I'm mostly a porn adict and I'm stuggling to do nofap.
I've found liberating in some sense.
I was looking at a bunch of scientific arguments in favour of it, besides spiritual arguments like sexual alchemy.
I came here to ask if you can still have a lot of sex with your wife or is that also a negative, like if you were masturbating too much?
Sex is fine, masturbating especially combined with watching porn is not.
so sex for fun is ok for christians as long as is inside a monogamous relationship?
A marriage, yes. But you should want children as a happy side effect of the sex.
Is there any diference between male promiscuity and female promiscuity?
I remember people on the bible having several wifes.
actually, isnt fun and pleasure is the side effect of the sex, after procreation and not vice versa?
I struggled with porn and masturbation a lot too, went to confession last week and it helped a lot. God gives us strength when we are weak, always remember that.
Pretty sure there'd enjoyment and THEN procreation about nine months later.
It has both reproductive and unitive purpose i.e. bringing the husband and wife closer.
Protestants, even serious Protestants, are cool with condoms and "kinky" positions as long as there is faithfulness.
Catholics and Orthodox are finicky about sex, even within marriage, which is a bummer. They have the best architecture and liturgy, but even famous "Natural Family Planning" proponents will secretly admit to having frustrating sex lives because of all the fiddly sexual rules.
You should bone your wife as often as possible in order to make soldiers for God.
If you don't mind having 10 kids do it as much as you want.
Screencap from /NoFap/
Having a traditional wife and 10 kids is literally the dream tbh
What is more important is the theology.
Your life should never revolve around sex; talking about having a "sex life" is godless and marriage isn't about having plenty of sex without being afraid of going to Hell since it’s not fornication. Don’t use your wife as a sex toy and remember that chastity is a virtue that you should aspire to.
#ThingsChristWouldNeverSay
It's good but
If you do these, you can have as much sex as you want. You can also take advantage of the female menstrual cycle. If in doubt about anything, check the Bible and the teaching of the Catholic Church.
Pretty sure the "sex ONLY for procreation" thing is a meme and actually unviable. It would mean that you could only have sex from 4 to 48 times in your entire life (assuming a 25% success rate and a number of children ranging from 2 to 12).
1 Corinthians 7: 3-5:
3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
There's nothing like NoFap for convincing yourself that Satan exists. I go through the same thing every time. The urges get stronger and stronger and I try to fend them off but eventually I start rationalizing and thinking things like "What if God doesn't actually exist? I'm denying myself for nothing". And then when you give in all the shame comes back and you realize that you sinned greatly and fell for Satans evil rhetoric once again.
We must be strong brothers and have faith because the moment we let our guard down the devil will take his opportunity.
It’s not a meme and that’s what sex should actually be reserved for. Don’t pretend to be chaste and pure if deep down you’re smirking and licking your lips, patiently waiting to empty your balls after being married.
Reducing mutual spousal affection to mere vulgar sexual activity is an error that indicates you do not truly understand the holiness of marriage. Do you currently struggle with NoFap? What are you actually struggling with? Sexual self-control. Do you genuinely believe that fighting masturbation right now only to then "bone your wife as often as possible" without feeling the need to masturbate anymore will have made you victorious against the lust infecting your mind? You are gravely mistaken and may be fooling yourself but certainly not God who wants you to lead a chaste life, even within marriage. If masturbation were only a venial sin (it isn’t) you might as well just masturbate right now if that’s how you perceive your future.
Kissing, hugging, massaging, etc. with your wife are signs of mutual affection and love; f*cking like godless dogs isn’t. "B-But muh sexual urges…muh dick though", resist lust forever, don’t give in and only when you feel ready to have children, engage in vaginal coitus; if your wife doesn’t get pregnant, try again. Does this sound extreme? Why so? Picture yourself f*cking your pregnant wife with a baby in her womb; does it look holy to you? You may not be committing mortal sin but you are barely cleaner than fornicating unmarried couples engaging in sex with procreation being the intention; you are taking advantage of the "safe zone" (not committing mortal sin) you find yourself in to satiate your lust and you know it. If you were to lick your lips and snicker while looking at the menstrual calendar, spending energy doing the calculations (to take advantage of it as the other user correctly phrased it) all to make your pee-pee happy, know that you will not have changed much from the last time you unzipped your pants to masturbate.
