How sex before Marriage is not haram (prohibited) according to the Quran

nsws1988

There is clear advantages to a relationship which has become a marriage but how is this advantage of marriage which you point to related to 2233? On the part about the fathers, it does not go beyond talking about him being responsible for provisions of the child. It could be that the father of a relationship outside of a marriage is a much better father and takes much responsibility then another father who is in a marriage.

Marriage as far as i know, does not bring an advantage to this.

I meant if there was a legal contract between them or at least they are known to the public as a couple, then the father can't flee from his responsibilities. You might think this won't happen but it does and single mothers are left to take care of their child on their own with no financial help from the father.

unknownuser

I meant if there was a legal contract between them or at least they are known to the public as a couple, then the father can't flee from his responsibilities. You might think this won't happen but it does and single mothers are left to take care of their child on their own with no financial help from the father.

well put bravo

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13800.0

Noah tried to help the then poor ladies but now the law of the land, in the west anyway, does help greatly.

peace

RiseUpMyPpl

Peace all
peace

The purpose of this article is to argue against the widely accepted belief that the Quran prohibits sex before marriage. I intend to do this by using the Quran to justify a case of pre-marital sex where it is acceptable in the light of the Quran.

I have had a similar view for a while now. From my perception, the Quran advises against casual sex but not against premarital sex. One does not share a bond with a one night stand, it is just sex. However, a gf and bf are committed to each other by oath. They have developed a bond and care about each other deeply. Is a gf or bf not whom your right hand possesses?

Elke

@ riseup & ninimak
that is also the way i see it
also, this interpretation of "those with which you are bonded through an oath" (imo implying reciprocity) is more acceptable than the one seeing malakat aymakoum as slave girls...
LK

san

Hi, nimnimak!

A very interesting thread, i must say.

If you've made up your mind about this--maybe the only thing left to do is ... practice? Because i can't help but notice so many could be's in this thread. So why not just let it be? Or at least, maybe steal other ppl's experiences for more insights? Maybe friends, relatives who've been there done that. Just maybe...

Also, anyone noticed the youngest age we've known yet of two human beings having sex (by their own will)? Or youngest mothers to give birth ever?

What i mean is, what is/are the boundary/ies for sex then, if not marriage--age? biology? psychology/emotion? self-control? economy? supply/availability? An oath? Oral or written? And how binding is this oath? One-to-one relationship only, or something more than that? (if there's any limit, where in AQ do we have that reMMA?)

I'm in for good discussions )

Bigmo

Looks like John Edwards and wife are split

Edwards Admits Fathering Love Child, Reportedly Separates From Wife

FOXNews.com

Former presidential candidate John Edwards has admitted fathering his former campaign videographer's child.

Former Sen. John Edwards arrives with his wife Elizabeth for the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's memorial service in Boston Aug. 28, 2009. (AP Photo)
Former presidential candidate John Edwards has admitted fathering his former campaign videographer's child.

In a statement released to NBC News, Edwards said, "I am Quinn?s father. ... It was wrong for me ever to deny she was my daughter and hopefully one day, when she understands, she will forgive me."

Friends of the family said that Edwards and wife, Elizabeth, have separated, NBC reported.

The admission comes after months of denials from Edwards that he fathered former mistress Rielle Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn. The revelation also comes a week before his former campaign aide, Andrew Young, is set to appear in an ABC News interview saying he posed as the father when the scandal first broke as a favor to Edwards.

The two-time presidential candidate also admitted to providing financial support to the child and said in the statement that he has "reached an agreement with her mother to continue providing support in the future."

"To all those I have disappointed and hurt these words will never be enough, but I am truly sorry," Edwards said.

Young's interview is scheduled to air on ABC next Friday, but may be pushed forward.

Previous reports have claimed that a secret DNA test proved Edwards' paternity to the child.

The test was taken after Hunter tried to get financial help from Edwards for Frances.

Edwards admitted in August 2008 to an affair with Hunter that he says ended in 2006. That year, Edwards' political action committee paid Hunter's video production firm $100,000 for work. Then the committee paid another $14,086 on April 1, 2007.

