What’s going on with our young ladies

[JayRob]

JayRob, you impress me as man who relies a great deal on logic. So, would you rather have sex with a virgin than with someone who has had one sexual encounter with someone with AIDS? I would say it is virginity that is priceless.

The bible instructs abstinence for mankind - both male and female. There is no double standard there. The bane of Abraham, Solomon, and David was they way that thay handled their sexuality; it is a dark part of their legacy that is permanently recorded in the scripture. They were still good men with lots of other good qualities. The same is true of many pimps and whores. According to the bible none of us are condemned for life. Repentance has always been the path to restoration. Don't mock it; embrace it.

Sex is not the measure of a man. Being a virgin does not make one a better or worse person.

As far as marrying a virgin, that's fine, but that wouldn't be a priority for me. A priority would be to ensure as best as possible that once we are married, she'd be faithful to me. Just because a woman is a virgin, that's no guarantee that she will be faithful or even a good wife.

In the Old Testament, the parents chose the man's wife. That has to be one of the stupidest rules I've ever seen. My mom or dad wouldn't be the one marrying her, I would, so shouldn't I determine who I want to marry and who I don't want to marry?

 

[Dr H..]

One time can be considered as having experience

That is the most stupid thing I have ever heard (period). That’s like saying I have been hunting and now I am ready for combat because I know how to shoot a gun. Would you trust you life with a pilot who have flown Cessna’s 150 now he is in the cockpit of a L-1011.

she's labelled all kinds of filthy names.

Based on your previous comment. it appears that's what you want.

"I suffer not a women to speak in church",

Do you understand what Paul was talking about. In another scripture he makes a similar statement to men.

 

[JayRob]

Now marrying a woman that has slept with every Tom, Dick and Harry in the community is really the way to go “rightâ€￾ so you marry one of my old gals and she see me, you know JR, she gonna have some memories about me, John, Bubba, Sam, Eddie, Robert and the entire defensive line “way to goâ€￾ and let’s not forget the one nighters. If that’s what you want, have at it.

I will take a virgin any day than a woman with the type of experience you are talking about. Besides, because a woman has been with several men, does not necessarily mean that she has experience or make a good wife or mother. The only thing you will is a wife that has been had by a lot of men. And it would be just a matter of time before her starts creeping out the back door. Here we call them porcupines.

First of all, you misrepresented the kind of woman I was talking about and gave the WORST case scenario.

Since you say you'd take a virgin any day than a woman whose had sex, let me ask you this. Let's say there's a woman who looked like Halle Berry, but she's only had sex five times in her whole life, but she's not a virgin. On the other hand, you have a virgin, who looks like "aunt Esther" from Sanford and Son, but she's never had sex. Either would be a faithful wife.
SO WHO WOULD YOU CHOOSE, the beautiful and attractive non-virgin Halle Berry type or the unattractive virgin Aunt Esther type?

 

[Dr H..]

First of all, you misrepresented the kind of woman I was talking about and gave the WORST case scenario.

You said experience, having sex one or two time is not [experience] - ok, so what are you defining as experience?

People lilke Hallie "sometimes" are deadly as vipers, because they look good they cal fool a lot of brothers like yourself "oh she looks good therefore she is clean" yeah right!

Well a partner of mine that I was stationed with dated a "Good Looking lady" with experience - a day later he was visiting the flight surgeon, and eventually was discharged from the military. Give me a clean virgin Aunt Ester or not than Hallie with all of her experience and whatever comes along with the experience.

 

[JayRob]

H says....

That is the most stupid thing I have ever heard (period). That’s like saying I have been hunting and now I am ready for combat because I know how to shoot a gun. Would you trust you life with a pilot who have flown Cessna’s 150 now he is in the cockpit of a L-1011.

H, it's not polite to call scripture stupid. According to the OT bible, experiencing sex one time outside of marriage is enough experience to get the death penalty.

Do you understand what Paul was talking about. In another scripture he makes a similar statement to men.

