cause which Jesus flagshipped.
For nearly all of the 400 years of the Second Temple, there were huge numbers of Jews who tried to assimilate into the general population of the Roman Empire, but still wanted to claim a special distinction in being Jewish.

From the POV of the Pharisees, the English transliteration of Perushim, which means "commentators" or "explainers", being Jewish is a responsibility, to be a "light to the nations". From their POV, the Jews were given many extra laws, to uphold a standard of decent behaviour much higher than would be expected of most people, so other nations would have an example of what it meant to be a "Mensch", a human being who treats all others with respect, whether they treat him with respect or not. From their POV, if those people mingled with the general population, you wouldn't see them in the crowd, and so, their shining example could only be seen by the few who would meet them. But by the Jews staying separate, even though this brought on some enmity, it meant that everyone could say "the Jews don't beat their wives, why should we?" FYI, I picked that example because I've been told many times, that many American girls liked to marry Jewish guys, because they were brought up to not beat their wives, which is very rare in most Jewish households.

To the Pharisees, being Jewish was not elitist. It was a duty and responsibility, that they cherished.

However, to the Jews who wanted to assimilate, they had abandoned a lot of their responsibilities by abandoning those laws that showed those responsibilities. They were more interested in being liked and accepted by the rest of the world, than being an example of how all of humanity could be. So they could not see any duty or responsibility in Judaism. But they still felt an attachment to Judaism. Re-framing a lot of laws that keep you separate from others, without any concept of duty or responsibility to help others, transforms itself into selfish motivations, as a form of privilege and elitism.

So, from the POV of the assimilated Jews, their only reason to be Jewish was to be elitist. But they didn't want to admit they were elitist, even though they clearly knew it. So they tried to project it onto the Pharisees. By claiming the Pharisees were elitist, they hoped to give the impression that they weren't.

This is clearly seen by the office of the High Priest. During the time of the Second Temple, once the Romans had took power, while the temple was still standing, some assimilated Jews bribed the Roman officials to make them the High Priest, even though they were often not descendants of Aaron, and so could not fulfil that position. There were a lot of these, as they died often. The Pharisees would not dream of such a thing, for one must be a direct descendant of Aaron to be a priest, and because one is praying for the Jews, and for the entire world, so it is a heavy responsibility that only the most loving and unselfish of people could possibly hope to do justice to. But many assimilated Jews saw it as an honour, to be seen as the High Priest.

One that sticks in my mind, was the High Priest who wore gloves when handling the sacrifices, as he didn't want to get his hands dirty, even though the law required that one have nothing separating between the priests and their holy duty, to such an extent, that the priests were supposed to walk barefoot over the temple floor, because even shoes and socks would have been a separation.

Imagine if a doctor refused to treat a homeless person who was on the verge of death, because he was "smelly". Is that a doctor who took up medicine to help others, or a doctor who took it up to impress others and earn a huge salary?

Contrast that with the behaviour of the Ten Martyrs, the ten Rabbis who were killed by the Romans for practising Judaism in public, after they had banned Judaism under pain of death. One of them was Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel, a descendant of the house of King David, and the next in line for the throne, if the Jews had not been oppressed by the Romans. As he was about to be killed, he was asked, how could G-d do this to such a holy man, and how could he had done anything to deserve such a fate? He replied that one day, a beggar came to his house, and knocked on the door. He replied that he couldn't answer the door immediately, but would get there in a minute. But once he got there, the beggar had died. He contended that since the beggar died so quickly, he was probably on his last legs, and hadn't long to go. If he had answered the door immediately, the man's life might have been saved. But one might ask, how could he have known that? Most beggars are not that near to death, to die in a few minutes. He was known for being very wealthy, and for giving much charity by choice. So the beggar probably assumed that if anyone would feed him, it would be Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel. So he had put himself into the position where many people who were near death would come to him for aid, and so, he had put himself in the position where at least some of the time, beggars on their last legs would come to his door, and if he didn't answer the door immediately, some of them would die. If he hadn't been known for giving money and food to every beggar who passed by, then this beggar might have found some other way to sustain himself, even to chew on roots, and would not have died. So he held himself culpable of manslaughter, of causing a life to come to an end, and because of his moral standing, he held that he should be held accountable far more than any ordinary man.

