Why do people engage in fornication before marriage?

Post Reply New Topic

Ooops, sorry, pages not discussion topics.

do you mean f*sh and f*ng*r pi?

You do not appear to have addressed the statement about the exploitation aspect at all.

I appreciate that the original poster's language may have struck many as perhaps strongly worded in terms of the sheer disgust, but I do not think that ridicule is a helpful response. Of course pleasure is involved as well as the continuation of the species, as well as cementing the loving bonds. Interestingly, C.S. Lewis once also used the food sex/analogy, though his argument was the reverse of yours. Look, many people (by no means confined to Christians, or even adherents of Abrahamic traditions) myself included believe in waiting before engaging in sexual activity. This is clearly an issue people on both sides feel strongly about, but please let us try to be civil. Many of the posts seem quite depressing to me; I would actually prefer for the intercourse to be within the context of a loving relationship, and have trouble understanding why anyone would not. Obviously I am no stranger to sexual desire, but society does seem to lionise it and carry on as though that was all there was to life, and have little regard for how they may be making some people feel abnormal for actually not wanting for some bizarre reason to treat others solely as objects for the gratification of their own desire! I realise of course that many unwed lovers are not like this, and conversely many married relationships can be abusive or manipulative, but I am confused why some have taken umbrage at my position. If we are discussing this at all we are clearly interested in other people's love lives, so why would my expressing concern be any worse that their expressing concern at myself and fellow abstinent Aspies? The decision is surely not harming people at any rate, nor do we represent a threat to our more sexually active fellow humans.

I am not familiar with the Testament of Truth. What religious tradition is that from, or is it your own creation? Sorry if my expression may sound confrontational, I genuinely have not heard of this text. The movement from the Law of Moses to the Gospels and Pauline Epistles seems to be rather in the contrary direction to that from the two Testaments to your Testament of Truth (many things were permitted in the domain of sexual ethics in the Torah that are not within the New Testament. What about the exploitation issues? There appears to be a tendency to conflate "needs" and "desires". We need food to survive. We do not individually all need sex to continue living(nor is the Earth currently exactly in any danger of humanity becoming scarce through lack of reproduction, quite the contrary). We do probably need relationships, more broadly understood (including friendships for example). What about the effect upon how people relate to each other? Lovemaking is surely not as functional and dull as you make it sound, but something involving many aspects of the whole human being, or rather two human beings. I have to say that some of you are really not selling your lifestyle choice, to be blunt.

You mention yourself an alternative to using someone else as a vent, an unpleasant one to be sure, but surely preferable to many of the alternatives. And there are also actually men who desire meaningful relationships; I am intensely irritated by clichés of us all having no interest in romance or children, as some females might similarly be irritated by denials of their own sexual desires. Surely it is important to regard the beloved as a person, to get to know them as a friend first, and to be able to take one's time and romance them.

Marriage is hardly confined to stunningly handsome alpha-males, any more than to irresistible alpha-females. The planet has many problems, but if you genuinely regard it with such utter distain that is somewhat troubling. Has it occurred to you that you may have contributed (as in my different ways may I) to some of those problems? If you genuinely consider yourself so loathsome physically, why is it alright for people who have not had time to get to know your finer qualities endure your attentions, but apparently impossible in your view that any woman might grow to like you despite your not being conventionally handsome (sorry about the personal tone here) and actually agree to a long-term relationship?