No need in trying to spin scripture. The bible is one of the most sexist books in the history of mankind....and you know it. Women weren't allowed to do simple things like men, eventhough they had the very same abilities. Such a shame that people have been fooled into believing and following such nonsense.

 

[JayRob]

You said experience, having sex one or two time is not [experience] - ok, so what are you defining as experience?

People lilke Hallie "sometimes" are deadly as vipers, because they look good they cal fool a lot of brothers like yourself "oh she looks good therefore she is clean" yeah right!

Well a partner of mine that I was stationed with dated a "Good Looking lady" with experience - a day later he was visiting the flight surgeon, and eventually was discharged from the military. Give me a clean virgin Aunt Ester or not than Hallie with all of her experience and whatever comes along with the experience.

H, I was counting on you to tell the truth, but you couldn't. Your claiming to take a virgin Aunt Esther type

over the Halle Berry type (who only had sex FIVE times),

is a flat out lie....and you know it. Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!

 

[Dr H..]

Jay

Neither Ester of Hallie excites’ me (period). Why would you compare a 70 year old to a 30 year old other than they are both females. Your analogy should have comparing Lena Horne to Ester or Hallie to Beyonce or Jada. Are you sure Ester is a virgin -

The scriptures do not state that having sex one time make one experienced, if it does please post the scriptures.

 

[JayRob]

Jay

Neither Ester of Hallie excites’ me (period). Why would you compare a 70 year old to a 30 year old other than they are both females. Your analogy should have comparing Lena Horne to Ester or Hallie to Beyonce or Jada. Are you sure Ester is a virgin -

The scriptures do not state that having sex one time make one experienced, if it does please post the scriptures.

You are no longer a virgin, that's what I meant by "experienced". After having sex ONE time outside of wedlock, the bible portrays such a woman as being "washed up", a harlot, defiled, a whore and many other degrading names. She may as well have had sex a dozen times, because having sex once in the bible, in several cases, is synomous with having sex with many. They're both called harlots and whores.

This SAME book though, says nothing about the man when he has sex outside of wedlock for the first time. He's never called and labelled with such demeaning and filthy names, no matter how many women he chooses to have sex with outside of marriage.

That ONE time sex could also cause the woman to lose her life. Do you want me to point out those verses? Wonder why this so-called book of justice doesn't mention what will happen to a man if he committed fornication.

 

[Dr H..]

What bible are you reading, the one that I have been reading does not say
“After having sex ONE time outside of wedlock, the bible portrays such a woman as being "washed up", a harlot, defiled, a whore and many other degrading names.â€
Please provide the Book, Chapter and Verse.
The fact is you don’t know how many time or how many men they had been involved with, do you. If the bible provides an indication on how many times or men, you know the routine provide:
The Book, Chapter and Verse
The word harlot is [zanah, meaning to commit adultery or fornication or force into prostution]
Again I am not sure what bible you are reading, because in many scriptures the bible talks about “Israel’ the Nation of Israel as being / playing the harlot. Those statements are inclusive, meaning every man, woman or child is being prostituted buy other nations.

Looking at my bible, let me see there is Rahab,

Gen. 34:31 – Shall we deal with our sister as a harlot†it did not say the sister was a harlot. They are saying shall we treat our sister like a prostitute?

38:15 “they thought she was a harlot†because her face was covered

38:24 – Tamar “played act like a harlot†she was with child, was she married

Lev 21:14 – is telling the person not to marry a divorced woman, profane woman of a harlot.

In the NT the word harlot is often use as a metaphor, to imply spiritual immortality. So are you saying that God does not condemn “sexual immorality†in the NT regardless of sex? As he did David in the OT (just read the consequences he suffered because of his behavior?)

Question: Have you ever called a female a "whore [Ho]" bit*&, Slu&" or anything close to those names?

 

[buckwheat]

This ain't nothing new.
And probably the main ones who are attending the church-affiliated schools may be the main ones whose parents kept a tight hold on them as teenagers. Once you get a taste of freedom for the first time at 18, you lose your mind.