Chastity should only be repulsive to demons, not to Christians. Tell me, if a lovely Christian girl adequate for your taste and in love with you asked you if you would like to marry her but said that she only wants to engage in sex once per pregnancy, how would you react? Do you believe a negative reaction on your part would be godly and her demand ungodly or would rather the opposite be true? Would your lust win over the love?
For me the problem is the other way around. I’ll have no problem having sex just for the purpose of having children. However, what if my wife has “needs” tgat she wants me to fulfill? Do I act then? And don’t say find another woman, because if I’m with someone I already love them enough to be with them without leaving.
Same here…
Unfortunately yes and do not do so begrudgingly otherwise it could fracture the marriage but try to gently lead her towards embracing chastity; regularly passionately caressing and kissing her without ultimately turning it sexual would be a good way to get her used to it. Remember that females are sexually timid by nature though conformist and easily corrupted by men who act as predators and turn them into preys; females are not as "sex hungry" as males though they can fantasise a lot about it; they are more apt for continence. Females being whores and "virgin-shaming" each other is the fruit of godless modern societies so if one is truly faithful to Christ, she'd appreciate "not being like the other girls" but you’d really have to reject lust yourself for her to remain chaste because, as I said, she may give in and conform due to your dominant position as a man and her preexistent sexual desires.
Thanks for the advice man.
You welcome, brother.
That might be prudent to keep one another happy, but you can't frame that as the Christian imperative. Both partners have the obligation to, when in the proper circumstances and barring anything like illness making them physically incapable, engage in intercourse when asked. And as far as being incapable, not being "in the mood" and convenient "headaches" don't cut it.
GTFO with this crypto-feminist trash. Both partners in a marriage have the responsibility to provide for the other when they ask. If you're in this situation then you're either an anemic skeleton of a "man" who can only muster a hard on every nine months, or you've relinquished the headship in your marriage to the object of your beta pussy worship. If any woman said that then you should say that you want to have sex more often then that and to ask you to ignore your needs to such an extent is unreasonable.
You: Blah, blah, blah wall of text + Pharisaical self-righteousness and legalism + arm-chair psychoanalysis = desiring sex with your wife outside of procreation is godless evil lust.
Compare to:
Bible/Word of God himself as per 1 Corinithians 7:5: ==Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
==
Do not deprive one another
come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Not enough? Okay.
Proverbs 5:18-19:
18Let your fountain be blessed,
And rejoice with the wife of your youth.
19 As a loving deer and a graceful doe,
Let her breasts satisfy you at all times;
And always be enraptured with her love.
And don't get me started on Song of Solomon 4.
Yes it is partially an allegory of the union of God and the Church, but if you think that there is no literal erotic dimension to it, you are delusional..
The Word of God himself literally encourages erotic love between husband and wife, and to to not deprive each other when the other is in need. That is literally part of the point of marriage:
From 1 Corinthians chapter 7 again, this time with more context and emphasis:
2 Nevertheless, ==because of sexual immorality==, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.
To prevent "sexual immorality"? Doesn't sound like sex is only for menstrual cycles to me.
6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. 7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. 8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; ==9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.==
"Marry, rather than burn with passion." = if you can't cut it as a monk/nun, i.e. perpetual chastity (and most people can't), get married. "Do not deprive each other." Not "only when your wife is ovulating."
Marriage is not just about procreation, but as the Word of God literally says, it is designed to constrain sex as an outlet between men and women who are not cut out for the monastic life. It's literally straight from the horses mouth…or more accurately: God's Mouth - the Word of God - Jesus.