A federal grand jury last year investigated whether Edwards broke campaign finance law by paying "hush" money to Hunter and Young over the affair.

http//www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/21/report-john-edwards-set-admit-paternity-love-child/

Thats what happens elektro

zubairus

Peace nimnimak,

Let us look at it like this
The post basically was meant to prove a point, which is non prohibition of premarital sex by quran and the argument essentially was based on the understanding that MMA are among the group we can have sex with yet they are not our spouse/wives.Ref 424

But if we understand MMA to mean slaves, the argument for premarital sex is arrested.

Now,an argument against MMA = those possessed by your oath/those you have bond with is that, In 3350-52, the merciful lord mentioned woman that offered herself to the prophet.This woman offered herself, a bond, yet not label as MMA, still and more importantly,in the same verse the prophet was told not to mary any more except MMA. This to me is proving that MMA is not = those you have a bond with.Note, I am not unaware of the fact that the provision therein was meant for the prophet alone.

Meanwhile, with the understanding that MMA means slaves, the interpretation for 424 is this ..and not allowed are muhsanat except that they become your slaves, in which case, their status as married becomes null and void.

You have argued that in 2221, a different label was used for slaves, you see, language is our invention,and the lord spoke to us in that language,In any human language, we have words/labels representing a thing and sometimes,a word/label represent more than a thing.Infact, this is the basis of ambiguity in our languages.
Therefore, the fact that a different label was used for slaves is not enough to conclude that MMA can't be taken to mean slaves.

THINK ABOUT IT.

ZUBAIRUS

afridi220

Peace nimnimak,

Let us look at it like this
The post basically was meant to prove a point, which is non prohibition of premarital sex by quran and the argument essentially was based on the understanding that MMA are among the group we can have sex with yet they are not our spouse/wives.Ref 424

But if we understand MMA to mean slaves, the argument for premarital sex is arrested.

Now,an argument against MMA = those possessed by your oath/those you have bond with is that, In 3350-52, the merciful lord mentioned woman that offered herself to the prophet.This woman offered herself, a bond, yet not label as MMA, still and more importantly,in the same verse the prophet was told not to mary any more except MMA. This to me is proving that MMA is not = those you have a bond with.Note, I am not unaware of the fact that the provision therein was meant for the prophet alone.

Meanwhile, with the understanding that MMA means slaves, the interpretation for 424 is this ..and not allowed are muhsanat except that they become your slaves, in which case, their status as married becomes null and void.

You have argued that in 2221, a different label was used for slaves, you see, language is our invention,and the lord spoke to us in that language,In any human language, we have words/labels representing a thing and sometimes,a word/label represent more than a thing.Infact, this is the basis of ambiguity in our languages.
Therefore, the fact that a different label was used for slaves is not enough to conclude that MMA can't be taken to mean slaves.

THINK ABOUT IT.

ZUBAIRUS

Great that is what i understand handshake

Bigmo

(1) THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME.

(2) THOU SHALT NOT MAKE UNTO THEE ANY GRAVEN IMAGE, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, VISITING THE INIQUITY (SINS) OF THE FATHERS UPON THE CHILDREN UNTO THE THIRD AND FOURTH GENERATION of them that hate Me. And showing MERCY unto thousands of them that love me, and KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.

(3) THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

(4) REMEMBER THE SABBATH DAY, TO KEEP IT HOLY. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; But the Seventh Day (not the first) is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the Seventh day; wherefore the Lord BLESSED THE SABBATH DAY and HALLOWED IT.

(5) HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER; that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

(6) THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

(7) THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.

( THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

(9) THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS (LIE) against thy neighbour.

(10) THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOUR'S HOUSE, THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOUR'S WIFE, NOR HIS MANSERVANT, NOR HIS MAIDSERVANT, NOR HIS OX, NOR HIS ASS, NOR ANY THING THAT IS THY NEIGHBOUR'S."

.

Genesis 209 "a great sin"
Genesis 347 "which thing ought not to be done"
2 Samuel 1312
Jeremiah 1327
Ezekiel 163-22
1 Corinthians 618
2 Corinthians 1221

II. What is the difference between fornication and adultery?

A. Fornication is the illicit sexual intercourse of unmarried persons.

1 Corinthians 69, 18

B. To commit adultery is to have sexual relations with someone other
than one's own spouse (husband or wife).

Jeremiah 2923; 57-8
Proverbs 629, 32; etc.