That's what happened to my cousin. She was pretty-much raised in the church. Once she got to Grambling she was buck-wild. She ending up getting pregnant her third semester there.

 

[JayRob]

What bible are you reading, the one that I have been reading does not say
“After having sex ONE time outside of wedlock, the bible portrays such a woman as being "washed up", a harlot, defiled, a whore and many other degrading names.â€
Please provide the Book, Chapter and Verse.
The fact is you don’t know how many time or how many men they had been involved with, do you. If the bible provides an indication on how many times or men, you know the routine provide:
The Book, Chapter and Verse
The word harlot is [zanah, meaning to commit adultery or fornication or force into prostution]
Again I am not sure what bible you are reading, because in many scriptures the bible talks about “Israel’ the Nation of Israel as being / playing the harlot. Those statements are inclusive, meaning every man, woman or child is being prostituted buy other nations.

Looking at my bible, let me see there is Rahab,

Gen. 34:31 – Shall we deal with our sister as a harlot†it did not say the sister was a harlot. They are saying shall we treat our sister like a prostitute?

38:15 “they thought she was a harlot†because her face was covered

38:24 – Tamar “played act like a harlot†she was with child, was she married

Lev 21:14 – is telling the person not to marry a divorced woman, profane woman of a harlot.

In the NT the word harlot is often use as a metaphor, to imply spiritual immortality. So are you saying that God does not condemn “sexual immorality†in the NT regardless of sex? As he did David in the OT (just read the consequences he suffered because of his behavior?)

Question: Have you ever called a female a "whore [Ho]" bit*&, Slu&" or anything close to those names?

Dude, it doesn't matter if the word harlot means actual whore or symbolic whore, it's still means whore. This can't be that difficult to comprehend, it just can't be.

The bible calls women all kinds of filthy names and you know it. Quit trying to justify the prejudiced and gender-biased teachings in the bible.

For a book to tell a woman that she shouldn't be able to voice her opinion in church, is nothing but showing "respecter of persons" based on gender.

So by asking me that last question, are you comparing me to your Old Testament god?

 

[Dr H..]

So by asking me that last question, are you comparing me to your Old Testament god?

Negative, I am not in any way or form making an attempt to compare you with God [there is no comparison]. Your answer is a cheap and cowardly way of answer my question. The question can only be answered yes or no!

If you ask me the same question “watch thisâ€￾ see how easy it is to answer the question.

Yes, I have.

For a book to tell a woman that she shouldn't be able to voice her opinion in church, is nothing but showing "respecter of persons" based on gender.

I am asking you again, do you understand why the Apostle Paul made that statement?

 

[dacontinent]

As far as marrying a virgin, that's fine, but that wouldn't be a priority for me. A priority would be to ensure as best as possible that once we are married, she'd be faithful to me. Just because a woman is a virgin, that's no guarantee that she will be faithful or even a good wife.

In the Old Testament, the parents chose the man's wife. That has to be one of the stupidest rules I've ever seen. My mom or dad wouldn't be the one marrying her, I would, so shouldn't I determine who I want to marry and who I don't want to marry?

Virginity is no guarantee of a good wife. It doesn't necessarily make a woman loving, nurturing, caring, or even a better cook. However, it does speak volumes about her character. It tells the groom that she was faithful to him possibly without having known him until the romantic interest actually began. Maintaining that virginity after romance and before marriage tells the groom what she also thinks of herself. That will command greater respect from him in the marriage.

Arranged marriages continue to this day. I really like the idea. In most cultures both then and now the parents look out for the best interests of their own children. The parents study not only the prospective candidate(s) but their parents, realizing that the entire family history will be brought to bear in the new relationship. To this day surverys show these unions to be happier and much more stable. They also show a higher percentage of singles who die without ever having been married.

Mind you, this is just that the statistics show.

 

[dacontinent]

...

For a book to tell a woman that she shouldn't be able to voice her opinion in church, is nothing but showing "respecter of persons" based on gender.

