Struggling with lust

[FFC]

Very good, Zoegirl. Taking something as close to the line as possible is something that I have always lost at. Even if I was successful one time...it usually meant that it would be consumated at another time because of all of the sexual fuel that I put into it. Besides we may think that we are in control, but even the devil knows that is a lie and plays on it big time. As difficult as it is the best way is to block anything sexual, in a sensual way, from entering our minds and not giving the devil a foothold. I don't know about anybody else but I need very little help in falling into this chasm.

Yeah, sometimes I think previous generations had it perfectly right to demand a chaperone for unmarried men and women. For them as much as for propriety.

Probably one of the most idiotic things any couple can do is be alone at night, especially late hours. There is something that happens to the brain the more tired we are that directly correlates to our idiocy

I heard a saying that goes: "nothing good happens after dark". Obviously there are always exceptions, but it does seem to hold in this context.

[madscientist]

I agree with most of the things, zoe, however, i also heard people say that they can have a relationship and not have sex. They say it's nice to have a gf/bf; life becomes nicer and all that. And I know people who are in a relationship for over a year and are OK; even are christians and did not have or think about sex; their relationship is about being with one another and friendship rather than sex or such thoughts. Many things can go well in a relationship but that just depends on the committment and the aims of the people involved in it - what they want to achieve and expect. And to add to this, I like someone right now and am looking for a relationship, but as I've said before, I have been very unlucky and did not get anywhere. That creates frustration... now then... if I was not able to get a nice pure feeling of sinless love, then my brain started to go on stuff such as lust etc. WHy? Due to a lack of love or satisfaction ever felt in this issue. And that be no good either because then I'm only frustrated and unhappy even more. And then i hear a bunch of people saying life becomes nicer when I'll find the right person, "wait till uni", "you'll find the girl of your life" etc. And even worse, at times when I feel depressed etc then at least a gf would be nice to talk to; but since this so-far imaginary gf isnt there I feel even worse and want one etc. And all gets worse. I think we humans were created for some sort of friendship and love and physical attraction. People get pleasure and joy and peace from some petting or touching of the other person (sorry, but i never had a chance to try this for real; once I do i will be able to say how it feels ) so then i think its good in a way.
So how to deal with that? Any possible advice? Still to note, I am NOT thinking about this person in a lustful way; just want her to know what I feel towards her and want to be a friend of hers (or more than a friend ) but dont want any sinful stuff.
Cant having a nice good relationship solve some problems and make it "nicer" even if sex is left out?

.
It's pretty simple. Sexual intercourse is the act Christians should abstain from prior to marriage. Sometimes the mere kiss leads to sex...this is normal. If one cannot control this urge to move naturally into the sex act, then kissing should be avoided IF you are wanting to avoid the sin of premarrital sex.

Thus some religious groups tend to frown on certain activities they deem as "dangerous" to leading one's thoughts into sex. They can certainly get overzealous in this respect.

And if it doesnt is it all right? I know some people like that... it's human nature to always want more (same as with drinking alcohol, for example) but one must know the boundary. Here is enough; beyond this i'll be drunk. I think the same shoudl go for sex. Kiss, do this, petting, touching, but no further than this - e.g. no spending a night half undressed in one bed and some booze right next to them... that could end up quite bad! But I mean that we are all humans and should have a right to show to the person we love that we love him/her without having to be artificial about it and trying to hide something etc.

Sex was meant for marriage, so the husband and wife can enjoy one another physically. It isn't sin to have sex for other reasons than reproduction. If it was, God would have made us like the animals, where the female of the species come into heat for the sole reason for reproduction.

Hm then why i seen somewhere that it's only for that? Then why cant any contraception be used? What if then no contraception used but the idea is that they dont want any children? So they'll try to have sex when the woman is least likely to have a child etc - is that not a sin to speculate and try to avoid having children? And what if they want no more, yet have sex and make one - what then? too late, they have to put up with it! Now imagine a still fertile couple in their forties, having brought up kids who are teenagers. And now they have sex, and have one more child. Unexpected. What then? Too late! Wouldnt it have been better think about this in advance and prevent this by using adequate contraception? Or then have no sex; but then that creates a paradox... So what would be the most intelligent way to deal with this?

[jenna]

Whoever said anything about contraception not being used? I think it should be used, if the couple does not want anymore children. There is nothing wrong with it, as long as it is used wisely and for the right reasons. It certainly is better than abortion in any case! About a couple getting older and then the woman getting pregnant, I certainly know all about that. I have a sister a year younger than my daughter. While it is true that contraceptives aren't foolproof, it is better than having unwanted children, or children that may not be able to be properly taken care of. I think having a good relationship can solve problems, without having sex. It is when you get into heavy kissing and petting that causes problems. Unknown to some, if the male gets aroused, and can't find an "outlet", then it does actually physically hurt him. Many women don't understand this, since it isn't the same for us. This is one reason why "necking" is wrong, because it doesn't show true love for the other, or respect. And too often, one doesn't know where to draw the line, but gets caught up in the moment, and they both go too far. Then what? Possible pregnancy, disease, or other complications arise. A simple kiss now and then is okay, I think, but that should be all that occurs.

