|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
physical contact - 7/2/2008 12:42:44 AM
|
|
|
Godsone
Posts: 40
Joined: 11/27/2007
Status: offline
|
Just wanted to know what you guys thought about having no romantic physical contact before marriage (holding hands, kissing, etc...). I've heard some people who have done this explain that the person's body does not belong to you. You are not married yet and therefore you have no romantic right to their bodies. Please let me know if you agree or not and why. Thanks guys 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 12:55:14 AM
|
|
|
ChoirDJ
Posts: 473
Joined: 6/15/2006
From: So Cal
Status: offline
|
Personally, I think that's a very healthy parameter to set for a relationship. Why flirt with the temptation and give the devil a foothold by testing the boundaries?!
_____________________________
"Sin will take you further than you intended to go, keep you there longer than you intended to stay, and cost you more than you intended to spend." Got it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 1:53:57 AM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 8694
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
Physical contact does NOT lead to sexual immorality. I am so very sick of people saying, "Oh my gosh, you two are hugging and holding hands! You MUST be sleeping together!" ... blah blah blah bull.
It, however, can, given that the individuals allow it. But being physical, in and of itself, doesn't lead to sexual immorality. It's the lack of self control.
I'm not going to set a limitation on myself that I cannot show physical love to my girlfriend. I have, however, set a limitation in my heart to not allow our physical contact to go beyond martial boundaries.
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 2:09:08 AM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 8694
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: song
And what are those exactly? 
Anything that would be considered sexually immoral unless otherwise married.
quote:
Different men and different women will be able to handle different things.
Exactly.
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 2:43:01 AM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 8694
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
The Bible gives an outline of boundaries. I don't believe holding hands was one of them.
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 8:04:45 AM
|
|
|
preserved
Posts: 924
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
|
If holding hands, kissing, hugging does not lead you into divers temptation to want to have sex...then there is nothing wrong...It is all a matter of control...The bible speaks of fornication...It does not spell out that one cannot hold hands, hug or kiss...However, if any of these leads you into fornication....then you are to refrain until marriage..
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 11:55:11 AM
|
|
|
Ninjaearth
Posts: 66
Joined: 2/16/2008
From: Washington, D.C. - Maryland
Status: online
|
You know, it's things like this that make dating and seeking a mate very difficult for Christians. Do you know why? Because many Christians are so legalistic in attempting to live a holy and pure lifestyle. On the other hand, Christians who have a more liberal approach to their faith (that is, they are less restrictive when it comes to certain things) are usually downcasted by those who are against any physical contact before marriage. In their eyes, any physical contact is wrong outside of marriage because it can lead to sexual temptation (as some have noted already). The other side of this believes that some physical contact is acceptable because it doesn't lead to sexual temptation and allows them to express their love for one another unsinfully (if I may use this term) in their relationship. The restricted side uses Scripture to justify their cause (as you have seen) and rightly explains that we should avoid sexual temptation of any kind, while the other liberal side simply acknowledges that while they do agree that sex outside of marriage is wrong, physical contact is okay as long as it doesn't tempt them. So, the main issue, of course, is who is right? Should we, as Christians, avoid all physical contact because of the dangers of being lead into sexual temptation, or can we be allowed to express our love to our gf/bf prior to marriage in non-sexual ways or contact that doesn't lead to sexual behavior and still be pure for God?
The ultimate answer must come from Scripture, regardless of what the person thinks. Not just that though, it must also come from the correct context as well. It has been rightly said that, in regards to 1 Cor 7, that Paul was referring to sexual contact when he talked about that it was good for a man to not touch a woman. Many may try to use this to justify that no physical contact is allowed prior to marriage, not even holding hands. Other Scriptures that may be used would be 1 Thess 5 and the later part of the chapter that talks about abstaining from all appearances of evil (some versions may read a bit different). That can be taken to think a boyfriend/girlfriend kissing are actually married if someone were to see them in the park, at least that's a Christian's thinking. You find out that they are not married and are like "should you be kissing outside of marriage?" So, again, what does the Bible say about physical contact in a dating relationship? Nothing.