I appreciate this post. Some of these posts I find profoundly troubling. I am confused as to why wishing lovemaking to be in the context of a mutually loving committed long term relationship should be mocked, but any questioning of their own lifestyle choice, which surely must have serious repercussions for many people, invites only further mockery and at times outright hostility. Hope you find someone who will love and respect you. I am beginning to be turned off the whole thing. I am on the one hand committed to abstinence before marriage and fidelity within, but on the other hand I do not see a high probability of my getting a girlfriend (though I have many female friends) any time soon. I would love to be a father and a husband, but there is a place also for people to live lives that may be dedicated to causes all the more because they need not trouble themselves with fears for their families, being single and only needing to fear for their own lives. At least my libido seems to be growing fainter, reducing the frustration (must be all the talk of soulless, transactonal, destructive congress!) I only hope if I ever do marry it (desire) will revive. I am irrationally anxious about whether I would be able to make it enjoyable for my as yet unknown beloved (this is important to me). Surely that is one thing I do not have to worry about as a single person! I hope I will be able to sire children by the time I marry, if that ever occurs. I am actually beginning to think lifelong celibacy might be a possibility I am absolutely fine with (though I have been very inconsistent as to my feelings on this subject). It is at any rate a possibility that must be considered seriously, so that one may learn to embrace that possibility maturely and get on with enjoying all the other aspects of one's humanity for the rest of one's life. At any rate, if I must remain a bachelor I am determined to remain a virgin. God bless you.

With regard to another poster here, why not similar schools to teach men to value and respect women and learn how to give them happiness, and yes enjoyment? I cannot understand all this talk of some ideal of sexual prowess. Could not a couple learn over the course of their lives how to give mutual pleasure? If I have never been with anyone prior, it is not as though I would have anything to compare my wedding night with, is it? And it would help with my probable performance anxiety not to have to worry about being compared unfavourably with previous, perhaps more experienced and skilful lovers. Also, why are you puzzled that other men would prefer "relationship sex"? Who wouldn't? Admittedly, at 33 I still have no basis for comparison, but I genuinely cannot see how the alternative would be appealing; I have had such thoughts, but associate them with unbelievably low self-esteem alone in my bed, so these are not positive connotations. I have trouble understanding how some who have obtained a loving relationship should wish to jeopardise something so precious by infidelity. I am troubled as to how it can be assumed that one could corrupt oneself indefinitely without having some impact on how one related to women. Even my lustful thoughts had a tendency that way (not so much the positive romantic day dreaming, though one can lead readily to the other) so I am glad that I am gradually being released from the curse of covetousness.

I was aware of the translation issue with Isaiah 7:14; not really sure of its precise relevance here. I am also aware that Hebrew has no neuter third person pronoun and besides there are many passages where both paternal and maternal images are used in connection with God. Just not sure what point you seek to make. A lot of the flee fornication/sexual immorality verses are New Testament, and therefore Greek any way. By what authority do you declare this Testament to be a more faithful recording of the Messiah's words than in any of the Canonical Gospels? Is it from the Nag Hammadi manuscripts? Then probably relatively late. If you have no more experienced marriage than I have, and have not even tried sexual continence for very long, how can you pontificate about marital relations with any more authority than me? Sorry if I am coming across as harsh. I am inclined to think that you do not appear to be considering your lovers' needs or emotions very much in all this (sorry if I am misjudging you in that at least).

Your scripture frankly seems to be a mixture of your thinly veiled prejudices against certain Christians and spurious justifications for your own behaviour. It is also grossly historically inaccurate; ancient religions were not exactly inhibited about sexuality, so you are projecting back your own prejudices into the eons. Sorry to find fault with your spiritual beliefs (as you have with those of others) but as we are in the mood for a frank exchange of ideas... You do not appear to me to have addressed my real concerns at all!

I suspect that most people in the world have not yet heard of it but there should come a time in the future when it will be revealed to everybody planetarily (the over-all theme of the web-site: What you or your servants do unto others will also be done unto you, therefore, you are advised to stop funding criminal-activities via tax-payments, lest you dig your own grave & bring about eternal-suffering upon yourself [but that Divine-Protection from being harmed/accosted can be achieved if one stops being complicit to iniquity once the individual and allows the "Scales of Divine-Justice" to "take its payments" of the required "suffering" to be inflicted upon that individual until they no longer have any "payment-debts" of "suffering" for those "Scales of Divine-Justice" to be satisfied that its scales are re-balanced]).