I.e." If you actually look forward to sex with your wife, whom you love, as the Bible tells you to, you are an evil lusty sodomite just trying to satisfy your pee pee." Wew lad, would you like some more straw for that straw man?
The Word of God himself literally shows that the woman in this scenario is acting contrary to what the Word of God commands for married couples. I remember one particular couple married and refrained from sex their entire lives. But they were Saints. Extraordinary exceptions. For everyone else, God literally says that sex is to be something regular and enjoyed by your average joe six pack laity married couple. Not lusting or masturbating? Yes of course. If you and your wife want to be on a whole other level of chastity from the norm, more power to you and God Bless you.
But telling everyone else who was not gifted with your level of God-given self-control (I'm assuming) that sex outside of procreation cannot be an expression of love, and not permitted to married couples is contrary to the Word of God, and thus Satanic.
Okay, I'm seriously struggling to be charitable here. I almost typed out contemptuous laughter but stopped myself. The above lines show that you have no idea what you are talking about regarding female sexuality, and thus have no business giving out advice in this area to anyone. Woman are a lot more lock and key with their sexuality due to obvious social pressures and risks, but thinking they are pure madonnas who are merely corrupted by evil predatory males is, in the nicest way I can put it, incredibly naive, and is a classic symptom of the appropriately named "Maddona-Whore Complex" that most guys who are inexperienced with women have. The y are flawed sinful human beings who put their pants on one leg at a time, just like men.
Read the aforementioned Bible verses in this post. Be thankful that God has provided you with a passionate woman, and enjoy the fruits of the wife of your youth and ignore and pray for this misguided soul: >>702563
I’m not married or with anyone yet.
I despise feminism as it is ungodly but being a crypto-feminist is better than being an entitled crypto-rapist such as yourself who wants to molest his wife without making it plainly coercive. Not only is there no "obligation"/"responsibility", or however you want to deceitfully phrase it, to engage in sexual activity for non-procreative reasons but
is also not the only thing that would make a female, in any context, "unfit" to engage in sexual activity. Most females are innately hesitant and timid when it comes to engaging in sexual activity thus this innate aspect of theirs must always be taken into consideration; don't try to "groom" them or to insistingly get them to "loosen up". Guess what? Your wife could be a rape victim, possibly during childhood, and still feel its traumatic consequences so put your pants back on and get your dirty perverted hand off her. She is never ever "obligated" under any circumstance to allow you to empty your balls into her at the snap of your fingers though if she decides to marry you, she would have to eventually engage in procreative coitus otherwise the marriage should be declared null and you two should instead go for a platonic companionship.
This is on-par with godless virgin-shaming. Sorry pal but your erections and "cool muscles" don't make you a "better man" nor do they impress Christ whom you'd define as a "scrawny weakling" if you saw Him without recognising Him. You're indirectly committing blasphemy by criticising and mocking these humble attributes which Christ and countless Saints share in common; attributes which are the visible fruit of committed continence and active mortification of the desires of the flesh, duly praised by Sacred Scripture while said desires are disdained.
I worship Christ and gladly promote the virtues which he preached; being a "pussy conquerer" is not one of them.
These "needs" are negligeable and please answer my last question:
I wonder how many "Christians" here are just faithless LARPers looking for a "traditional qt wife" to facef*ck because of their unadmitted fantasy to corrupt purity; it's so sad.
I know; I'm saying if you are theoretically provided with such a woman by God.
What kind of Christians are you guys ?, Give it god !
I will provide, though how do I put up with her if she wants to do something that’s a bit much?
Either:
a) Be a man and lay down the law: that you will do no such thing, period.
or
b)If you are picking up early signs before marriage, that she has such proclivities, do not marry her. Such things are usually a sign of even worse things under the surface.
I pray it doesn’t come to either of these two, but I will if I have to.