I will explain. First of all, any physical restrictions in regards to man and woman are directly related to their sexuality. 1 Corinthians 7 is full of this, as Paul addresses, those who are single and have not married, the married, and those who are thinking of being remarried, and widows. Nothing in this passage will work for a dating relationship (directly) because he's not talking about checking someone out for a while and while doing so no touching. The main reason: in that culture, if you were not married, you were single and not dating because most marriages were arranged. Furthermore, this "dating" concept didn't exist back then; wasn't in the practice of the cultures. So, you can't rightly justify this as a principal for dating, directly, as the issue of not touching a woman or man in a non-marital relationship. It will work however to remind those who are dating to refrain from sexual activity because this is the context in which it was intended. Secondly, kissing in a relationship isn't directly addressed (what I mean is that you find a verse in Scripture that says "thou shall not kiss") as kissing, in general, was a normal practice for the culture. I am taking this from Romans 16:16 where Paul writes to the Roman church and tells them, at the end of his letter, to greet all the brethren with a holy kiss. He repeats this in other letters like 1 Cor 16:20, 2 Cor 13:12, and 1 Thess 5:26. Based on these passages, a holy kiss was a greeting among the church body, like handshaking or even hugging is practiced in today's churches. Now in our culture we only kiss those we care about, and we dont' go around kissing people we general know as a greeting. Some cultures today still practice this and it a norm for them, but strange (very strange) to us here in America. But sure, all that kissing didn't lead to sexual temptation otherwise it would have been a moral problem. That is much different than a man kissing his girlfriend and vice versa, as they are not "greeting" each other with a holy kiss. Rather, it is, for some, the highest expression of physical contact that tells them that they love one another, aside from various deeds done in love (romantic ones) or general expression. For some, they can kiss and not go further whatsover; for others, it's an obvious door to temptation that leads them to go all the way. So, what does the Bible have to say about this? No kissing? On the contrary, it says to greet one another with a holy kiss. That's as best as we can do with kissing, in general, as far what the Bible says. However, the Bible does say that we are to control our bodies in a holy manner and not in passionate lust like the heathen who do not know God (1 Thess 4:1-8). Again, in regard to context, what does Paul mean? He relates the control of our bodies to that of heathens who don't know God that passionate lust with their bodies. In the same passage, Paul again refers to sexual temptation because he tells the believers that they are to remember who they are to walk according to the commandments of Christ and to control themselves. So, the issue then, in this passage, is self-control. They are to control themselves because they are now saved from being out of control like the Gentiles are because they don't know God and follow the lust of their flesh. So, what does that mean for Christians who are kissing outside of marriage? The better question to ask is this: do they control their bodies in regards to each others' sanctification and not in passionate lust (out of control) like the Gentiles? Or in other words, do they let their passions control them rather than them controlling their passions? If the answer is yes, then they are sinning against God. If not, then what's the problem? Because according to the passage, if they are control of their passions and have control, they are obeying the commandments of Christ. It all goes back to loving your neighbor as yourself (right after loving God with your whole being) and all that Christ taught through others throughout the NT. Anything that leads two people into sexual temptation (or has the power to) should be avoided at all cost; kissing is no exception. So if this is you, then it's obvious what you need to do. So, based on this passage, if you are controlling yourself correctly and not in passionate lust, then you are not sinning. In regards to kissing for those who are dating, I would strongly advise you to examine your convictions and set up appropriate boundaries for this kind of thing. This leads me to Titus and the principals that are taught in there; on the other side, it is still a matter of conscience, especially if two people are strong enough to kiss without going all the way. Regardless of which you fall under, remember that man and woman are naturally attracted to each other and those "natural" feelings will occur one way or the other. So, it's all about control, control, and control. If you don't have it, DON'T KISS. In more explicit words, if you or your "other" has had any problems with sexual temptations in the past, it's probably best not to do this. If two people are virgins, then it's probably less likely that they would be tempted to go all the way (without their nerves being shot and high-wired for paranoia) but they still need to be careful. They, however, are more likely to control themselves since they have never encountered sex before. So, again, both control and conscience are needed.
