LMAO, this tops the thread. Seriously, what some of the other folks said though. Listen to you what you really want to do, not what you've been taught to believe.
-
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
The TMF is sponsored by:
fetish vs. faith
- Thread starter madpipertn
- Start date
LMAO, this tops the thread. Seriously, what some of the other folks said though. Listen to you what you really want to do, not what you've been taught to believe.
BrightEyes1082
Verified
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 5,103
- Points
- 0
Hi there!
I can definitely see what would make for a very conflicting situation there. I grew up Catholic so I've thought of these things before, esp. when it comes to perhaps a D/s relationship (which I have been involved in before). We're taught to not worship any other than Him and in a D/s relationship, that isn't necessarily the case, esp. when you use the words "Master" etc. Most times in a D/s relationship, your very own goal is to please your Dominate, which in return you get pleasure from of course but at first, I was really, really conflicted with these feelings. That kind of messed with my head because ultimately, was I worshiping a false idol??? If I go by the Bible, yes I was. Tickling was sort of the same for me......the whole flesh thing of course. What it came down for to me though, I can't give up who I am. I'm generally a good person and I pray that God focuses on that. As I've gotten older, I've become more comfortable with who I am and I've accepted that. And my love for tickling is sort of how I relate to being gay..........I was born this way. It's all about acceptance for me now. And that is the best feeling in the world. Best of luck to you!!!!
It's interesting that you brought this up. I struggled in the beginning of my
D/s relationship. I idolized my Owner for a long time before I realized, with
the help of a kinky Christian friend, that I was even doing it. I had to figure
out how to put God first, and my Owner second, and then myself third. That's
what I do now, to the best of my ability. It's not easy. It's so easy to get
obsessed with pleasing my Owner. She requires that I kneel each night and
reflect on my submission, and I have to make sure that I have my quiet time
with God before I do that, including prayer time and Bible reading.
I'm forever grateful to my friend who helped me discover the huge plank
that was in my eye, and I pray that plank never enters my eye again.
Faith and fetish
I am a catholic but never once thought that my faith was a conflict to my tickling and fetish desires.Im not sure what it says in the bible but I would reavaluate my moral standing if I wanted to satisfy my fetish by taking advantage of an unwilling participant. As long as it doesnt affect others and I dont bother anyone then im not going to worry about some christian right person judging it as immoral. Werent many Heretics interrogated or forced to confess by christians by having the soles of their feet coated in brine and their feet licked by goats sending many prisoners into flights of madness.
I am a catholic but never once thought that my faith was a conflict to my tickling and fetish desires.Im not sure what it says in the bible but I would reavaluate my moral standing if I wanted to satisfy my fetish by taking advantage of an unwilling participant. As long as it doesnt affect others and I dont bother anyone then im not going to worry about some christian right person judging it as immoral. Werent many Heretics interrogated or forced to confess by christians by having the soles of their feet coated in brine and their feet licked by goats sending many prisoners into flights of madness.
Deadsea7777
2nd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 3, 2006
- Messages
- 1,369
- Points
- 0
I call it simply read the poem and use my freedom of thought, a gift from God. In doing that I am not alone, in the XVI Century Sebastian Castellio the first of the Reformed Christian proponents of Freedom of the Conscience or Freedom of Thought pointed out to Calvin that the Song of Songs was in fact an erotic poem, which praised the physical love and not a hymn to God. Common sense does “make sense”.
Therefore, if an erotic poem, which is an exquisite exaltation of the sensorial world of physical pleasures, is in the Bible there is no way the Bible condemns physical pleasures. Is does condemn the excess however. This poem has always been a problem to support the vision that the Bible condemns the pleasures of the flesh.
So, from my point of view tickling as a physical pleasure has no condemnation in the Bible.
Song of Solomon 4
Your two breasts are like two fawns, like twin fawns of a gazelle that browse among the lilies.