The scriptures also consider remarriage after divorce to be adultery.

Matthew 532; 199

Even looking at someone with a lustful heart is adultery.

Matthew 528

III. The Bible is not silent on the subject of premarital relations.

A. Sexual intercourse is to be confined to marriage.

Genesis 341-7, 31

B. Marriage is God's provision for the release of sexual desire.

1 Corinthians 72
Hebrews 134

C. Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 522-23). If a couple
cannot restrain themselves, Paul said that they should go ahead and
marry (1 Corinthians 79, 36-37).

D. Consider the following accounts of fornication in Scripture.

Schechem and Dinah

Genesis chapter 34

Tamar and Amnon

2 Samuel chapter 13

IV. Fornication and adultery are absolutely forbidden by God.

Genesis 209
Exodus 2014 (Deuteronomy 518; Matthew 5;27; 1918;
Mark 1019; Luke 1820; Romans 139; James 211)
Leviticus 1820
Deuteronomy 2317-18
2 Samuel 1312
Matthew 1434 (Mark 617-1
1 Corinthians 615; 108

A. These sins are exceedingly "evil" and "wicked" in God's sight.

Genesis 399
Leviticus 1929
Deuteronomy 2222-24, etc.
1 Samuel 222-23
1 Corinthians 513

B. They greatly displease God (Hosea 41-2, 11) and provoke Him to
anger (Numbers 251, 3; Ezekiel 1626; Colossians 35-6).

C. God abhors them.

Proverbs 2214

D. "For this is a heinous crime" (Job 311, 9-12), "villainy" (Jeremiah
2922-23) and filthiness (Revelation 174).

E. "They know not the light" but "are in the terrors of the shadow of death"
(Job 2415-17). It is "the way of hell;" "the dead are there" (Proverbs 727;
913-1.

F. The words of anyone who defends such "unfruitful works of darkness"
(Ephesians 53, 11-12) are "contrary to sound doctrine" (1 Timothy 19-10).

V. Adultery and fornication are serious offenses.

A. Under the law, such acts were counted worthy of death.

Genesis 203, 7, 17; 2611
Leviticus 2010-12
2 Samuel 12
Proverbs 216-19; 75-27
Romans 129, 32

Burned.

Genesis 3815, 24
Leviticus 219

Stoned.

Deuteronomy 2213-21, cp. John 84-5

B. In the days of the early church, fornication was considered just cause
for excommunication from the fellowship of believers.

1 Corinthians 51-2, 9-12

C. Fornication justifies divorce.

Deuteronomy 2213-21
Matthew 532; 199 (Mark 1012)

D. In the Old Testament, fornication and adultery symbolized unfaithfulness to God,
either by idolatry or backsliding in general.

Jeremiah 31, 6, 8, 9, 14, etc.
Ezekiel 69; 1636, etc.
Hosea 12;411-12; 31
Acts 1529

E. Such offenses are self-defiling (Leviticus 1820, 24, 30; 1 Corinthians 618-20)
and can lead to one's own spiritual destruction.

Proverbs 216, 18-19 "unto death"
Proverbs 627-29, 32 "destroyeth his own soul"
Proverbs 913-18 "the dead are there ... in the depths of hell"
Genesis 203, 7 "thou art but a dead man ... for she is a man's wife"

F. Scripture lists fornication and adultery with such sins as murder, witchcraft, robbery, idolatry, etc.

Hosea 42
Romans 221
Acts 1529; 2125
1 Corinthians 69-10
Revelation 921

G. The offense shall be met with severe judgment.

Proverbs 627-29, 32
Ezekiel 1638, 40-41
Malachi 35
Hebrews 134

Fornicators and adulterers shall not be allowed in the kingdom of God.

1 Corinthians 69-10, 18
Galatians 519, 21
Ephesians 55-6
Revelation 2215

They shall be tormented eternally in the lake of fire.