Okay, so physical restrictions in Scripture, in regards to male-female, relationships are focused mainly on remaining sexual pure and kissing needs to be controlled or refrained from depending on the control of the individuals who are not married. So, what about holding hands and all that other stuff and where do we need to get our standards for dating? The answer to the last part is Scripture. But didn't you say that Scripture didn't hold any principals for dating? Yeah, i did, but all Scripture is useful and profitable for correction (2 Tim 3:16); Plus, again, while I did say "directly" Scripture has nothing to say about dating, it does have plenty to say about single people, because single people (in our time) are the only ones that date (I'm not counting married people who do this illegally according to their marriage vows and I'm not referring to married couples who are dating their spouses regularly, as the context of this discussion is in reference to singles as the thread is initially for). This means, then, that instead of searching Scripture for "dating" principals that we should be searching Scripture for singleness behavior that governs all of our relationships, including male-female, relationships. With that, I turn to Titus 2. In Titus 2, there are four things I want to you be aware of: young men, old men, young women, and older women. Ask yourself this question: how is a young Christian man suppose to act? Apply this same question all other parties as well. Let's see what is says:
"2Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.
3Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good,
4so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,
5to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.
6Likewise urge the young men to be sensible;
7in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified,
8sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us." NASB
Our main focus is going to be on the young men and the young women (since in our time this is the typical dating age for most Americans). The young are to be sensible, examples of good deeds accompanied by pure doctrine and dignified, and good speech (not unwholesome, gossip, talking down to people, etc). Young women are to be sensible pure, and kind. Notice I omitted the characteristics dealing with husbands, because again, we're dealing with single individuals are who are not married; in no one I am omitting this from the original text, as all of this still applies, apart from this discussion because it's sacred Scripture. Our focus is on those who are not married, so being subject to your husband in this context will not fit. What we want to focus on is the character of those who are not married and this gives us good details on the characteristic of both men and women. Granted, however, this passage deals with women that are married, so I really am going a bit off here on the subject, but it does hold some things valuable to single young women that are not married so that when they are the other characteristics will apply as well. I would even say that they could use these as blueprints the attitude that will need to develop for their husbands who they plan on marrying. In the regular context courtship, however, remember that no one is married yet but are desiring marriage so certain things still apply up to a point with others following afterward. While this isn't the only passage dealing with the character of Christian men and women, it is all well-known used passage to describe what a man or woman should look like for another. Dealing with the men, our characteristics start in the first chapter dealing with the qualifications of elders, which are parallel to 1 Timothy 3.
So basically, young are to be wise, have a clear understanding of God's Word in both knowledge and discipline (this is what doctrine is, understanding the Christian faith from a Biblical perspective (not all Christian teaching is biblical doctrine) while good deeds are the demonstration of what was learned based on doctrine), and have respectable behavior and dialect and dialogue (essentially having comfortable acceptable speech) and have self-respect (dignified). The young women are to be lovers of their families, pure and wise also, and know how to care for their families at home (based on the passage alone). This will eventually mold them to be subject to their husbands in which all the rest of this will apply in marriage. Together, we can an interesting understanding of how young men and women are to act in a dating relationship. In another passage, that I'll briefly mention (this post is long enough already) in 1 Tim 5:1-2 Paul tells how he is to act towards the older men, younger men, and younger women and older women. The context starts in 1 Tim 4:11-5:6 when Paul tells Timothy to prescribe and teach these things. He then tells Timothy various things; we'll focus on him relating to the older men and women as well as the younger men and women. Basically: see the older men as fathers, younger (or same age) men as brothers, older women as mothers, and younger (and same aged) women as sisters. There it is. That's how young men and women are to act in a dating relationship, giving the other passages as well as characteristics of both men and women in general. When you put this together with all the rest of Scripture, you have the whole counsel of God explaining the conduct of both men and women that can be used to help set boundaries in a dating relationship between them. As such, you can finally give a decent answer regarding kissing or holding hands and any physical contact whatsoever.