Is not me who made the comparison, is the author of the poem, something 3000 years ago. Still accurate today. I loved it, always did.
john getty
2nd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,446
- Points
- 0
I'm an atheist anyway, but being surrounded in my area by Christians and Muslims I do often put myself in their religious shoes, and I still arrive at the same conclusions. If God in fact DOES exist, what makes you think he's still paying attention anyway? He sent his son down to talk some sense into us and we nailed him to a piece of wood. If I was God that would be it for me, I'd concentrate on the Klingons, they're more reasonable.
vladtickleman22
2nd Level Violet Feather
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
- Messages
- 7,329
- Points
- 0
it all really depends on whether or not you want to go to heaven or hell really.
I couldn't agree more!
waitin2btkled
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2001
- Messages
- 471
- Points
- 16
I study the bible and have been with the Lord for many years. I know the scriptures very well and welcome anyone who has questions, or need direction, feel free to ask anytime...
This is something in the beginning of coming in terms with my fetish I have been battling with for years. Firstly, what you mentioned about it is sinful to lust after the flesh, you are correct and that is the very reason why you are feeling guilty. I feel the same as you do and what do you do in this situation?
The bible says that if you are burning with passion, it is better to get married than to live in sin. This is likened to get married instead of whoring out in the streets and fornicating which will kill you in the end. This is the work of lust and that desire for man and women which is called "arrows" love is stronger than any force known to mankind. What is not known to man since the fall of adam and eve is agape love. That happens when we find christ, we have that relationship with him and his father.
Where am i going with this? When you find Christ and REALLY accept his as your messiah and savior, you are born again spiritually. You now have 2 natures within you and the spiritual nature is in constant battle with the human nature.
Yes, it is just as bad if you lust over a tickling fetish and do it to ejaculate than sex or anything else. When you are dating someone and have self control, if you don't have sex with them before marriage, this is ok (VERY DIFFICULT). If you meet someone from the forum or play with friends satisfying your tickling fetish but not in a sexual way, than it is fine.
For us, think of it as the bible says it is stupid to get drunk and not to get that way. No where does it say that you shouldn't drink at all. However, it is very hard to drink socially when everyone else is drunk and you keeping self control. (See the difference?)
I hope this cleared some things up for you. Send me a message anytime if you have any questions and I am open arms on this topic as i have battled with this for years.
wishful1234
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2008
- Messages
- 167
- Points
- 0
I went thru it....
It can't be wrong to "lust after the flesh"- we'd never "be fruitful and multiply" if we didn't lust!
I think a greater problem lurks behind your doubts; LEGALISM. It's the bane of many believers.
There are sects who believe husband and wife should NOT have sex, or at least not enjoy it (certain branches of the 7th Day Adventists, for instance) Be very careful of legalistic dogma, it can poison your whole life; I believed many false teachings for years, wasted much of my life with it.
Can you quote a scripture that says a tickle fetish is wrong? I sure can't...
(Sorry, too lazy to dust off my Strong's Concordance and cite the references)
Closest I can find is "...lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, and the pride of life" This verse is severely misunderstood. So is Christ's quote that if you look at a woman "to lust after her" you've committed Adultery in your heart. That one was a stumblingblock to me for decades (to ANY male who's CREATED BY GOD to desire females) Until I understood what it meant: Married men are to be faithful to their wives, and single men ought not lust after another man's wife. The verse says nothing about single men lusting after single women.
Lust can be good, have you ever thought of that? He gave us "all things richly to enjoy" and that includes this miraculous wonder of tickling. No, I can't imagine Jesus getting off on tickling any more than I can imagine Him making out with a woman (too much like watching my parents have sex, I guess) but that DOES NOT mean it's wrong for us!
We are to enjoy our mate, delve into wondrous pleasures that He designed. Tickling is healthy for the human spirit, so is abandoning yourself to sexual desire sometimes. The two natures are NOT always at war!
(BTW masturbation is NOT a sin. It's mentioned exactly ONCE in the Bible; Onan was smitten because he refused to sire a child as he'd been commanded, NOT because he spilled his "seed" upon the ground!!)
Last edited:
john getty
2nd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,446
- Points
- 0
The bible also says not to spill your seed without a woman. I think half of us may be going to hell. Fun while it lasted though.
Hell can't be that bad. It's always warm, and you will probably get to hang out with Motley Crue (sp?), Frank Sinatra, and any honest politician.
Plus you'll probably get tickled alot, so isn't that what you wanted from the beginning!?
