Is a passionate kiss 'fornication'?🤔 Why?... or Why not?
Posted : 1 Sep, 2022 05:24 PM
Fornication is sex outside of marriage. A kiss is not sex. Therefore, a kiss is not fornication.
This is basic logical deduction...
The word fornication comes from fornicati, which is the Latin Vulgate translation of porneia, which is the word used by Paul in the Greek NT. Porneia is where we get the word porn/pornography.
Based on the above, it would be easy to argue that sexual activity outside the confines of marriage, including, but not necessarily limited to, porn are viewed as acts of fornication.
Most men tend to be logical and driven by rationality. Most women tend to be emotional and driven by feelings. This is a fundamental difference that accounts for a lot.
>> I was just wondering. Because men dont understand me.
Perhaps you don't communicate as clearly as you assume you do - if at all. For example, men are often direct and women are often indirect - but expect men to "read between the lines". That's not effective.
A lot of the time, it seems women think it's up to men to do all the work. I hope women understand that if they do not show genuine interest, then men have no reason or basis to believe women are interested in them, and since most women tend to communicate very indirectly (e.g. wHy DoEsN't He GeT tHe HiNt?), we might just conclude (incorrectly or otherwise) that she wants to be left alone and not be bothered. We have no way of telling the difference and if we reach that conclusion, we may just stop "bothering" you. So, if interested, then *show* genuine interest. This is just one possible variable here though.
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 24 May, 2022 02:58 PM
>> Some woman might be very lucky to have him in the future.
Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not rooting for that particular guy; I'm just viewing certain factors, and your description of them, as objectively as I can, and commenting on it. It could've been any other man in a similar situation. I just wish you the best of luck in your search.
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 24 May, 2022 11:53 AM
>> The guy from yesterday was content with the stuff he had now [...]
Based on your description, he seemed to be doing pretty well already, so at least I don't see the problem.
>> and didn't plan to change anything in his life, ever, except get a wife.
I don't think you can know that for a fact; even if he said something to that effect himself, people often change their minds based on new information and/or experiences.
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 24 May, 2022 01:25 AM
Correction of Typo: "why *should* this hypothetical man believe that you would remain loyal to him *instead of abandoning* him if situations outside of his control change for the worse? It's a rhetorical question, but I hope you see where this is going.."
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 24 May, 2022 01:22 AM
>> I'd rather be alone and eventually miss the romance and company of a husband, than to be with a husband that I might end up resenting because I chose him only to aviod the first scenario.
Well, I think the only thing that would lead to your 2nd scenario is if you make your choice by for the (fundamentally) wrong reasons.
>> I don't want to settle for someone who can't impress me with their personality.
I don't get why women believe that they must be "impressed" before they're willing to seriously consider the man in front of them - or what they would define as "impressive" in the first place - but, then again, I'm not here to change anyone's mind. There're many more things I could mention on this point, but I'm keeping this one short.
>> Someone I will be proud to introduce to my friends.
I think I understand what you mean, but, fundamentally, why does it matter what your friends think of him? Are you expecting your friends to marry him that you must have their approval? Is it a competition? Are you comparing him to the men your friends are with? If not, then why does it matter?...
>> I also need someone I can respect, and that is hard when the only thing I must base the respect on his his social status.
Well, according to the Bible, some key reasons why you're supposed to respect the man you're with are: 1) he's the head of the wife and household (Ephesians 5:23); 2) based on his *character*, not his worldly "social status".
If we're candid about it, you're not really respecting the man - you're "respecting" his "social status". (There's a difference.) From a rational/logical point of view, knowing that social status depends on what *other people* think, knowing that it's unpredictable, and knowing it can change without your control (e.g. become unemployed and hit financial hardship), it necessarily follows that your level of "respect" for this hypothetical man would also change and could quite easily turn into resentment - or worse. First, this seems contrary to every marriage vow I've ever heard of, and 2nd, why wouldn't this hypothetical man believe that you would remain loyal to him and wouldn't abandon him if situations outside of his control change for the worse? It's a rhetorical question, but I hope you see where this is going..
At least to me, it seems like your way of evaluating the situation is off, but, like I said, I'm not here to try and change anyone's mind about it.
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 24 May, 2022 12:32 AM
>> The entire experience became a bit off, and then I know I would rather be alone than with someone I feel is not invested if that even makes sense.