I said earlier that kissing was a matter of both control and conscience, based on the analyzed passages. In this passage, it may eliminate that option because you wouldn't kiss your sister or mother in the same manner you we are referring to in a dating relationship. The is true for the women, regarding the men being older or younger as fathers and brothers. But, look at the passage closely (in the English) and you'll notice Paul is telling Timothy how to relate to them. As this , as that... we call that similies in English language. Using like or as to describe something, like in this case, seeing someone as a sister as mothers. They are not sisters, but they are as sisters or as mothers do use in regards to relation. Other scriptures do in fact call all children of God sisters and brothers, so I will not rule out that factor, but keeping with the passage this is the most likely understanding. So, those who say "would you kiss your sister that way" would be right on hand, but on the other I hand I relate to my sister differently than I would my girlfriend. I wouldn't treat them differently, in a sense, but my affection towards my potential wife would very different from my sister and the same would be true for the woman.
What I am saying, in light of this, is that while we should treat each with respect in all relationships, naturally, they will be some affection that reveals more than just regular sisterhood or brotherhood in relation to the opposite sex. That doesn't mean, however, we can just express our feelings and affections to one another in any manner. It does mean, however, that your bf/gf will be special and you want to show them that you care in a special way and that might be kissing, holding hands, hugging, etc. The highest degree of expression is sex, but until two are married this isn't going to work. So, what are we allowed to do based on Scripture? Respect each other, treat other like family, use self-control when engaging any type of physical contact and remember to honor God with your body. This might mean refraining from kissing; for some, holding hands, or for others,all the above. Overall, its' about being wise, sensible, sensitive, respectful, and holy. Gee...that sounds like something we just went over? In the end, that's pretty much all we can do. It goes beyond holding hands and even kissing, but loving each other in such way that we respect each other and have those safety boundaries in place so that both parties will not sin against God; that is the real issue. If it will not cause you to stumble (creating a stumbling block is a sin) or lead you into temptation, then you have nothing to worry about. Otherwise, you shouldn't do it. I hope that helps and sorry for being so long. Any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. God bless!!!
_____________________________
"Spiritual Soldier Ninjaearth"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 1:40:06 PM
|
|
|
jaimestarcross
Posts: 803
Joined: 11/28/2005
Status: offline
|
The person getting "in the flesh" and choosing not to flee from temptation... that's the real problem!
*We see this in the life of King David and his lust/desire for Uriah's wife Bathsheba.
David stepped away from walking with the Lord and allowed his flesh to rule in his life... it happened little by little.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 2:14:46 PM
|
|
|
ChoirDJ
Posts: 473
Joined: 6/15/2006
From: So Cal
Status: offline
|
...getting back to the OP's Question about physical contact in the relationship. I'm not sure how it got turned into a "right and wrong issue" because I certainly didn't go there. Personally, I look at it from a wisdom standpoint. We have to take into consideration the level of immorality that goes on even among the so called "christian" community and I believe it's because so many of us make compromises and put ourselves in situations we shouldn't be in. Given this fact, it certainly wont hurt us to abstain from physical contact because what starts off as minor, innocent compromises can lead to greater sinful compromises. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Now, let's chill out a bit here and keep this issue as simple as possible.
Regardless of how you feel about the issue, if make God the center of the relationship and protect your own purity as well as the purity of the other person, you'll be okay.
< Message edited by ChoirDJ -- 7/2/2008 2:21:23 PM >
_____________________________
"Sin will take you further than you intended to go, keep you there longer than you intended to stay, and cost you more than you intended to spend." Got it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 7:45:51 PM
|
|
|
LivingParadox
Posts: 582
Joined: 2/28/2007
Status: offline
|
As for the waiting to kiss before getting to married, it depends on the couple. I don't think holding hands, hugging and even kissing are inherantly wrong in dating but if you are obviously pushing the bounderies on a "hug" then there is probably a temptation issue going on. Holding hands can be a great starting point for showing affection in a growing relationship as hugging and possibly kissing would be a little further along in showing affection.
...and then there are obvious bounderies of showing affection that should be respected prior to marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/2/2008 10:46:21 PM
|
|
|
Ninjaearth
Posts: 66
Joined: 2/16/2008
From: Washington, D.C. - Maryland
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChoirDJ
...getting back to the OP's Question about physical contact in the relationship. I'm not sure how it got turned into a "right and wrong issue" because I certainly didn't go there. Personally, I look at it from a wisdom standpoint. We have to take into consideration the level of immorality that goes on even among the so called "christian" community and I believe it's because so many of us make compromises and put ourselves in situations we shouldn't be in. Given this fact, it certainly wont hurt us to abstain from physical contact because what starts off as minor, innocent compromises can lead to greater sinful compromises. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Now, let's chill out a bit here and keep this issue as simple as possible.