Plus you'll probably get tickled alot, so isn't that what you wanted from the beginning!?
serialtickler
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2005
- Messages
- 241
- Points
- 0
Thank you for raising such a question. When I was a teenager, I went through the same problem. And what you say reminds me of the most painful and guiltful period in my life. I'd like to share a few memories and thoughts.
I've been raised in Protestantism, spending most of the time in a congregation where many activities were proposed (as a youth group, holiday camps), and being taught about lust, masturbation, sex in general, many things that made me feel painfully guilty then. This congregation belonged to French Protestant Federation, and was "remote controlled" by Presbyterian Church of America, a few "missionaries" from which had been sent to France in order to trigger french people's faith and found new congregations.
When I gradually discovered I had a tickle fetish and, as a teenager, began to fantasize about tickling girls and to masturbate thinking of it, I felt guilty, felt like I was a hypocrit and went through hard moments that threw a sad shadow on my adolescence. There are many people (relatives, ministers, members of the congregation, even mates) I still find difficult to forgive for being as irresponsible (and much more hypocrit as I actually was) as they were then : "just do as I say, don't do as I do", as Phil Collins used to sing. Some of my mates were clever enough to play the good pupil's role in front of our ministers and do whatever they wanted with girls behind their back : I wasn't good at it, feeling more and more guilty over years, uncomfortable at church. I felt like I was going to burst out.
So, my adolescence was ruined and I almost remained impotent : it took many years to make things get better and, though being soon 40, now divorced, and being the father of a 11 years old son, I never completely recovered from this period's wounds. For somebody sincere, hearing such bullshit as "masturbation is a sin", "you mustn't have sex (nor even kiss a woman) till you get married", "God chose only one woman on Earth for you" "having sex is only a duty one a christian has to do in order to have children", "sex can barely be a pleasure for men only, and is a pain for women", yes, hearing such bullshit is terrible. And it's much more terrible whan one realizes it comes from adults who took a good time when they were younger, from ministers who cheat with their wife or who keep on pawing them in front of many people in the middle of a hotel dining room...
Something even more sad is the way this education perverted my taste for tickling during those times (fortunately, it's been brought back to something much more light, happy and playful since then). Yes, when I was a teenager, tickling appeared to be a comfortable and hypocrit "ersatz", a substitute for sex, amongst these people I lived with most of the time. And I used it as such a thing myself. First, I happen to explain the increase of my foot fetish as being a result of guilt : one doesn't have the right to watch women's ass or breasts, so he watches what hasn't been clearly prohibited. Second, I attended many protestant holiday camps, first as a camper, then as a camp counselor. What I lived in such circumstances now appears to me as one of the most hypocrit and unhealthy situations one can imagine. I can remember all these teenagers - and I was one of them - burning with desire, but never daring to go out with a girl (though some did it very discreetly, as I previously said), because they'd been told any "flirt" would be regarded as "impure". So, what did we do? We spent most of our free time trying to get girls, pin down girls, tie girls up to beds in dormitories, take their shoes and socks off and gangtickle them, just before going and masturbating thinking of what we'd done (a substitute for a rape sex drive?). Most of us were pathetically frustrated teenagers, finding each way they could to have a physical contact with girls. Girls pretended not to like to get captured and tickled but, in fact, never really tried to escape our attacks much, teased us, even telling us where their most ticklish spots were, and what the best way to drive them nuts was. Relationships had eventually got perverted by the irresponsible behaviour lessons we were taught. I now think tickling was then a way of hiding a huge hypocrisy. The camp's directors, the ministers who got involved in these camps never blamed us for tickling girls, though they knew how often it happened and which way tickling sessions took place, never blamed girls for playing tickle games with boys. But - you know - I think that, in their hypocrit minds in the hypocrit minds they'd learned us to have, tickling was a "safe", "clean" way to deal with sex matters, a comfortable way of getting round the interdicts. Tickling didn't go too far, was only considered playful, not sexual, whereas a kiss, a flirting, a sexual relationship should have been considered "impure". Who'll trust that? Either everything had to be blamed, or nothing (though I know the question of wondering if tickling could be not sexual at all has often been debated on TMF). And with regard to masturbation, this was theoretically forbidden, though the "guardians of our souls" perfectly knew all of the teenagers we were then used to do it (but, you know, this couldn't be seen much, hidden in the secret of our beds at night, so people could let it go).