It does. My way of saying it is "I'd rather be lonely and sad than accompanied and miserable". That being said, I don't know that anyone really wants either of those options.
Can you have something on the "must have list" that you don't have yourself?
Posted : 23 May, 2022 11:48 PM
>> English is my third language, so it was hard to describe this in a reasonable way.
I see. I think that clarifies quite a bit and I'll keep it in mind. (Your English is good enough to fool me into thinking you were a naitive speaker, so that's why I took issue with the original statement.) I also understand the introvert aspect, because I'm also an introvert myself - I *must* have my alone time. In fact, finding someone who can actually *understand* this basic point and not turn it into some sort of stupid relationship crisis is also problematic... (I was in one relationship ~20 years ago; she was an extrovert. I've been alone ever since.)
>> Not all men who are openly searching for virgins are twice divorced, but it was a caracteristic I thought I could use to underline a point. Many of them are far from virgins themselves, although they might have never been married before.
I understand that, and, to be honest, for certain things, I don't think people get to expect something from others that they themselves have failed to offer. Virginity before marriage is one of those things, IMO - i.e. if a person isn't, then they don't get to "demand" that the other person ought to be. Either the same standard they seek to apply to others also gets applied to themselves, or it applies to no one.
>> If a virgin man is looking for a virgin wife I would consider that less controversial
It shouldn't be. At point like this should be considered reasonable. If I spent my time preserving certain things, based on Christian principles, rather than prostituting myself, why should it be "unreasonable" for me to expect the same from someone else? (Rhetorical question)
>> I have also observed many men state this on their profiles, and at that point it might scare women away [...]
Well, this is a catch-22 if I ever saw one. On the one hand, women who want a Christian man, which is supposed to imply certain things. On the other hand, women get scared away if a man publicly states he's a virgin. Women like these need to understand that you cannot have both at the same time - especially when we're talking about mutually exclusive options.
>> because it is such a weird thing to broadcast to the world when you are meeting someone for the first time, visiting their profile.
Perhaps. I don't put things like that in my profile, but I wouldn't be ashamed of mentioning that to a woman if we're talking about the subject *and* I think that's something that particular woman should know about me. (I don't just go around telling something like that to anyone.)
>> I had another date yesterday, and this time the man had the best social-wealth situation one can imagine. He had a job as a computer engineer, a 4 bedroom house fully paid for. A modern electric car fully paid for, and one of the most beautiful bengal cats (expensive) I have seen. He just had no romantic tension at all, little to none humor, quite low attractiveness, and conversation flow was not the best.
Sounds like you're having some luck. I either get "not interested. thank you" or scammers that need to have their accounts banned. I think I've given up here in this site. I may or may not keep the account around for exchanging messages and so on. Who knows.
>> He would most certainly have been a safe choice to take home to my mother, but also potentially a boring person to spend a lifetime with. I will eventually need to meet someone that I feel attracted to without seing their bank account.
I don't know what it is that you hope to find that you wouldn't consider "boring", but judging from your own description of your own life, it sounds like there're at least 2 problems: 1) most lives are average, by definition, and they are what you make of them - I hope you're not trying to find some James Bond-type of "exciting"; and, 2) you don't seem to have a lot of time for "excitement" even if you could find it anyway - given your work schedules and introversion. (I know that, as an introvert, I tend to rely on routines, and most of them involve staying at home.)
I'm not saying you ought to go for anyone in particular, but let's face it, there's also nothing wrong with having a so-called "normal" life with a regular/average guy.
If the OKC data shows anything, though, it's that most women seem to have a skewed view of men and of themselves, so they always (incorrectly) *claim* they're "settling" for a man because, in their minds, they *think* they "deserve" better - which, tbh, is disrespectful towards the man they *do* have (if at all) - and it's also incorrect b/c it's men who have been "dating down" from the beginning of time.
A while back, there was one instance where a woman recounted (twitter) that she was talking to a man she was interested in and he asked her if she would date a struggling man (read: struggling financially) and her reply was "no". She says the man's reply to her was "well, to me, *you* are the struggling man" and he left. I don't know if she learned anything from it, but at least it made enough of an impact on her that she posted it online. I thought it was funny... because it was true.