I am asking you again, do you understand why the Apostle Paul made that statement?

Dr. H,

One of the following is true:

• No, JayRob does not understand this;
• JayRob understands it but won't admit it here.

 

[dacontinent]

Dude, it doesn't matter if the word harlot means actual whore or symbolic whore, it's still means whore. This can't be that difficult to comprehend, it just can't be...

Perhaps using more modern terms will help you to understand the differences. Replace harlot with prostitute and whore with nymphomaniac. A prostitute is sometimes a nymphomaniac; however, most nymphomaniacs are not looking for payment. The two terms imply very different things. Potiphar's wife was likely a nymphomaniac and that probably had something to do with Joseph being imprisoned rather than killed.

...The bible calls women all kinds of filthy names and you know it. Quit trying to justify the prejudiced and gender-biased teachings in the bible.
...

On this point you are simply wrong. Even names in the bible were given to reflect the character of a person. So, when we read the scriptures and a person OR NATION is depicted as a harlot or a whore (thief, robber, gossip, murderer, backbiter, etc.), it is a direct reflection of their character and not an accusation. So, it simply is not used as a "dirty name" any more than to call Heidi Fleiss a pimp and a prostitute.

David and Solomon were adulterers. Amnon was a rapist. Depending on what version of the bible you read (KJV, NKJV, NIV, NLT, NASB, RSV, NRSV, TLB, Message, Reina-Valeria, etc.) the terms are there for both men and women as is consistent with the version.

 

[Dr H..]

Arranged marriages continue to this day.

I have a female friend from India. I was trying to get with her and she said “Moms, Pops, Cousin, Aunts and Unclesâ€￾ would kill her, because or the arranged marriage. She have to be a virgin when she get married, if not all the material wealth would have to be returned to her future husband. And if she married him and was not a virgin, he would kill her.

To add what you said:

Jesus [Apostles] called some Christians spiritual adulteress in James 4:4. The same analogy God used in the OT when He referred to Israel as committing adultery or called them whores.

 

[JayRob]

Negative, I am not in any way or form making an attempt to compare you with God [there is no comparison]. Your answer is a cheap and cowardly way of answer my question. The question can only be answered yes or no!

If you ask me the same question “watch this” see how easy it is to answer the question.

Yes, I have.


I am asking you again, do you understand why the Apostle Paul made that statement?

I don't care what the reason. To single men and women out is one thing, but to single out just women, it's clearly being gender-biased. This is not much different than most Western religions of Judaism and Islam. This is more proof that the bible is a paternalistic based book written by prejudiced men who looked at women as mere property.

 

[JayRob]

On this point you are simply wrong. Even names in the bible were given to reflect the character of a person. So, when we read the scriptures and a person OR NATION is depicted as a harlot or a whore (thief, robber, gossip, murderer, backbiter, etc.), it is a direct reflection of their character and not an accusation. So, it simply is not used as a "dirty name" any more than to call Heidi Fleiss a pimp and a prostitute.

David and Solomon were adulterers. Amnon was a rapist. Depending on what version of the bible you read (KJV, NKJV, NIV, NLT, NASB, RSV, NRSV, TLB, Message, Reina-Valeria, etc.) the terms are there for both men and women as is consistent with the version.

I have no reason to lie....

Luke 2:22 Mary is unclean after birth of Jesus
Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit..."
Colossians 3:18 More "Wives, submit yourselves..."
1 Tim. 2:11-14 Women should learn in silence in all subjection;
Eve was sinful, Adam blameless
Leviticus 12:1-4 Women who have sons are unclean 7 days
Lev. 12:4-7 Women who have daughters are unclean 14 days
Lev. 15:19-23 Menstrual periods are unclean
Numb. 31:17-35 "Virgins" are war booty
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 Bride who is not virgin must be stoned to death
Deut. 22:28 Unmarried rape victim must marry her rapist
Deut. 24:1 Men can divorce women on the spot
Job 14:1-4 "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean [woman]? not one".