Well, as many have said in this thread, many words that are supposed to be God's words are human words, sometimes coming from neurotic and/or irresponsible people, from inconsequent and hypocrit people, from people who did whatever they wanted during their youth and as young adults and then became converted to what they think is the truth and purity...
I'm not much of a believer now, though I still happen to hope God has a wider view on what some of his ministers fiercely pretend to be a pure behaviour, and a greater sense of humour. I'm not very proud thinking back of this period, not because I tickled and got tickled, but because of the hypocrit way tickling was then used, probably so as to get round an unbearable contradiction, because of the way tickling was then perverted. I don't think tickling has to be considered a "pure" and tolerable substitute for sex, coming from young people who did not yet get the right to have a sexual relationship : this is a healthy (playful and/or sexual) enjoyable pleasure for consenting people of all ages, such as having sex can be in the same conditions. But I think religion can turn healthy human things as desire and sexual relationships into hypocrit practices.
So, madpipertn, I don't think tou have to feel guilty and "in confliction" with the rules you want to obey because you're a christian tickler/ticklee (though I can perfectly undersand you feel so, for having experimented it myself). It doesn't hurt anybody consenting to it more than being a video games addict does, whether it is a sexual turn on or not. This can be a passion among many others (are christian compulsive chess players are blamed?). Why would there be a specificity for sex in what religions use to call "sin", though I know Paul writes "body is the holy ghost's temple" or "better getting married than burning with desire" (there would be many things to say about Paul's words about sex and women...). Who can exactly interprete such words, which - some other members are right - come from a human mind? I think one of the things I now hate the most is some ministers of God's incredible spiritual arrogance.
Don't let such a happy, funny and positively exciting thing as tickling get spoilt and ruined. You can be sincerely faithful, though having a taste for ticking.
Why wouldn't there be a place for tickling in heaven?
Last edited:
yes, there is semi-erotic poetry in scripture.
and this is very important because solomon himself was a Christ shadow. this book is fundamentally representative of both the passion between man adn woman and the passion with which god loves his church.
as for lust after the flesh, that's not basic sensual desire. that's misuse (of which i am completely guilty don't get me wrong) of said desires after something not in line with the divine order.
paul put it like this, when you're married the only time you shouldn't be sleeping together is during times of fasting and prayer to god, other than that it should be on like popcorn. from a Christian perspective within the construct of the marital relationship things like denying a footor tickling fetish is just plain silly.
part of the decree to not be unequally yoked i fully believe has to do with sexuality and why in any responsible christian guidebook on courtship we should really discuss and discern sexual compatability with our potential life mates on or around the third to fifth date.
there is no where in scrpture that says though shalt not tickle.
and as to the idea of a d/s relationship i think that it's very important to distinguish that
1.) at several parts of scripture wives referred to their husbands as lord lovingly but not in the sense that they elevated them above god.
2.)the service of our spouse in whatever itteration of sexuality is subordinate to our love for god and does not constitute idolatry when you use a term of endearment like MASTER.
***************************************************
and practically from scripture (again i am the guiltiest of all guilty on this one) one of the greek terms represented as adultry in the english was originally the word pornia, meaning anything sexually related.
the potential danger for a site like this especially for males is that through exposure to material directly hard wired to our sex drive the way that we relate to other people specifically woman and most specifically our future spouses will be overly autocratic. tickle clips don't have feelings, stories don't want to cuddle after, and tickle cartoons don't use tampons.
like anything its about awarness both of our flaws, our service to god, and our heart motives.
i think that one thing we are slack on as a minority within this community is letting ourself be known to each other so that this site can be a meeting place for christians of ike mind to facilitate long term courting and finding marital partners of like mind. because if you take away that premice then any air of legitimacy just goes right out the window.
and as to the question of homosexuality... i have believed and will always believe that no matter how far one may be to that particular side of the spectrum that in the vastness of our species god can prepare a hetero sexual mate for anyone like he prepared a fish for jonah that still fulfills someone emotionally, physically, and mentally as a ministry of God's perfection and mastery of this earth. but i have been accused on more than one occasion of idealism.
wow... that explains a hell of a lot. thank you for sharing serial.