Your heart is hardened; it's why my words hits it like a hammer and makes you internally panic. So many inane accusations…I'll just disregard them.
Depriving someone of something very often implies the involving of unwillingness. As I've explained, affection should not be reduced to mere vulgar sexual activity. Not "boning your wife as often as possible" does not mean that you should be a distant cold weirdo.
Descriptive poetic passages are not demands to satisfy.
It is not the main point.
A spousal "need" could be emotional support, not your wife begrudgingly opening her legs for you.
Have you not read anything I've written?
Yes, because fornication is mortally sinful while "boning your wife as often as possible" is venial.
No, it is designed for a male and a female to become one flesh and build a family.
If you marry your wife because you "look forward to have non-sinful sex with her", you are indeed a lusty brainlet, slave to his lust. I sure hope my daughter won't end up with an entitled sex-hungry impostor such as yourself.
Please answer my last question:
I never denied this; you completely misunderstood what I've written thus your entire reply is a failure.
Do not deprive one another
come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
The verses that this is in the context of is painfully obviously about sexual relations. You are deliberately twisting the Word of God to the point where I now think you are a troll arguing in bad faith. Your uncharitable insults and use of filthy ungodly language (i.e. your graphic descriptions of sexual acts) further reinforce this perception.
Everything else is you similarly dodging and twisting Biblical verses and putting forth your own heretical interpretations.
I already did.
Self-control is seen favourably and that's my point; "boning your wife as often as possible" is a venial sin, that's my other point.
You're the one who made baseless inane accusations against my character, "Mr. Charitable".
I enjoy being blunt about vulgar things when I criticise them; same goes for sodomites: I find it amusing to describe them as "two men shoving each other's cocks up their sh*tholes"; it may be ungodly to speak this way but when the subject matter is vulgar and ungodly itself, I'd rather not tame my speech as much as the one trying to polish a turd would like me to. It sounds bad? Because it is bad!
They are in line with Sacred Scripture and I could bombard you with quotes from Church Fathers.
Also: I never said that engaging in non-procreative marital sex is mortally sinful and should be prohibited. Read:
Don't put words in my mouth.
I’m confused. What do I do, love my wife in bed or by other means?
Love her, eventually responsibly procreate with her, aspire to both willfully remain chaste and preferably detach lust completely from love. If she really wants to get more physically intimate: let her but don't be insisting yourself as she, being a female, is weaker than you, a male, and could end up feeling "used".
The verse never calls those marrying due to lack of self-control sinful, it literally exhorts them to marry to avoid sin caused by lack of self-control in the first place! Having non-procreative sex within marriage is not "venial sin".
I called you out on acting like a Pharisee, performing arm-chair psychoanalysis, and promoting heretical and Satanic doctrine. Your actions, not you. Show me where I called you a brainlet. I'll wait.
If you enjoy these things, then you are rebelling against the Word of God. Repent:
James 3: 5-12:
5 See how great a forest a little fire kindles! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is so set among our members that it defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire by hell. 7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and creature of the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind. 8 But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so.
11 Does a spring send forth fresh water and bitter from the same opening?
12 Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Thus no spring yields both salt water and fresh.
Ephesians 5: 3-4:
3 But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints;
4 neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting,
which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks.
Ephesians 4:29
Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.
Colossians 3:8
But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander,
and obscene talk from your mouth.
Matthew 15:11
It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.
Matthew 12:36
I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak,
If that was your intention, your characterization of those who engage in marital non-procreative sex as crypto-sodomites didn't help much. Also: venial sin…. but not prohibitied….
Show me in the verses that I posted, that married non-procreative sex is a "venial sin."
But apparently according to you, commiting a "venial sin" for the sake of a marriage is okay:
If you have the strength, be chaste. If not, enjoy sex with her in moderation (i.e. don't make it the center of your existence), don't be kinky, and ultimately be procreative. Monk/Nunhood is not for everyone.