I could go on and on about this foolish demeaning of women, but you get my point.....I hope.

 

[JayRob]

Arranged marriages continue to this day.

I have a female friend from India. I was trying to get with her and she said “Moms, Pops, Cousin, Aunts and Unclesâ€￾ would kill her, because or the arranged marriage. She have to be a virgin when she get married, if not all the material wealth would have to be returned to her future husband. And if she married him and was not a virgin, he would kill her.

To add what you said:

Jesus [Apostles] called some Christians spiritual adulteress in James 4:4. The same analogy God used in the OT when He referred to Israel as committing adultery or called them whores.

So if SHE was not a virgin, SHE would be killed, not HIM??!! This is simply another one of the many horrors of primitive, man-made religion.

Religion has been responsible for the deaths and subjugation of women for centuries, and as you pointed out, it shamefully continues in our time.:smh:

 

[dacontinent]

I have no reason to lie....

Luke 2:22 Mary is unclean after birth of Jesus
Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit..."
Colossians 3:18 More "Wives, submit yourselves..."
1 Tim. 2:11-14 Women should learn in silence in all subjection;
Eve was sinful, Adam blameless
Leviticus 12:1-4 Women who have sons are unclean 7 days
Lev. 12:4-7 Women who have daughters are unclean 14 days
Lev. 15:19-23 Menstrual periods are unclean
Numb. 31:17-35 "Virgins" are war booty
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 Bride who is not virgin must be stoned to death
Deut. 22:28 Unmarried rape victim must marry her rapist
Deut. 24:1 Men can divorce women on the spot
Job 14:1-4 "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean [woman]? not one".

I could go on and on about this foolish demeaning of women, but you get my point.....I hope.

I must have missed it.

You said

Dude, it doesn't matter if the word harlot means actual whore or symbolic whore, it's still means whore. This can't be that difficult to comprehend, it just can't be.

The bible calls women all kinds of filthy names and you know it. Quit trying to justify the prejudiced and gender-biased teachings in the bible.

Please find me even one (1) filthy name in anything you referenced or something that you did not reference that would be a filthy name.

 

[dacontinent]

I don't care what the reason. ...

I do appreciate your honesty.

 

[JayRob]

I must have missed it.

You said

Please find me even one (1) filthy name in anything you referenced or something that you did not reference that would be a filthy name.

Unclean for 14 days after the birth of a female, while only being unclean for seven days after a male? What the heck is that all about. Are females less worthy than males?
How can you continue to ignore such nonsense is beyond me.

 

[dacontinent]

Unclean for 14 days after the birth of a female, while only being unclean for seven days after a male? What the heck is that all about. Are females less worthy than males?
How can you continue to ignore such nonsense is beyond me.

1. First of all there is nothing filthy here.
2. In basic nurture, females are far more worthy than males and rightfully equipped. That is, in fact, part of what this reference in scripture speaks to directly.
3. Circumcision for boys was on the 8th day. Basically, the mother had to make an appearance for that purpose, something that she did not have to do for the birth of a girl. So, if you really look at it, girls were better protected than boys.
4. I'm guessing at this point that you are not married and/or have not gone through childbirth with your wife to understand how vulnerable she is medically during those first few weeks after childbirth. I have recently revisited this with the birth of my first grandchild and having my son & his family living in our home.

I wish I had written the following, but I didn't. Adam Clarke did.

1. God designs that the human female should bring forth children.

2. That children should derive, under His providence, their being, all their solids and all their fluids, in a word, the whole mass of their bodies, from the substance of the mother.

3. For this purpose He has given to the body of the female an extra quantity of blood and nutritious juices.

4. Before pregnancy this superabundance is evacuated at periodical times.

5. In pregnancy, that which was formerly evacuated is retained for the formation and growth of the fetus, or the general strengthening of the system during the time of pregnancy.