TklDuo-Ann
2nd Level Black Feather
- Joined
- May 21, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Points
- 0
But, little kids don't do it as a fetish/sexual thing. Therein lies the difference...and the issue for many.
johnny3tears
TMF Novice
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2010
- Messages
- 59
- Points
- 0
I was originally raised as a Christian, but don't consider myself to be as religious as I was when I was a child. Right now, I think of myself as a Spiritual. Neither religious nor agnostic. I believe in all paths to God. Even though my beliefs in God were inspired by the Bible, I have problems believing some of the stories in it.
As far as a fetish interrupting or possibly straying a person away from God, I believe in no such thing. As long as you recognize God as your Protector and Almighty Father, you should have no problem at all continuing in your fetishisms, whatever they may be.
As far as a fetish interrupting or possibly straying a person away from God, I believe in no such thing. As long as you recognize God as your Protector and Almighty Father, you should have no problem at all continuing in your fetishisms, whatever they may be.
Shift your paradigm
It seems these threads are focused generally on two extremes: atheists and agnostics (most of which were raised in a religious home) and religious people who think they have found the "balance" of fetish and faith to keep from feeling too guilty. I apologize for the length and rambling nature of the following:
The thing is, it's not a black and white issue. Reading and intelligently interpreting the Bible eventually leads to a life decision, but it's not a rulebook. It's not even all about ethics and morality. The "book" is a vast collection of writings over thousands of years made up of every literary genre you can think of (narrative prose, poetry, song lyrics, parable, legal documents, apocalyptic writing, etc). It's a mistake to generalize it by saying things like "It was written by men, God had nothing to do with it," or "God wrote this book for us, he just used the writers as tools." We actually have pretty good copies of the original texts to check newer translations on (and yes, different translations of the Bible can be significantly different), so it makes no sense to say things like "It's based on a culture where science was thought to be from the devil!!" because science wasn't developed until hundreds of years after the Bible was written. If you're reading the bible from a scientific standpoint you've missed the boat already.
Now, more than ever before, people of faith can interpret scripture for themselves both individually and in their communities. Even Catholics have the ability to form their own opinions, whether the top-heavy papacy likes it or not. There's no need to make ad hoc arguments for things like homosexuality and fetishism, because when you study the culture these documents were written in and ignore the "Moral Majority" in the USA, there's really very little in the Bible about such things. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in the records we have of his teachings (most of his teachings were about the Kingdom of God and taking care of the poor and widows), and other references were made in a society which had no concept of a "sexual orientation." Anal sex in the Old Testament was mostly something one man did to another to shame him after conquering him in battle. In the New Testament time period pederasty was an acceptable relationship in Roman culture, but it wasn't because the men were "gay." It was just what people did.
There is no verse in the Bible that says "Sex before marriage is wrong." In Hebrew culture it was expected that the bride was a virgin, but this was also a time of arranged marriages, so the bride was more of a possession than a person anyway. I suggest finding the "spirit of the law" in instances where a cultural equivalent does not exist today. Who wrote the story/law? What did the story/law mean to the people it was written for? What is the context this passage was written in? When you have an idea to these answers, then you might see how they can speak to you today, rather than blindly cutting and pasting directly from the bible into your 21st century life.
Satan is barely mentioned in the Old Testament; the idea of Hell and the Devil seem to be later developments, probably partially influenced by Greek dualist ideas (if there is an all-good God, there must be an evil counterpart). Satan may also just be a way to personify evil forces. The idea that God is the ultimate love, with infinite grace, yet is somehow unable to forgive people who don't believe in him and pray a certain prayer, and is contractually obligated to send them to Hell is complete nonsense. If you believe in a loving, all-powerful God, remember that He is in control, not some self-contained justice system of sin and punishment that God must submit to.