The Testament of Truth was authored by a man by the name of Terence Malaher, his origin was being born a "White Man" from Africa, but he's resided in and now continues to reside in Tasmania, and does his Service-to-Community as a Spiritual-Counsellor/Healer. His full story is on The Testament of Truth web-site itself (one can probably complete a full-reading of the entire web-site within 3-6 months if they read through it avidly every day depending on reading-speed & number of hours of reading). The Testament of Truth is described not as a religion per sé but simply the Pure-Truth in regards to Spiritual-Reality (and that its core message is the core of all religions, therefore, humanity simply needs that message rather than any religion).

Yes, I thought it was quite like that, too, but you have to remember that the ancients™ also followed many different already established "beliefs" that existed before Jesus was even born, and many records indicate that Jesus was a rebel who deeply upset & offended the Pharisees & Jews who held their religion/beliefs as sacrèd, whilst Jesus went about teaching & preaching what they regarded as "blasphemy" against their "authority" of the Church.

For example: "What!? Jesus is teaching these peasants that they can pray directly to God!? Blasphemer ! Only we have access to communicating with God & the peasants must go through our Church-authority (with payments first into our corporate-church-coffers first of course) before any of their messages can reach God !"

I am sure you can find many more examples of Jesus' challenges to Church-authority with some search-engine-activity. The latter portions of Jesus' life should include many examples of how he actually preached against many of those already pre-established-before-Jesus-was-even-born beliefs.


Exploitation is certainly regarded as itself being a sin/crime according to The Testament of Truth. From what I can surmise, when a woman is suffering, she may have been complicit at some point in her past to the same or similar punishment(s) upon others, perhaps for such reasons as being jealous of some other lady & getting that other lady into such situations. Even if it is a Spiritual-Debt (Karmic-Payment), according to The Testament of Truth, the Dark of God severely frowns upon the exploitation of his daughters (all women being daughters of God), and becomes extremely incensed to the point that its feelings are like that of a father learning that his daughter had been violated but multiplied by at least a thousand-fold (actually more like in the millions-fold) of the kind of destructive-anger that any human may feel towards the offenders.


This part does not appear to be addressed to me so I'll move onto the next part...

I believe that you are a sincere individual & likely have a better capacity to discern "truth/deception" or "fact/fiction" than most people. I do not have much to say here, for it does not seem to be addressed specifically to me either, although the part about clichés does seem to be a response to something that I had written. Treating others with respect & kindness is always important (that is also another one of the main basic-themes of The Testament of Truth).

Alright, now that most of the main points have been addressed, I want to explain/time-line how I arrived at The Testament of Truth, and why I regard it as being accurate regarding "Spiritual-Reality"™ (because I've personally bothered to field-test many of its claims for which I already knew that several of the testaments already had a scientifically™ valid-basis as well-documented from the research of various parapsychologists & para-normal researchers).

Before I got into The Testament of Truth, I had read through all of Daniel Rosenblit's NDE account, inluding his secret-document. Rosenblit's NDE-testimony is heavily peppered with scriptural™-references in order to prove to the churches that his story and "teachings from God" are/were indeed genuine. The part of Rosenblit's documentation that eventually became a "stepping stone" for me to arrive at The Testament of Truth was that the secret document mentioned about how another continuation from the NT would be written just as the NT came after the OT, and I also remember reading his references to Star Wars and something about Yoda, but Rosenblit does not believe that a "Truth Testament" has been written yet, but Rosenblit also spends most of his time out on the streets rather than on-line (a kind of street-preacher), and he still holds onto & adheres to many fundamentalist-beliefs (that I feel I have now out-grown).