Jude 7
Revelation 218

VI. Why is this considered such a serious offense?

A. "Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth
fornication sinneth against his own body."

1 Corinthians 615-20, esp. verse 18

B. God desires a walk of consecration and holiness within His people.

Leviticus 217, 13-14
2 Corinthians 61
1 Thessalonians 43
Titus 211-12

C. Our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 316-17; 613-20

D. The sin is self-defiling.

Ezekiel 23
Matthew 1519-20
Mark 720-23
1 Corinthians 615-20

E. It influences others by bad example.

2 Samuel 1214
Nahum 34
Romans 132
Revelation 214, 20

F. An attitude of sexual permissiveness pollutes the entire nation.

Leviticus 1824-28; 1929
Jeremiah 32, 9
Nahum 34
Revelation 192

VII. Fornication and adultery should especially have no place among the people of God.

2 Samuel 1312
Romans 221-22
1 Corinthians 51-5, 9-13
Ephesians 417-20
Hebrews 1216

A. Such a way of life was expected of us before we were saved.

Ephesians 22-3
Colossians 37, 5-6
Titus 33-5

In describing the extent of moral corruption among unbelievers, the
Bible says, "the land is full of adulterers." "...they committed adultery,
and assembled themselves by troops in the harlot's houses."

Jeremiah 2310; 57

The world has hardened their hearts to the extent that they actually
feel no guilt or shame for such wrongdoing.

Proverbs 3018-20 "She saith, I have done no wickedness."

B. Christians are commanded to "flee," "avoid," and "abstain from fornication."

Acts 1520, 29
1 Corinthians 618 (cp. Genesis 3912); 72
1 Thessalonians 43
2 Timothy 222

"Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed,
and fell in one day three and twenty thousand."

1 Corinthians 108

"But fornication, and all uncleanness ... let it not be once named among
you, as becometh saints ... For ye know that no whoremonger, nor
unclean person ... hath any inheritance in the kingdom..."

Ephesians 53, 5

"For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should
abstain from fornication that every one of you should know how to
possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of
concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God ... For
God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness."

1 Thessalonians 43-7

C. When a person gives his life to Jesus, he is expected to put aside the
evil practices of his former way of life.

2 Corinthians 1221
Ephesians 417-20

D. We are forbidden even to fellowship with those who do such acts.

1 Corinthians 51-5, 9-13
Ephesians 311-12; 511

VIII. Scripture describes fornication and adultery as "a deep ditch" and
"narrow pit" (Proverbs 2214; 2327-2, because the lustful intentions
behind them are deadly (Proverbs 726; James 115) and deceitful
(2 Samuel 133-5, etc.; Proverbs 53-4; 710).

A. They are works of the flesh.

Galatians 519-21

They originate in the heart.

Matthew 528; 1519
Mark 721; 1011
Luke 1618

They spring from an evil lust.

1 Corinthians 106
1 Thessalonians 43-5, 7

Because lust is especially aroused by the sight of the eyes (Matthew
52, the Word of God specifically exhorts Christians to "adorn
themselves in modest apparel" (1 Timothy 28-9; cp. 1 Peter 33;
Isaiah 316-24).

Genesis 342 "saw"
Genesis 381-24 "saw"
Genesis 397-12 "cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said,
'Lie with me'"
Judges 161 "saw"
2 Samuel 111-5 "he saw a woman washing herself, and the
woman was very beautiful to look upon"

B. There is a great difference between love and lust.

"Love is of God" (1 John 47) and gives (John 316; 1 Corinthians
135). Lust is evil and seeks its own satisfaction (2 Samuel 1312, 14).
While love is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 522-23), fornication and
adultery are works of the flesh (Galatians 519-21).
Love can wait; lust cannot.

2 Samuel 1313-14

C. The result of yielding to fleshly lusts is corruption.

1 Corinthians 316-17; 108
Galatians 68
James 115

Murder.

2 Samuel 111-5

Rape.

2 Samuel 131-20

D. God can provide victory over lustful temptations (Romans 611-14;
Galatians 516, 24-25; 2 Peter 29-10, 14), but it takes an act of our will.

"Cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light."

Romans 1312

"Mortify therefore ..."

Colossians 35

"Flee youthful lusts."

1 Corinthians 618
2 Timothy 222

"Put off ... the old man ... put on the new ..."

Ephesians 422-24

IX. Fornication and adultery are not unforgivable sins, if repented.

Matthew 2131-32
Titus 33-5
Revelation 221

A. Some examples in scripture (in which God forgave the offense)

Rahab the harlot.