Regardless of how you feel about the issue, if make God the center of the relationship and protect your own purity as well as the purity of the other person, you'll be okay.
Errr....wrong or right issue eh? I don't mean to go off the subject, but I hope the Bible tells us what's wrong and right and if any Christian claims to live by the Word of God, being "right" is exactly what we want to be--that is living the right way for Christ. Because even if you deal with the issue of the conscience, it's still goes back to a moral issue of what's right and wrong. If you throw that out, then are you trying atempting to live by the Scriptures or by your own understanding? 2 Time 3:16 reminds that all of the Word of God is profitable for teaching, reproof, correction (hhmmm..interesting word)...instruction, and training in (right-eousness...interesting). I'm not trying to sound mean or stir up trouble, but I would hope the Bible has some guidelines to how we should behave on all levels, even prior to marriage. We shouldn't even dismiss these details on kissing and hugging, although they are small matters it seems for couples, but it's so small that God takes time to tell us be careful and not to be playing with fire. While I know my argument wasn't really necessary and is only my understanding of Scripture, I still think it does fall under right and wrong, as the Bible deals with what's right and wrong; there are no "gray" areas. So, why should this be any different? Or is it the fact we should ignore the Bible and just do things because it's not going to hurt anyone.
I mean, with all due respect, many teenagers would probably agree with you on the right and wrong issue, but that would also explain why there is so much teenage pregnancy because it was a "harmless kiss" or they were just "hugging". Certainly, if there is any understanding of Scripture, we should at least take time to see what God tells on these issues of purity. So, it's an issue of right and wrong (according to Scripture) always for Christians because if we are not living for the glory of God, then whom or what are we living for and what is the worth of our salvation?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/3/2008 7:00:46 PM
|
|
|
Bridgitt
Posts: 237
Joined: 6/18/2008
Status: offline
|
It depends on the level of self-control one person has. I think the more "contact" the greater the temptation to go further.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/3/2008 11:03:47 PM
|
|
|
ChoirDJ
Posts: 473
Joined: 6/15/2006
From: So Cal
Status: offline
|
Ninja...Judging by your post, I think we missed each other there so let's try again.
Of course we want to be righteous in how we relate to someone in a dating relationship. The issue is whether or not there's anything wrong with physical contact during the relationship and the answer to that is "not necessarily." If the physical contact leads to impure thoughts, physical arousal, or more it's wrong. If it doesn't, then it's not wrong.
The problem comes when we start making unbrella statements such as "holding hands" is wrong for example. It may be wrong for some (depending on what's going on in the heart) but it may not be wrong for others. We all have our threshholds and it varies with each person. Men tend to have a lower threshhold for physical contact in that the average man will become aroused more quickly than the average woman. So, we have to be careful about being a stumbling block to the other person even though we may not be struggling personally with some form of physical contact.
Now, the last part of this post and the point I was trying to make. Would it not be wise to avoid the temptation altogether if possible? Remember, it's not wrong if you do have some physical contact in some cases but the closer you get to that edge, the more likely you are to fall off the cliff. I can't fall off the cliff if I'm no where near the edge. I may not fall off the cliff even if I am standing right at the edge but wouldn't conventional wisdom say to stay away from it anyway?
_____________________________
"Sin will take you further than you intended to go, keep you there longer than you intended to stay, and cost you more than you intended to spend." Got it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/4/2008 11:51:31 PM
|
|
|
Ninjaearth
Posts: 66
Joined: 2/16/2008
From: Washington, D.C. - Maryland
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChoirDJ
Ninja...Judging by your post, I think we missed each other there so let's try again.
Of course we want to be righteous in how we relate to someone in a dating relationship. The issue is whether or not there's anything wrong with physical contact during the relationship and the answer to that is "not necessarily." If the physical contact leads to impure thoughts, physical arousal, or more it's wrong. If it doesn't, then it's not wrong.