When I had read through the writings of Terence-Christ, I had found that it had a kind of Yoda-style poetry, and I also remember reading through some other sources about Jesus & how Jesus spoke in a kind of poetic-verse when his sayings are read from the original language-source. The Testament of Truth is full of poetic-style verses and Terence seems to have a kind of Yoda-style speech and, when combined with my knowledge about the evidence for reincarnation (I can send/e-mail you a document of a chaptre of a book that I had transcribed from about ten years back that describes in elaborate detail the kinds of research-methods used to determine whether reincarnation was fact or fiction which also includes how they used all of the "conventional" methods of "debunking" claims in order to rule out fraud while "testing" phenomenon for themselves only to find that everything checked out for many cases against all expectations, also, considering that much of this was discovered by "skeptics who had originally set out to "debunk" the "nonsensical claims" of reincarnation, only to end up being forced to change their opinion that it's actually a real & genuine phenomenon), I found it extremely difficult to dismiss Terence as not being genuine or sincere, especially after having read near-all of the contents of The Testament of Truth & seeing how sincere he was about trying to help make the world more peaceful (this is the "Prince of Peace" we are talking about after all).

Before I had read through Rosenblit's NDE-account, I had read through all of the NDE-accounts that were collected by Kevin Williams, although I feel that his choice of choosing Linda Stewart as a moderator for the NDE-forums was a poor one, considering that she still holds onto a black-and-white world-view (even though she thinks she doesn't), and still has fundamentalist™-tendencies, not to mention that she's heavily subscribed to Eckart Tolle whose content about spirituality™ are so watered-down that you may as well just call it a fast-food-version of spiritual-truth rather than a truly well-researched or deep-level understanding of spiritual-reality (the materialist-atheists describe Eckart Tolle & his followers pretty accurately imo).

Before I had gotten into reading all of those NDEs, I had been reading, researching, and studying information about para-psychology and para-normal phenomenon for a few years or at least a couple of years beforehand, and although I'm going to skip a lot of details as I go back-wards through my time-line of paradigm-shifts, I had thoroughly studied a lot of Neo-Tech™ literature before experiences lead me into reading so much literature about the para-normal (many of them were books by Joe Nickell so I'm pretty well-versed in all kinds of "debunkery" explanations). The reason I transitioned from Neo-Tech into para-psychology was because of its section on lists of books that were harmful versus books that were "approved" for reading, stating that those "harmful" books should not even be read, and this was one of the first turning points in my life where my former materialist-oriented™ beliefs, largely adopted by reading Neo-Tech literature, had to be put into question (not to mention the fact that I started noticing a lot of ironies between how the materialist-oriented literature behaved in many was like the very things that they were against).

...before & during the Neo-Tech years of my life, I had gone from "Christian" to Atheism and back several times for various reasons, some from semantics, others from evidence, and others yet again from paradigm-shifts, I am a four-times-Atheist here, although I might have to be regarded as currently somewhat of an Agnostic-Pantheist, but I accept the definition of God as given by Terence in The Testament of Truth (because it solves the issue of why "evil" exists within the world and why "God" allows it to exist as well as its purpose). The reason why I had been Atheist/Christian/religious so many different times has to do with the fact that there are many different types of Atheisms, the most prominent/pronounced one probably being that of Materialist-Atheism, just as there are different definitions of God/religion/etc. I would love to go into more detail about the history of my Belief-Transitions with you and also anything regarding The Testament of Truth so that I can help to clarify what might seem currently absurd to most but we should probably either make an entirely new thread for that purpose or communique via PMs.

Last edited by Ban-Dodger on 02 Jun 2015, 9:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

Indeed! Though ball and chain does not sound very pleasant. Absolutely agree with the need for true love and commitment. I am sorry if I am at times showing a lack of empathy for those more sexually experienced bachelors and damsels, but I am trying to combine honesty and courtesy.

The idea of using someone without love is frankly really disturbing. Hope that I have not offended or hurt anyone here.

Thank you for your very detailed reply. I have to say that so far I do not find your quotations very persuasive (I am aware that this is my first encounter with this text, and much would be calculated to set my teeth on edge). My journey has been quite complex itself; although I have struggled with Christianity, and considered giving it up, as well as giving serious thought to alternatives, in the long run I have stuck with it, as it appears to make most sense of my life and of history. I am sorry if my language towards you may sometimes have been discourteous and ungenerous. With the poetic language, surely many texts with a range of teachings might employ such a style; I do not understand why you should regard this as conclusive proof that Terence is Christ returned (if I understood you rightly?) Please forgive my at times quite strident or defensive language. By the way, Jews prior to the coming of the Messiah could and did pray directly to God; at times Roman distortions of the Gospel may have moved in that direction, but that is a different issue.