Joshua 21; 617, cp. Hebrews 1131 and James 225

King David.

2 Samuel 1213, cp. 114

The prodigal son.

Luke 1530, 32

The woman in the temple.

John 83-11

Early church believers.

1 Corinthians 69-11 "such were (past tense) some of you but ye are washed..."

B. However, we sometimes must face punishing consequences in this life
(according to the law of sowing and reaping).

2 Samuel 1211-14

C. Many will never repent of the offense and for them there can be no forgiveness.

2 Corinthians 1221
Revelation 921

"Being past feeling," and having a "seared conscience," they gave
"them selves over unto lasciviousness (Lit., sensuality; erotic lust)."

Ephesians 419

Therefore, "God gave them up" (they became reprobate).

Romans 128-29, 32

http//www.dianedew.com/adulforn.htm

elektro

RA786

I read something Interesting on the subject.....
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/chakra.jpg

Spiritual Effects of Sexual Promiscuity

Dear Julia

Spiritually/astrally/energetically, what energetic bonds are set up when an individual has sex with another person or persons? Are people who have multiple partners (like prostitutes or sexually promiscuous people) linked eternally to the people they have sex with? I've been watching an HBO series about a brothel in Nevada. One of the young women declares that she is a whore; she says she is proud of selling her body and enjoys it. I also wonder about actors in the porn industry, for I look at them and see a "hardness" etched around them. I can't describe it, but there is something different about their auras. What happens on a spiritual level during a sex act of a purely carnal nature? Thanks for you insights into this question.

Alexis

Dear Alexis

First we must remember that everything that happens on a physical level has non-physical counterparts. What we think and feel affects our bodies, what we do affects our auras, etc.

Further, the energy that flows through us when we have sex is the same energy that fuels all creation. Whether you call it chi, prana, kundalini, life force energy, etc., it's all the same thing. When we don't channel our chi in positive, creative ways, it will build up towards release. Orgasm is the sudden release of a great deal of creative/life force energy.

The life force energy that flows through us during lovemaking not only propels us into all sorts of important life experiences via relationships, it is powerful enough to create new life! This same energy can carry us into blissful states of consciousness during spiritual practices such as meditation. As it is powerful stuff, it is very important that we use it wisely.

This doesn't mean we should become ascetics. If we don't use our life force energy enough, we end up depressed, sluggish, bored, listless, and physically ill. If we use it too much, we end up exhausted, burned out, stressed, anxious and physically ill. As with everything, balance is wise. Good health, personal power and happiness all depend on a healthy balance of chi. When used consciously, this force is the source of all art, innovation, growth, creation, progress, life, etc.

Every interaction between people involves an exchange of energy. When that interaction involves profound feelings of love and desire (or bodily fluids!) the exchange is intense. Just kissing and heavy petting create energy links between the parties involved that penetrate their auras. These links are temporary, however, and will fade away in a few days, weeks or months, depending on how much mental and emotional energy is fed to the connection after the sweethearts physically part.

Sexual intercourse creates a much stronger energetic bond on the astral plane that will often last for many years. The more emotionally and mentally involved the lovers are, the stronger the link. It is this energetic connection that causes emotional pain upon separation from a lover, for it's like a living part of them is starving to be fed.

The more intense a relationship is, the stronger the bond is. The more times we have sex with a certain individual, the stronger our energetic bond will be to them. That's why it's so much more painful to leave someone we're in love with than someone we don't really care about, and why even leaving a "dead marriage" can be so darn hard - those energetic bonds are very strong due to many years of sustenance.

Now to explore the effects of promiscuity, let's get past all the confusing moral lessons we've been taught by working with an ecological metaphor.

We know that if we're careless ecologically, the Earth is affected in undesirable ways. Being careless about whom we sleep with is like being careless with our natural resources. If we use them up before they've been replenished, we end up depleted. If we fail to treat our bodies as our sacred homes, they end up deforested, polluted, scarred and littered with garbage. When it comes to sex, the key to maintaining one's vitality and beauty both physically and aurically is thus to treat our bodies and sexual experiences as sacred.

