Why are most Christian men living sexually immoral lifestyles?

Christian Post ^ | 02/03/2022 | J.S. Shelton

[af_vet_1981]

Well, Paul’s advice to men tempted by lust was to get married. That’s not really an option for most men anymore, so what do you expect?

The first is an oversimplified interpretation and the second is false. Remember what Jesus said about it is better to enter into life with one hand or one eye than to be thrown into the fire of hell with both.

• 7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!
• 8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
• 9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

[the OlLine Rebel]

See my OP https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4035128/posts?page=94#94

Not BS. Individuals DO NOT NEED sex for THEMSELVES to survive.

This is common cover for those wishing to justify their immorality.

And this is not just about viewing porn. It’s about any immoral sex. Period. All sex outside marriage is a sin. It may be natural, but it is not moral. Because it ruins other lives, like childrens’ who inevitably result and which IS the PURPOSE of sex, not your survival. Thus it should not be so glibly thrown around. Check out urban decay. Lots of screwing, lots of uncared for children and consequent citizens.

[the OlLine Rebel]

How is the first phrase expanded on by the “cut it off” admonition? Or just how is it oversimplified?

[the OlLine Rebel]

It is NOT. A need. No matter how much males esp. and any sexual sinner wishes to justify it.

A natural happening is not a deal. Swinging that thing around and using it on others without sacrament of marriage IS a sin.

[al baby]

And now Phil Collins is retired

[al baby]

Thumper is my porn name

[PapaBear3625]

It works both ways. I am shocked at the number of guys who are less than average across the board, who seem to think they deserve supermodels for girlfriends or wives. Or that they really think some girl who could get any guy she wanted would even give them a second look.

It works both ways, but not as much as you imply.

One major difference between guys and women: the woman would rather stay home than go out with a guy she feels is beneath her, while a guy would rather go out with the most desirable woman he can actually talk into going out.

As the guy is still the one who society expects to make the first move, and thus the one who will get shot down when he asks out a girl who doesn't find him attractive, guys VERY QUICKLY find out their true "sexual market value".

A guy with the courage to keep asking, and keep getting shot down, is more likely to succeed in getting desirable women, than a girl who waits at some for Prince Charming to select her on Tinder (or whatever).

Guys also know that they peak later in the desirability game. For a woman of 24, she's at her peak, lots of older men want to date her. A guy tends to peak later, in his 30's, when he's had time to become professionally successful, learn to dress well, and become more confident. Meanwhile, women's desirability starts going down in their 30's, and they may regret passing up the good men who wanted to date them in their younger days.

(BTW, I'm a happily married man who exited the dating game decades ago, but who still talks to my younger friends)

[fatman6502002]

Now you’re denying Mother Nature, you’re denying human nature. You are a true fanatic.

[the OlLine Rebel]

I was considered “normal” at least in the ‘50s. And earlier.

Keep your legs together. It helps children, nevermind possibly you and the person you’re using.

Urban culture with free love is all you need to see to see how serious sexual sin is. I don’t care about nature. It IS nature, but it can and does lead to ruinous society. Deny that and you deny liberal anything-goes philosophy of the last 50 years which HAS ruined our culture. Pill and abortion, Welfare AND payment for more kids…who are RUINED being put in this situation by NO FAULT OF THEIROWN. Their “parents” just wanted to screw, and likely get the bit of money for it. That’s all. No responsibility.

Abortion and pills and condoms didn’t work….it’s the habit of lust and screwing that ultimately overrides all that and lead to HUGE illegitimacy rates along with huge dysfunction.

Keep it in your pants. Save it for the chosen one.

[PapaBear3625]

God’s design is not 15 years of chastity after sexual maturity. That’s man’s doing.

Yes, up until recent times, it was normal for young people to marry in their teens, to partners who had their parents approval (because while they might be sexually mature, young people may not be judgmentally mature yet, that's what parental guidance is for).

[fatman6502002]

Live your life the way you choose as a free person, act responsibly and accept the consequences of your actions and decisions, do your best to make this a better world.

[PapaBear3625]

The problem with looks is that they can fade, and what I have noticed is, ironically, it seems that the more attractive a woman is when she is young, the less well she ages.

Yes, looks can (and do) fade, which is why looks should be a lesser consideration when looking for a spouse. I'm fortunate to have married an average-looking woman, who after 40 years is still interested in keeping me happy.

[af_vet_1981]

How is the first phrase expanded on by the “cut it off” admonition? Or just how is it oversimplified?

In that passage of his letter to the Corinthians the Apostle is not speaking of lust, which is disordered and oft leads to porneia, a deadly sin. Instead he referred to a lack of the virtue of temperance/self-control (see Second Peter).
Marriage is a holy gift to those not called to celibacy and not a solution to lust. He was not addressing “men” per se, but rather “unmarried” and “widows,” so both genders, giving them permission to marry if they lack enough self-control to remain celibate like him, according to their calling in the Lord.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Well stated.

[the OlLine Rebel]

I can agree with that. Just wasn’t seeing the connection.

[af_vet_1981]

How is the first phrase expanded on by the “cut it off” admonition?

Jesus was speaking of “offenses” ie., scandalous sins so that if the hand or eye causes one to commit those “offenses” it would be better for that one to remove the causes than perish in hell. The preceding verses give the context as scandalizing children (little ones) who believe. However, if one reads his last recorded words about the “pornoi” (whoremonger/sexually immoral/fornicator), it is clear they do not obey his commandments, will not have a right to the tree of life, and not enter into his kingdom; thus losing limbs is preferable to hell.

Yet the answer is not mutilation, but rather repentance and self control out of a pure heart.

[metmom]

Yes, “do” would have been a better choice of words.

And you are fortunate because I’m known some very attractive women who are just witches and brutal to live with.

I can’t understand that the trade off was worth it for those guys.

[fatman6502002]

Thank You.

[Varsity Flight]

Nocturnal

Nocturnal...while asleep

Asleep

[Varsity Flight]

Yes.

And now:

Because lawlessness is increased, the love of most people will grow cold

Men are unable to trust “law”

Cold law