The problem comes when we start making unbrella statements such as "holding hands" is wrong for example. It may be wrong for some (depending on what's going on in the heart) but it may not be wrong for others. We all have our threshholds and it varies with each person. Men tend to have a lower threshhold for physical contact in that the average man will become aroused more quickly than the average woman. So, we have to be careful about being a stumbling block to the other person even though we may not be struggling personally with some form of physical contact.
Now, the last part of this post and the point I was trying to make. Would it not be wise to avoid the temptation altogether if possible? Remember, it's not wrong if you do have some physical contact in some cases but the closer you get to that edge, the more likely you are to fall off the cliff. I can't fall off the cliff if I'm no where near the edge. I may not fall off the cliff even if I am standing right at the edge but wouldn't conventional wisdom say to stay away from it anyway?
I do thank you clarifying what you mean. I do agree. It's a bit tough with one person saying it's okay and the other saying it's not okay. I do think it is important to have a fine mark on the standards set in a relationship. I would think that it's better to say that it's best to avoid all types of physical contact that will lead to sexual impurity. This would rule of kissing because the stumbling block would be eliminated, regardless of which side is on this. Of course this is where the "but we're okay with and nothing ever happens" comes in, but then that's back to where we started. Like you said, it's better to avoid the cliff altogether. I think, in the end, then issues like kissing and petting so to speak probably should be avoided solely for the point of safety, not necessary because it's wrong. Holding hands usually never results into anything beyond the norm (for many). I think the overall issue is setting a Biblical standard regardless of how parties feel about holding hands and kissing. In no way I think holding hands is wrong; I'm all for it. I think there's something to be said about kissing, because that can be literally playing with fire. The same is true petting/caressing and the like, but not holding hands (though it's still unclear somewhat). I don't want to make it seem like I'm turning this into a bigger issue then what it is; all I'm trying to see is that a fixed standard needs to be set to protect both parties from stumbling and sinning against God. That may in turn may require minimal physical contact to just simple stuff like holding hands. The basis is trying to keep purity as high as possible while reserving the maximal potential for physical intimacy later on in the marriage as well as stay true to Scripture as well. That's main issue I'm looking at, trying not to be really in the middle but still solid. I think that will also go back to the issue of how two people should act in a non-marital relationship. If that's the case, Scripture has plenty to say on the matter. I guess that's all I can really say. Nevertheless, I do believe view on it is completely valid, although I think you stating what I'm saying in a different way. Again, thank you for clarifying.
God bless!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/4/2008 11:58:05 PM
|
|
|
deermousie
Posts: 1680
Joined: 9/26/2007
Status: offline
|
I think one thing could use mentioning, and that is sex isn't just intercourse. Intercourse is just the final step of the sexual dance. It starts with an eye-catching glance, a smile, talking, hand holding, a side hug, a full-on hug, and so on. Kissing is foreplay. Handholding is foreplay.
Unless it's with your aunt (yes, I kiss my aunt. But not like I kiss my husband). 
People can become aroused just by holding hands, because it's part of the path that leads to intercourse.
Someone has said that 1 Cor. 7:1,2 refers only to sex. I'd like to see some scholarship on that from the Greek:
Strong's Concordance gives the word used in 1 Cor. 7:1 as haptomai, 'to touch' which apparently is derived from the Greek word hapto : "a primary verb: 'to fasten to' as in specially to set on fire."
So to me that doesn't say intercourse but arousal.
If a man touches a woman and either is aroused by it, then this doesn't come under the few man/woman relationships defined by brother/sister or friend/friend but by husband/wife. And that verse does say let people get married to avoid sexual immorality.
When I was dating my now-husband, we avoided touching. We avoided even being alone together. Partly we did that to avoid the appearance of evil (so no one could say we'd been alone and therefore must have been inappropriate) and partly because we didn't want to slip.
We've taught our teen to do the same, and to not give her heart or her body to a guy she isn't married to. She has to choose how she'll handle her life, but she's been watching the non-Christians snuggling and then breaking up and finding someone else to snuggle, and she doesn't want to go there.