I know you just want clarifications so I do not interpret your intent as confrontational. I think it's a good idea to try & understand others, and that's one of the reasons why I started doing so much reading on para-psychology, because back then (over ten years ago), I just absolutely could not understand why anybody would believe in the existence of psychic-abilities, reincarnation (even though I retain pre-birth memories), psychics, anything para-normal, and just about anything that the materialist-atheists refer to as woo or woo-woo, especially "smart" people like university professors, scientists, doctors, and any number of post-college-graduated individuals who were making (what I thought were "absurd" at the time) claims about "spirits" and "psychic" stuff being real & having solid-evidence.

I had originally gone into reading that material in my naïve assumption (back when I was a "young whipper-snapper") that I could easily "debunk" those authors' materials then write responses to all of their "research" material, pointing out all of their mistakes, then sending it to the authors/scientists/professors who believed in such magical-entities, only to find myself "humbled" that they already addressed what I thought I knew, and in fact, the parapsychologists seemed to actually have much more sophisticated methods for "debunking" and "detecting fraud & trickery" than even the "skeptics" & "debunkers" themselves ! That was one of my turning-points of going from "skeptic/debunker" into a para-normal enthusiast.

How I arrived at Terence-Christ being who he claims is is due to a very long journey of many years of reading & researching & comparing & cross-referencing, and many years of paradigm-shifts, and a lot of personally field-testing of any claims I had ever come across (such as with Daniel Rosenblit's claims about the intentional-pursuit of being subjected to suffering & humiliation being a "fast-track" to heaven). I also did various exercises of forcing humility upon myself, regarding what I knew, via finding what-ever the most diametrically-opposed sources of information existed to what-ever my past belief-systems were at the time, and subjecting my paradigm to the harshest criticisms I could find, because I've had a history of various beliefs/belief-systems where I thought I had "finally arrived at pure truth" only to be "humbled" yet again when I "tested" as to whether there was any "evidence" or not to prove any of my previous-beliefs as incorrect, and I can attest & confirm that it was certainly quite a humbling experience, the more I learned, the more I was forced to realise how much I really did not know about reality™. Basically, any time in the past that I thought I had pure-truth, I always ran into more "cognitive-dissonance" shortly there-after, forcing me to eventually drop any kind of rigid mental-belief system.

I should also point out, the identity of Terence-Christ should not be the focus of importance, but rather, the message(s) he brings forth from God™. The problem with praising messengers is that their messages then get ignored completely whilst everybody raises up the messenger as some kind of idol to be worshipped rather than his warnings to be heeded. I would like to have a discussion about prophets later or maybe I'll just copy/paste the e-mail I sent to my Fundamentalist-Christian aunt-in-law (bless her sincere soul even though I cannot really adopt many of her most-deeply held & cherished beliefs) regarding prophets. Within the writings of The Testament of Truth or at least from my e-mail communications with Terence, God could certainly & easily make everybody believe in His existence if He wanted, but many people have made themselves "enemies of God" & it is much easier for God's demonic-side to crush those "sinners/criminals" into oblivion in the after-life if He continues to allow them to believe that He doesn't even exist (and against such a God it is impossible to win any eternal chess-game of life against Him, and if you can agree that God is indeed all-powerful, then you should also be able to agree that nobody can win in an eternal chess-game against God with one's eternal-existence on the line if they've made or continue to make an eternal-enemy out of God).