First off, give me 1 (one) verse from the Bible that confirms this.
Secondly, I didn't read your whole post, but I noticed
this is more akin to what you are suggesting. Sex is obviously pleasurable, and God never commanded us not to enjoy it (just look at the verses brought up by ). Who are you to make up new commandments not based in Scripture? By limiting sex to procreation-purpose only, you are bringing it to the level of animals who mate only with the purpose to pass on their genes.
Procreative and unitive. Not procreative only.
Every sexual act can be unitive, but not all of them can be procreative in the way that it would result in pregnancy. However all of them still need to be open to procreation, which means no unnatural contraception. This is what is commanded and this is what makes an act procreative, not that you put in effort so that every time you have sex it's as likely to produce a child as possible and you only do it for that purpose alone.
When did I claim this? Stop putting words in my mouth.
I specifically said: "boning your wife as often as possible", referencing this user who described the vulgar thing vulgarly himself:
I never said that engaging in non-procreative marital sex is venially sinful in itself and should be prohibited.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
Word vomit; flushed down the toilet it goes.
Reasoning like a brainlet makes you worthy of being called a brainlet; I'm not the "no u" type so it doesn't matter whether you called me the same or not. You are however describing me as a disciple of Satan, how much harsher is this?
It is venially sinful, I know; I also use curse words out loud when angry and by myself. I am not immaculate.
Sodomy is a transgression which cries out to Heaven for vengeance; I would never even faintly equate it with any type of heterosexual relation.
Yes, but:
>If she really wants to get more physically intimate: let her but don't be insisting yourself
My issue has only ever been with "boning your wife as often as possible" and "your wife is obligated to open her legs at the snap of your fingers", though I also argue that coitus only for procreative reasons is preferable due to the clear detachment of lust from love.
"Boning your wife as often as possible while pretending to have been truly victorious with your pre-marital struggle with lust causing you to masturbate" is in no way noble or honourable; it's hypocritical.
Yet that is what 1 Corinthians 7:5 says. You even imply in a Pharisaical fashion that a "Real True Christian" would gladly take up the offer presented in the final paragraph of (along with your final sentence in )
while 1 Corinthians 7:5 offers mercy from St. Paul himself to those not strong enough, speaking the Word of God. You're making it very easy to misinterpret your position.
I described what you are pushing as Satanic, not you. Even Peter was rebuked by God as Satan when he, with what he thought were good intentions, tried to dissuade our Savior from performing his mission; and this was shortly after God proclaimed Peter as a Rock for his profession of Christ.
First you admit you enjoy and revel in it, and even act braggartly and boastful of it; now you're penitent, "venially sinful" and "not immaculate." Which is it? You can't have it both ways. Either struggle or don't. Cursing in the heat of the moment IRL is one thing. Taking the time to type it out is another.
You're also further reinforcing my distaste with the concept of dividing sin into "venial" and "mortal." You seem to have a more lax attitude towards the "venial". All sin is sin before God.
It does not say that "boning your wife as often as possible" and that she is "obligated to open her legs at the snap of your fingers".
Should a "Real True Christian" choose lust over love?
He does not condone their lack of self-control though and it should not be expressed in their marriage.
TIL: the Church Fathers were pushing Satanic ideas
I didn't; I explained that I like to shock people with the harsh reality of that which they promote.
Purgatory is real.
So non pro-creative marital sex is not a venial or mortal sin, but it is lust over love? What's the difference? Just like a Pharisee, you care more about the letter of the law than mercy.
1 Corinthians 7:28
28 But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.
Saying that those who are not strong enough to go with sex only 2 times in their life or be lifelong chaste, aren't True Christians, and are evil slaves to lust is Satanic. (and don't bother with the "don't put words in my mouth" claptrap. You said it yourself that not taking the offer you presented is choosing lust over love.)
You're lying. You know what you wrote. You said you enjoyed and liked using filthy shocking language and that it amused you. And you wave it off because "it's just venial." All while posting pics of the Virgin Mary and Female Saints.