_____________________________
Want to know where a certain word or phrase in the Bible is found? www.biblegateway.com Yay!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/5/2008 2:40:01 AM
|
|
|
Covaan_Meshuga
Posts: 3509
Joined: 6/8/2005
From: a mother who let me live
Status: offline
|
I have yet to hear or read one (real) believer who wished they had gone further before marriage.
_____________________________
Abiyah
"Ladies and gentlemen, there are things that you will only be able to learn by the weakest among us, and when you snuff them out, you are the one that loses." ~~Gianna Jesson, 1977 LA, CA, saline abortion survivor
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/5/2008 3:24:04 AM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2543
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
Good posts, deermousie and Covaan!
< Message edited by OneOfHisJewels -- 7/5/2008 12:21:13 PM >
_____________________________
"We basically use what I have seen referred to as "get off your butt" parenting. It employs more interaction, more redirection, more prevention, and usually less spanking."
-Mrs. Wifey
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/5/2008 3:32:27 AM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2543
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrapeApe
Physical contact does NOT lead to sexual immorality. I am so very sick of people saying, "Oh my gosh, you two are hugging and holding hands! You MUST be sleeping together!" ... blah blah blah bull.
It, however, can, given that the individuals allow it. But being physical, in and of itself, doesn't lead to sexual immorality. It's the lack of self control.
I'm not going to set a limitation on myself that I cannot show physical love to my girlfriend. I have, however, set a limitation in my heart to not allow our physical contact to go beyond martial boundaries.
And, if Lord willing, you do marry your girlfriend, that has the potential of having a bad effect on your marital intimacy. I have known of couples that thought it was ok to do do certain things before marriage as long as they stopped at a certain point. Then after marriage, they had a hard time going beyond that point, and had inhibitions and embarrasments that a married couple should not have. They were also so used to being so cuddly clothed, that they felt embarressed to be visually seen by one another. Which is sad, because marriage is the ONE AND ONLY place where any two people should be "naked and unashamed."
Now, of course, any sin can be repented of, and God can redeem and renew no matter what, but while it's still possible to make a change is a good time to do so.
GrapeApe, you said you set a limit not to go beyond marital boundaries, but from what I read in extreme teens, it sounds to me like you and your girlfriend have already done more than two unmarried people should. I am not trying to preach at you, I am trying to show loving (as in agape love), caring concern as a big sister in Christ. I'm 36, so I don't have the wisdom of a 90 year old, but I am a few years past you, and I understand how it can really feel like you are sure your girlfriend is "the one," but believe me, I went through being sure 2 different people were "the one," and neither one was. One of them I never had any physical contact with, and the other one, while we never went "all the way," I did have one evening where there was way toomuch hand holding, cuddling, etc., and I regret it to this day. Especially because he married the sweetest girl ever, and when I am around them, I feel bad that I did that with her husband, even though it wasn't even her husband at the time. Even if you DO marry your girlfriend, the MORE you save for marriage, the more special things will be. Think of it this way: When you were a kid, did you ever peek at a b-day or Christmas present ahead of time? Don't you remember how when you opened it, it was never the same as when you waited and had that ahhh moment? It's the same with physical contact. The more you save for marriage, the more special things will be in the marriage.
Now, don't get me wrong. I understand that no matter how far one stumbles, one can repent, and become completely renewed in Christ, however, I am just encouraging you at this point to do what is right in Christ.
One more thought, grapeape. I see you are vp of xtreme teens. You are therefore in somewhat of a leadership position on these forums. I would encourage you to reflect and think and ask yourself what is the best example to other teens on the forums. Is it God honoring chaste behavior, or is it pushing the hormonal limits as far as you can?
< Message edited by OneOfHisJewels -- 7/5/2008 12:22:26 PM >
_____________________________
"We basically use what I have seen referred to as "get off your butt" parenting. It employs more interaction, more redirection, more prevention, and usually less spanking."
-Mrs. Wifey
|
|
|
|
|
RE: physical contact - 7/5/2008 11:14:39 AM
|
|
|
deermousie
Posts: 1680
Joined: 9/26/2007
Status: offline
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