[madscientist]

Hm you think contraception is right in the eyes of God?? Well me personally I would have thought the same thing most probably, but Christianity is strongly agains it. Because it stops the possibility of a child or something like that - simply, it is strongly against it. Of course, it is better and the lesser evil to have a condom and a sin rather than an unwanted child!! And if someone is to have sex even outside of marriage (e.g. teenage couples who do not even intend to marry), the best thing would be no sex, but if they really want then with a condom would be I think even less sin, because what if a child is made? Then that would only make more sin. We are to be responsible and use wisdom when we decide. So being silly and irresponsible by not caring about having contraception, I must agree, would be stupid and i think a greater sin...
But if we look at married couples, then I've been told and heard and there are issues that contraception of any sort is EVIL. The Bible, unfortunately, i dont think has a lot to say about this since there was nothing as such back then.

Unknown to some, if the male gets aroused, and can't find an "outlet", then it does actually physically hurt him. Many women don't understand this, since it isn't the same for us. This is one reason why "necking" is wrong, because it doesn't show true love for the other, or respect.

What is this arousal - any special sort of it or just normal? I think it's quite normal for males to get aroused every time they kiss or make out with their gf; and i think it is the same for girls (sorry, i have no experience in this yet!! ). And what is this outlet - i.e. go even further until sex? And why is "necking" or what is it different to other sorts of things e.g. normal kissing? Can't is show the love to the other just as any other sorts of petting or how it is called?

[jenna]

I'm not sure where you heard contraception is wrong in God's eyes, either in marriage or out of it. I don't personally think he considers it wrong, since it only prevents pregnancy, not ends it. Yes, it may stop a human from being made, but I would think that if God had a special plan for any child yet to be born, He could possibly make the contraception fail. Between married couples, it is always best to plan a child, instead of just "letting it happen", unless you have everything possible to care properly for a baby. I don't think it would be wrong for a couple to use protection if they aren't ready for, or unable to take care of a child. Many people think they would not be good parennts, so they chose not to have children. Is it really a sin to know whether or not you are capable of raising a child properly, and planning accordingly? As far as "necking", that is simply a form of foreplay, and should not happen except in marriage. Necking and kissing are different in the sense that a kiss should be a kiss. Not a "french kiss" or anything similar, but a simple "peck" can show affection without going too far.

[madscientist]

Hm well it's been quite an issue and still is . But as for my own opinion I must agree that you are right in the sense that having a child when we're not ready should be a sin because it is taking a life in vain or ruining or how you want to put it.
And then is sex outside of marriage the same sin whether protected or not?

Yes, it may stop a human from being made, but I would think that if God had a special plan for any child yet to be born, He could possibly make the contraception fail.

Hm yeah very true!! The thing is. it is a paradox applicable anywhere. Suppose we take IVF and all that. The ethical issues are that we "play God". But the paradox is, that if the child born is let's say without a disease, in a way it was God's will because then He would not made it possible. If we dont decide to use this and do all naturally, it would still be God's will that would have happened as it did. But I can certainly see what you mean... Or who decides about a new life? Even when a wanted/unwanted child is born, it was the people having sex; but since God decides about everything it was God's will what happens. Well this is goin off topic but certainly is one of many interesting things that could be well discussed in this forum!! What a paradox...
As for necking - is that just kissing the neck or stimulating the very sensitive nerves?

[jenna]

I think "necking" is more than just kissing the neck. Generally it also involves heavy "petting" and kissing more than a general kiss. When teens, or anyone for that matter, "neck", it usually involves a lot more than kissing the neck! Which can lead to sex. Also, the neck does have sensitive nerves, so it can be stimulating as well.

[madscientist]

aha right so its considered harsher than normal kissing. same as french kissing id guess. The question is what if it doesnt lead to sex...
And as for petting (even if not heavy) would that be considered a sin if it doesnt cause sexual pleasure? And what if it did? (Im speaking outside marriage ofcourse). Because I think one of the reasons why it's done in couples is because it does cause some arousal or pleasure or whatever.

[FFC]

aha right so its considered harsher than normal kissing. same as french kissing id guess. The question is what if it doesnt lead to sex...

If you can do it without becoming aroused you are a better man than I am. You have to also think of the neckee. Are you causing him or her to stumble?

[Kurieuo]

aha right so its considered harsher than normal kissing. same as french kissing id guess. The question is what if it doesnt lead to sex...

If you can do it without becoming aroused you are a better man than I am. You have to also think of the neckee. Are you causing him or her to stumble?