6. After the birth of the child, for seven or fourteen days, more or less according to certain circumstances, that superabundance no longer necessary for the growth of the child as before, continues to be evacuated. This was called the time of the female's purification among the Jews.

7. When the lacerated vessels are rejoined, this superfluity of blood is returned into the general circulation and, by a wise law of the Creator, becomes principally useful to the breasts, and helps in the production of milk for the nourishment of the new-born infant.

8. And thus, it continues till the weaning of the child, or renewed pregnancy takes place.

Here is a series of mercies and wise providential regulations which cannot be known without being admired, and which should be known that the great Creator and Preserver may have that praise from His creatures which His wonderful working demands.

The term "purifying" here does not imply that there is anything impure in the blood at this or the other times referred to above. On the contrary, the blood is pure, perfectly so, as to its quality, but is excessive in quantity for the reasons above assigned. The idle tales found in certain works relative to the infectious nature of this fluid, and of the female in such times are as impious as they are irrational and absurd.

Remember that references to being unclean here had to do with congregating with others and not with the valuation of the mother. Even today the standard for maternity leave is 6 weeks - a week longer than given in the Bible for extended circumstances. Modern medicine recognizes this; you should, too. Many women/families today get "cabin fever" and feel like they just have to get back out into society. Be assured that hardly anyone but the pediatrician and immediate family saw my wife and children before the newborn was 6 weeks old.

I hope this helps.

 

[JayRob]

Nice try dacontinent. Instead of giving the woman MUCH extra needed care and support from loved ones, they kick her out of the camp? Come on dacontinent. Enough with the excuses.

This same bible calls lepers unclean and likewise, they were ordered outside the camp.
Sending a weak woman outside the camp after having given birth is ludricous.

And another thing. If she's separated from the camp, that means she had to be separated from her baby for 14 days. How cruel is that for the mother? How traumatic would that be for a newborn?
Does modern medicine follow this nonsense? Thank goodness they don't.

Did your wife have to be sent away for 14 days after given birth? I doubt it.

Like I said, people make all kinds of excuses for the bible and it's primitive doctrines. It never ceases to amaze me.

 

[dacontinent]

Nice try dacontinent. Instead of giving the woman MUCH extra needed care and support from loved ones, they kick her out of the camp? Come on dacontinent. Enough with the excuses.

This same bible calls lepers unclean and likewise, they were ordered outside the camp.
Sending a weak woman outside the camp after having given birth is ludricous.

And another thing. If she's separated from the camp, that means she had to be separated from her baby for 14 days. How cruel is that for the mother? How traumatic would that be for a newborn?
Does modern medicine follow this nonsense? Thank goodness they don't.

Did your wife have to be sent away for 14 days after given birth? I doubt it.

Like I said, people make all kinds of excuses for the bible and it's primitive doctrines. It never ceases to amaze me.

Now I am convinced that you do not read my posts. Let's try this again.

Remember that references to being unclean here had to do with congregating with others and not with the valuation of the mother...

THESE WOMEN WERE NOT OUTSIDE THE CAMP. They were being attended to in their homes by those of the immediate family or midwives. They were excused from worship and normal gatherings because they had given birth. Husbands were not to have sex with them in order to give their bodies time to recover. They were being treated for the INFIRMITY of childbirth. She is not separated FROM her child but TO her child.

Read the passage. Here is the text (KJV) of Leviticus 12. The whole point has to do with worship for the woman who has delivered a child.

Lev 12
12:1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

6 And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:

7 Who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

Transliterated, Vs.1-5 give the minimums and guidelines and V.6 says "however long it takes" for her to recover. The chapter ends with her being officially welcomed back to public worship through the presentation of an offering.

Come on, man. I have middle schoolers that read and understand this stuff. You are better than that.

And no...my wife was not sent away. She was at home being cared for by me for 14 days...and she did not leave home for 6 weeks except to go to the doctor's office and for an occasional ride in the the car just to get some air. She did not go to the store, the beauty salon, visit another home, laundry, cook, clean or go to church for 6 full weeks following the birth of each child.