Yes, in our sexuality, as in all human qualities, there is always the potential for corruption. The world is broken, we see that every day. But drawing lines in the sand over "how far is too far" to balance a spiritual, churchy self with a physical, everyday self creates a false dichotomy. We don't have two distinct natures. There's no "inner battle" going on between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. We're just people, flesh and spirit fused, and God is present in every aspect of our lives. I happen to believe that responding to that love entails a change of heart and a change of lifestyle, but it has nothing to do with hating gays and bombing abortion clinics. If it requires a change in how you understand your tickling fetish, I would think the main question might be "How much power am I giving this fetish over my life?" not "How can I satisfy my desires and still feel holy?"
I'm not perfect either, I've shared in these same struggles of faith, but these are my working conclusions.
It seems these threads are focused generally on two extremes: atheists and agnostics (most of which were raised in a religious home) and religious people who think they have found the "balance" of fetish and faith to keep from feeling too guilty. I apologize for the length and rambling nature of the following:
The thing is, it's not a black and white issue. Reading and intelligently interpreting the Bible eventually leads to a life decision, but it's not a rulebook. It's not even all about ethics and morality. The "book" is a vast collection of writings over thousands of years made up of every literary genre you can think of (narrative prose, poetry, song lyrics, parable, legal documents, apocalyptic writing, etc). It's a mistake to generalize it by saying things like "It was written by men, God had nothing to do with it," or "God wrote this book for us, he just used the writers as tools." We actually have pretty good copies of the original texts to check newer translations on (and yes, different translations of the Bible can be significantly different), so it makes no sense to say things like "It's based on a culture where science was thought to be from the devil!!" because science wasn't developed until hundreds of years after the Bible was written. If you're reading the bible from a scientific standpoint you've missed the boat already.
Now, more than ever before, people of faith can interpret scripture for themselves both individually and in their communities. Even Catholics have the ability to form their own opinions, whether the top-heavy papacy likes it or not. There's no need to make ad hoc arguments for things like homosexuality and fetishism, because when you study the culture these documents were written in and ignore the "Moral Majority" in the USA, there's really very little in the Bible about such things. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in the records we have of his teachings (most of his teachings were about the Kingdom of God and taking care of the poor and widows), and other references were made in a society which had no concept of a "sexual orientation." Anal sex in the Old Testament was mostly something one man did to another to shame him after conquering him in battle. In the New Testament time period pederasty was an acceptable relationship in Roman culture, but it wasn't because the men were "gay." It was just what people did.
There is no verse in the Bible that says "Sex before marriage is wrong." In Hebrew culture it was expected that the bride was a virgin, but this was also a time of arranged marriages, so the bride was more of a possession than a person anyway. I suggest finding the "spirit of the law" in instances where a cultural equivalent does not exist today. Who wrote the story/law? What did the story/law mean to the people it was written for? What is the context this passage was written in? When you have an idea to these answers, then you might see how they can speak to you today, rather than blindly cutting and pasting directly from the bible into your 21st century life.
Satan is barely mentioned in the Old Testament; the idea of Hell and the Devil seem to be later developments, probably partially influenced by Greek dualist ideas (if there is an all-good God, there must be an evil counterpart). Satan may also just be a way to personify evil forces. The idea that God is the ultimate love, with infinite grace, yet is somehow unable to forgive people who don't believe in him and pray a certain prayer, and is contractually obligated to send them to Hell is complete nonsense. If you believe in a loving, all-powerful God, remember that He is in control, not some self-contained justice system of sin and punishment that God must submit to.
Yes, in our sexuality, as in all human qualities, there is always the potential for corruption. The world is broken, we see that every day. But drawing lines in the sand over "how far is too far" to balance a spiritual, churchy self with a physical, everyday self creates a false dichotomy. We don't have two distinct natures. There's no "inner battle" going on between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. We're just people, flesh and spirit fused, and God is present in every aspect of our lives. I happen to believe that responding to that love entails a change of heart and a change of lifestyle, but it has nothing to do with hating gays and bombing abortion clinics. If it requires a change in how you understand your tickling fetish, I would think the main question might be "How much power am I giving this fetish over my life?" not "How can I satisfy my desires and still feel holy?"
I'm not perfect either, I've shared in these same struggles of faith, but these are my working conclusions.
A tickling fetish is simply another form of sexuality. It therefore should be no more "sinful" than any other form of sexuality.