So is the wrongness in the pleasure and not the action?

[FFC]

aha right so its considered harsher than normal kissing. same as french kissing id guess. The question is what if it doesnt lead to sex...

If you can do it without becoming aroused you are a better man than I am. You have to also think of the neckee. Are you causing him or her to stumble?

So is the wrongness in the pleasure and not the action?

Good point. I would say the wrongness was in the motive of the heart. are you doing it with sexual lust in your heart that you want to satisfy, or as a innocent act of tender affection. For me i need to find the line and stay a mile away from it...which can be easier said than done.

[madscientist]

Interesting! Exactly what i wondered - where does the sin come in? I mean, if we hug someone for 5 minutes and get aroused, is that sin? Or is getting aroused in general terms a sin? At times, people cant help it - its a reflex to a stimulus. If someone you feel attracted comes to you and starts touching you all over i dont think you will not like it physically (although you may want that person to stop due to psychology - possible sin? ah ya no it's better if i withdraw from her/him... ). If you cant help it what to do? And if you can, is it a sin no to withdraw from such moments - e.g. tell her/him to stop or leave - would it be a sin to remain and let be touched by that person?
Now if you hug someone for 5 minutes but get no aroused whatsoever (although we may feel psychological joy but no necessarily sexual ) then is it a sin? If it's a person we feel attracted i mean, not a friendly hug with a child or parent or so...
And it's also said that these things produce good mood, motivation by releasing good hormones and endorphins! now i think God made it for a reason...

Also heard that watching porn without getting aroused is not a sin; then i read that it doesnt make a difference. As for me, i myself hate porn because i know its a sin, but i made myself believe it's nasty so i made myself disgusted it in the subconscience. So where's the problem - pleasure or action?

[zoegirl]

Interesting! Exactly what i wondered - where does the sin come in? I mean, if we hug someone for 5 minutes and get aroused, is that sin? Or is getting aroused in general terms a sin? At times, people cant help it - its a reflex to a stimulus. If someone you feel attracted comes to you and starts touching you all over i dont think you will not like it physically (although you may want that person to stop due to psychology - possible sin? ah ya no it's better if i withdraw from her/him... ). If you cant help it what to do? And if you can, is it a sin no to withdraw from such moments - e.g. tell her/him to stop or leave - would it be a sin to remain and let be touched by that person?

This is where the Holy Spirit convicts each of us at different levels of the intimacy scale. I think, in those 5 minutes, we are presented with a choice....Arousal *is* a physical response and to some degree we do not control it. We may see someone of the opposite sex and just-bam- become stimulated from their looks. It is as this moment that we must train ourselves to look away and not allow that arousal to be fed.

In those 5 minutes when you realize you are being stimulated, you are then in control of your response. You can pull away and disengage from that person....you can walk away....you could leave and take a cold shower....whatever....but I think that we step into sin when we *choose* to entertain that arousal .

Obviously, those involuntary arousals at night or sudden arousals that arise (ahem) so unexpectantly are not under our control, but our continuing the arousal through thought or deed then reflects a choice on our part.

Now if you hug someone for 5 minutes but get no aroused whatsoever (although we may feel psychological joy but no necessarily sexual ) then is it a sin? If it's a person we feel attracted i mean, not a friendly hug with a child or parent or so...
And it's also said that these things produce good mood, motivation by releasing good hormones and endorphins! now i think God made it for a reason...

I think a friendly hug with no sexual overtones is not sin. Remember, we are talking about lust, so these sorts of physcial intimacy are fine and good if no lust is involved; however, as FFC mentioned, this can be awfully hard to separate. IF you can hug a friend without introducing lustful thoughts and physcial arousal, then this is not a tempation for you.

But if we are discussing other stages of foreplay, then first of all, I think the point is moot, because these actions (kissing, petting, necking) are really not done inthe absence of arousal. Secondly, the actions do become prohibitive because these are actions involved in the sexual act really reserved for the marrieds.

Also heard that watching porn without getting aroused is not a sin; then i read that it doesnt make a difference. As for me, i myself hate porn because i know its a sin, but i made myself believe it's nasty so i made myself disgusted it in the subconscience. So where's the problem - pleasure or action?

Um, again, why would you even watch it if not for arousal? I think that's a bit of a silly question....However, there are other issues here.

YOu are watching others fornicate....which, really, is a form of adultery and fornication.

You are watching, in all likelihood, the abuse of women, a form of human slavery (many of those girls and women are terribly abused and lured by false promises), which, all questions of arousal aside, becomes a sin for that acceptance of that practice by watching it.

You are watching a perverted form of the sexual act, dominated by lust and not love. In this regard you are letting your mind and soul travel through sinful thoughts and practices and feeding those thoughts and practices.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

My compliments to you, Zoegirl. Your answer - above - to madscientist impressed me.

FL

[zoegirl]

thanks