That is a Pharisee, and even in this regard, there were many Pharisees who were far more humble and giving than him.

Does that give you an idea of how things were back then?
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 78
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:02:41 AM
Does that give you an idea of how things were back then?


It clearly gives a second face to the allegation. I can see that not everything is all black and white, and that while "some pharisees" might have been pretentious as the allegation presumes to state, others remained true, humble, and faithful; and likely saved Judaism to stand next to Christianity in these days. It comes down to the adage that all people will be people. We are individuals, and there are notable characters in every group. Some define the character, and others try to destroy it. Some just can't meet the standards.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 79
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/18/2009 8:43:31 AM

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding but only in expressing his opinion.
proverb 18.2


Pure wheat. No chaff to burn in that proverb. I wonder what 18.3 or 18.1 says. Did you know that someone is supposed to come along and separate the wheat from the chaff. I think I will gather the one above and put it in my storehouse.

I take pleasure in understanding what that proverb says.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 80
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/18/2009 9:47:05 AM
You can have an iq of a genius but be completely dumb in spiritual matters.


This true. You could also obey the earlier proverb, and simply state it so that you hear your thoughts, yet fail to attempt to understand theirs. Of course there is alway the possibilty that if your throw your pearls before swine, they will trample them underfoot, and then turn to rend you. It is understanding that is the focus of both proverbs, but the second understands the emotional responses of those who fail to understand the completeness of the sayings. If my words cut like a two-edged sword, then I had a good teacher.
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 81
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/18/2009 3:25:13 PM

What exactly is there to understand. The divine child was conveived and born out of wedlock, correct?


I all depends on what you are actually trying to understand. When a drama Queen tells you a story, do believe every word? Are you sucked up into the drama? Do you weight the evidence?

What is there to understand?

Hearsay is inadmissible in a court of law.
 kissmekindsir
Joined: 11/16/2008
Msg: 82
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/24/2009 5:52:59 PM
Matthew 5:32
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

For those wo HAVE NOT thoroughly studied their Bible doesn't the above scripture *IF* it was trully Christ's words wrote by Matthew and also other disciples, point out how wrong that adultery was and the only provision for grounds for adultery; which was generally punnished by death!

Point is, celibacy til the wedding vow was and is a big part of Judaism and adopted by Chritianity; even if many Carnal Christians DO NOT want to take up their cross much of the time!
 lovinvixen
Joined: 9/10/2008
Msg: 83
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 7/5/2009 4:18:21 PM
The fact the Bible regards fornucation as a BIG sin should explain that Pre-Marital sex is out of the question.

See earlier post to define what fornication is!
 2hi-iq-4u
Joined: 5/29/2009
Msg: 84
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 7/5/2009 5:10:33 PM
We actually had a very interesting discussion on the topic. Too bad you couldn't attend or contribute. Do you suppose everyone should ignore your post as you have ignored theirs? Isn't that what "do unto others means?"

Personally, I think "Do unto Others" applies in the case of pre-marital sex as well. It was one of jesuses highest commandments.
 kissmekindsir
Joined: 11/16/2008
Msg: 85
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 7/8/2009 10:23:32 AM
The topic is about documentation within the Bible against Pre-Marital sex.

Why was her Scripture on Fornication seen as off topic? Don't you understand that Fornication is ANY sex outside of marriage except sex within marriage of same sex ties or marriages to animals also applies as fornication.

She did contribute, but others before her were going waaaayyyy out there off topic, was that it, you didn't like her not following the detour others engaged in?

What IF one is a SADIST Or MASOCHIST, how do you justify the 'doing unto others as you would have them do unto you' if they are of the warped traits of those 'isms'?

Let's get back on topic and how about you who believe so strongly in 'FORNICATING' show some scriptures in context, of Pro-Pre-Marital Sex? If you can!
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  >