Is sexuality sinful in and of itself? I don't think even the Bible argues that. It just argues for expressing sexuality (of whatever form) in a monogamous relationship.
serialtickler
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2005
- Messages
- 241
- Points
- 0
Don't apologize. Thank you very much for your wise and enlightening reply.
john getty
2nd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,446
- Points
- 0
The thing about Christianity is, even though it's the same religion there are so many different interpretations of the bible by Catholics, Protestants, Mormons etc, and as Christians they disagree with each other, can't they even get their story straight before they start lying to us?
I study the bible and have been with the Lord for many years. I know the scriptures very well and welcome anyone who has questions, or need direction, feel free to ask anytime...
Firstly, what you mentioned about it is sinful to lust after the flesh, you are correct and that is the very reason why you are feeling guilty. I feel the same as you do and what do you do in this situation?
The bible says that if you are burning with passion, it is better to get married than to live in sin. This is likened to get married instead of whoring out in the streets and fornicating which will kill you in the end. This is the work of lust and that desire for man and women which is called "arrows" love is stronger than any force known to mankind. What is not known to man since the fall of adam and eve is agape love. That happens when we find christ, we have that relationship with him and his father.
Where am i going with this? When you find Christ and REALLY accept his as your messiah and savior, you are born again spiritually. You now have 2 natures within you and the spiritual nature is in constant battle with the human nature.
Yes, it is just as bad if you lust over a tickling fetish and do it to ejaculate than sex or anything else. When you are dating someone and have self control, if you don't have sex with them before marriage, this is ok (VERY DIFFICULT). If you meet someone from the forum or play with friends satisfying your tickling fetish but not in a sexual way, than it is fine.
For us, think of it as the bible says it is stupid to get drunk and not to get that way. No where does it say that you shouldn't drink at all. However, it is very hard to drink socially when everyone else is drunk and you keeping self control. (See the difference?)
I hope this cleared some things up for you. Send me a message anytime if you have any questions and I am open arms on this topic as i have battled with this for years.
off topic, from the greek translation of peters conversation with Christ post resurection God is capable of agape the highest we ever really get pre-redemption is philia....
but that's just the nerd in me.
taptoematt
2nd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 1,415
- Points
- 0
I see your point,although there are some, like myself, who make a distinction between sex and tickling.
I imagine if you were one who got them intermingled, it would be a problem for sure.
TklDuo-Ann
2nd Level Black Feather
- Joined
- May 21, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Points
- 0
I pretty much keep them seperate as well. It's more about friendship and bonding for me. But, there are many for whom that isn't the case...a good percentage of whom are wired in such a way that they are not even capable of separating it from their sexuality. They deserve a bit of understanding and compassion.
T
Tidas
Guest
Don't forget Jews and Muslims as well, they worship the same God as Christians. It is the nature of man to disagree on pretty much everything, especially matters of faith. Christianity is not some kind of political movement that seeks to change how you think and make you one of us. Not true Christianity anyway. So your statement here is both ignorant and seems to be borne of a chip on your shoulder. You might reflect on your reasons for thinking this way before you make such statements.
As to the OP, it is hard not to reiterate what everyone before me has said, but i'll give it a shot.
Aristotle teaches us about the via media, the middle way, splitting the difference between extremes. In virtue ethics, (which is not exclusionary of Christianity) the moral life is one in which you take everything from a middle standpoint. The extreme of self-confidence is hubris, the deficiency is cowardice, and the median is courage. Have courage to do what you feel is right.
Kierkegaard teaches that the authentic life is one lived through blind faith. Not questioning that you have faith in what you believe, and never backing down from your faith in the face of the terrifying unknown. So have the blind faith to do what you feel is right.
Jesus Christ teaches that the only way to the Father is through Him. Meaning that the example of Christ's life is an exceptional model for right-living. I believe that Christ's life teaches us that Aristotle and Kierkegaard are on to something here. Christ never doubted his faith that His Father was with Him. He lived virtuously according to Aristotle's "Golden Mean." Find your own via media. Carve out your own faith. Never let the desires of your flesh outweigh the desires of the two, but instead create synthesis. Synthesis is the key to right living.