If you're trolling, mission accomplished. Well played. Slow clap, and all that. I'm done. Good night and God have mercy on your soul.
It is a venial sin if it is "boning your wife as often as possible".
What's the difference between passionately kissing your wife and "boning her as often as possible"? The former is a clear sign of love while the latter mainly the fruit of lust though you could say "it's just love, man :)" (fornicators do the same).
How is this relevant?
For the umpteenth time: I have not once said that marital non-procreative coitus is venially sinful in itself and I've also certainly never claimed that engaging in it makes you a false Christian since I've even clearly stated that I would myself if my wife insisted.
And I firmly stand by my statement, despite your inane accusation of me acting as a disciple of Satan. 🙄
Slander is mortally sinful. I've explained that when you try to polish a turd, I will, due to the vulgarity of the subject matter itself, vulgarly describe to you what you're trying to polish and if it shocks you, wonder if what can so easily be described vulgarly is truly godly. See it like this:
You wrote "F U C K" on a piece of paper and then proceed to go on about the aesthetic beauty of the combination of the shape of those letters and how your calligraphy embellishes it even more and blablabla. Then, I open my mouth and say loud and clear "the word F U C K is just vulgar, pal" which causes you to screech and tell me "Oh no! Think of the children! How can you be so vulgar! How dare you!" with quivering lips and crocodile tears.
No it isn't. You should have sex with your wife as often as possible and as hard as possible to keep her happy and free of temptation.
t. Satan
Well that's good then. Personally I am against sex only for procreative reasons as imo it's needlessly giving up a pleasure that God created for us and potentially weakening your marriage union, as well as reducing something that can be beautiful, building and mutually pleasing to something with only a practical purpose. If you're really against this so much then you're better of becoming a monk.
I'm also against this, it's basically muslim marital rape tier.
I don't know of anything in the Bible or Church teaching that condemns my opinion and I guess the same could be said for you, so at least OP can read about both opinions and make up his own mind.
Now y'all should stop autistically bickering and calling each other satan.
I want a family, am too curious about the world and hate manual labour; monastic life really isn’t for me. Chastity is also for the laity.
That's not how it works
My girlfriend and I have moved to a new area and have also decided to start going to church. We are looking for something that meets most of the following criteria:
-Reverent and peaceful atmosphere
-Sunday best worn by most
-Traditional hymns preferably with pipe organ
-Straightforward sermon without weird rituals and chanting.
-No women or gay clergy
We’ve tried a few different churches this summer. Baptist, Lutheran, and Non-Denominational. They all played shitty Nickelback music while the Pastors were carrying on and banging drums on the stage. The members all were wearing ball caps and flip flops. I can’t believe it’s this hard to find a decent church that doesn’t cater to millennial retards with low attention spans. We don’t want a spectacle, just a no nonsense place to worship. Are there any denominations we should try? Any input would be great.
Just a little background, I was raised Mormon and she a Southern Baptist. Both of our churches had clean, traditional services.
.
Catholic and/or orthodox
Based
I've gotta disagree with this outlook. Sex within a marriage is a beautiful act of unity and intimacy that should be celebrated, to say nothing of the reproductive aspect of it. This is why natural planning and sex between infertile/old couples is allowed and encouraged.
Treating sex as a "necessary evil" is heretical as it suggests the only means of procreation (a commandment from God) has some destructive aspect to it. Nothing of God is, or even can be, destructive.
It's the abuse of the faculties that leads to destruction.
Cathodox, though beware of poor-quality modern Catholic masses. There will likely be multiple Catholic churches in your area, I'd recommend checking them all out as it can be hit or miss compared to something more strictly formal like SB.
Hash out what you actually believe, and look into the basic doctrines of different denominations. Picking a church that you "just like" is a bad idea, and is how some very iffy organizations pick up new members.
And if you're married, just to be clear