Anyway, I did not accept the idea at first that Terence-Christ was who he claimed he was, but it was through a gradual process of "swallowing my pride/disbelief" and being willing to hear/read the words of a "simple man" who makes no claim to walk on water nor turn water to wine, a simple man who is neither king nor leader of a huge military, nor a famous celebrity, nor a does he perform any kinds of magic-tricks, nor does he have any other kind of high-on-the-ladder social-status amongst society, but I gave his writings a chance, and it's due combining all of my previously read materials which seemed to "click into place" like a jigsaw-puzzle upon reading through all of his/God's materials/content (over a span of over ten years worth of intense reading that has well-exceeded the 12K total hours mark by now since around 2500 hours worth of reading is about one year's worth of full-time-reading).

I followed a few other "rules" earlier within my life, too, because of my "spiritual-eyes-to-see" that many or most if not all "commonly held beliefs" were actually the opposite of what is actually truthful. I had also noticed from the mid-point onwards of my life that what we say or think about others is often/frequently true of ourselves. You come across to me as a very good man and I believe that you are absolutely deserving of the very best possible woman that God could ever send your way, but I digress, for this "rule" of mine did in fact, help to shape several of my past-beliefs & how I've formed my paradigm-grid (I now call it a paradigm-grid rather than a paradigm simply because I eventually stopped bothering trying to find one belief-system to adhere to & instead decided that I'm just going to absorb all of the knowledge that I can from every belief-system that I come across, and so my paradigm-grid includes much of the knowledge/education that I had gained from my Christian years, and as well as my Atheist-years, and Gnostic-years, and Spiritualist-years, and Materialist-years, and various other types of Paradigm-years, ParaPsychology-years, Aliens-years, Conspiracy-years, etc., and I believe that I now currently understand why Frederick Myers of the Cross-Correspondences described how our "spiritual-evolution" requires that we rid ourselves of any "rigid mental-constructs be they religious or scientific" and a NASA-Physicist, Tom Campbell, describes our existence very similarly to how my paradigm-grid now views our very existence, and his book is titled: My Big TOE [Theory of Everything]).

Anyway, I need to emphasize, I did not originally accept Terence as being the same Christ-spirit of Jesus until after I had gone through as much reading & research throughout my life that I did, including taking the time to read The Testament of Truth's contents for myself (even though admittèdly I found it at first to come across like some sort of hilarious comedy but could also "spiritually" tell that there was much ironic truth within its contents, but I have field-tested even its claims for myself, and I absolutely do not regret that decision due to how much I had learned since and also now that I have found myself being able to live in spiritual-freedom™ from the oppressors found in government), and that the message(s) of The Testament of Truth should be regarded as being more important than the identity of its messenger.

Marriage and long-term relationships operate on a different dynamic than dating/sex. For finding relationships, beta and sometimes even omega males have a fighting chance, and I knew it well. (There is no equivalent alpha/beta/omega divide for women, although a less strict hierarchy does exist.) When I was younger, I kept pursuing serious long-term relationships, to the point of willingness to wait until marriage (shocking, right?), even though what I really wanted was casual sex. But this had problems: (1) In order to get to the serious stage, you have to get through the lusty, casual stage first, where I had no chance, because initial attraction is about looks; and (2) I found out that beta males get used and abused mercilessly in long-term relationships, and even more so in marriages, making them something to be feared. I now, at age 32, developed just enough skills to pursue casual dating, with or without sex, fairly successfully. It's just sad that I'm doing now what most NT guys were doing 10 years ago.

No offense taken on "not being conventionally handsome". That was very true until my late 20's. (To the point where I went to a consultation with a plastic surgeon, but backed out due to cost.) Escorts helped me get through those years smashingly, for which I'm very much thankful. I aged into my looks since then, and now look "OK" at the absolute minimum. It has to be true, since women on a cruise I took were acting very touchy-feely with me.

Will you please stop using the terms "alpha" and "beta" males. There is no such thing and we are not pack animals.

ok, how 'bout "leaders," "followers" and "loners/outcasts"?

OP gets troll-of-the-year award.

My hat is off to you, sir. I am not into trolling, but that is quality work.