This doesn't mean we should only have sex within legal marriage or anything like that. In fact, in some ways the determined "security" of marriage often makes it very challenging to keep sex a conscious spiritual act.

On the other hand, marriage (or a similar committed relationship) is like a container for our valuable energy. If we just pour our energy out on the ground, it is quickly gone - wasted. If we pour it into a container, then we still have it, and if our partner pours his/her energy into the container, then together we have twice as much as we did alone. Every time one of us takes our energy and pours it elsewhere, it means less for both of us. Every time we pour more of our energy into the container, together we have more.

Everything that happens on a physical sexual level has correspondences at a metaphysical level, so every time we have sex with someone, we know we're mingling with their physical germs, but we're also mingling with their emotional, mental and spiritual "germs," PLUS the energetic issues of the people they're connected to.

Since the sexual revolution, the energetic webs between people have multiplied unlike anything ever seen before on planet Earth. Every time we sleep with someone new, we are linking with everyone they've ever slept with both physically AND energetically. From the astral, this is seen as a vast web of intricate energetic interconnections.

Further, it's not necessary to have physical sex to experience a strong energetic bond with someone. The deeper you feel about someone, the deeper your bond to them - even if your feelings are hateful instead of loving. If you feel a very deep, strong connection to someone and fantasize about them often but never sleep with them, you may have a stronger auric link to them than a prostitute would have to her client.

Though culturally we've twisted sex around to the point where common attitudes are a universe away from spiritual truths, beneath some of our moral 'values' there is some real wisdom. For example, virgins (both male and female) appear aurically "pure" and beautiful because they are free of energetic cords. They aren't caught up in that vast web described above.

They are also guarded by an energetic, hymen-like shield that protects them from psychic intrusion. While I certainly don't appreciate the way we've smeared this simple truth with religious guilt and the economics of procreation, there is some spiritual "value" in being a virgin just as there are "risks" in being sexually reckless.

As we grow more and more spiritual, we naturally grow more and more mindful in every area of our lives. Mindfulness is the key to growth and greater well-being. The more mindful we are about what we eat, what we think, what we read, what we believe, who we associate with and yes - who we make love to - the more we will be able to manifest personal power, fulfillment and well-being.

To me, this doesn't necessarily mean we should restrict ourselves in any way. Instead, we should bring our highest selves to every relationship. We should remain very conscious about what we really want and use our personal gifts and resources wisely. Whether we're talking about sex or any other matter, to manifest a happy, healthy life experience, we have to consciously bring the best of ourselves to all we do.

Think about it from the DNA in a strand of hair or a drop of blood, we can be identified as the unique individuals we are. The physical and metaphysical marks we leave on everyone we meet are unique; this makes all our interactions and relationships very special. Lovers are not interchangeable! Everything we do is ultimately very important.

Julia

http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/Snake.jpg
Alot of this Promiscuous Ideology is synominus with the satanic idiology The "Do as thou will" Concept...of "Self-Indulgence" and Neglect of all Moral Restrictions..

In my belief, Sex is not just a Physical Activity. It is Highly Spiritual...and very important. When Two have sex, the Spirits Connect...and many Things Happen In which Our Eyes cannot Witness.
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/se.jpg
That is why Sex is so Important and is used Both in a Positive way by "Good People" and it can be used in an Evil Ritual by "Bad People"...
"Prostituting the Soul"... So basically, the more you have sex with a million different people...That a Million different Connections you had with Different Spirits

Exodus 3415 "Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices.

Exodus 3416 And when you choose some of their daughters as wives for your sons and those daughters prostitute themselves to their gods, they will lead your sons to do the same.

Jeremiah 31 "If a man divorces his wife and she leaves him and marries another man, should he return to her again? Would not the land be completely defiled? But you have lived as a prostitute with many lovers-- would you now return to me?" declares the LORD.

Ezekiel 1615 "'But you trusted in your beauty and used your fame to become a prostitute. You lavished your favors on anyone who passed by and your beauty became his.

Ezekiel 233 They became prostitutes in Egypt, engaging in prostitution from their youth. In that land their breasts were fondled and their virgin bosoms caressed.

Ezekiel 2329 They will deal with you in hatred and take away everything you have worked for. They will leave you naked and bare, and the shame of your prostitution will be exposed. Your lewdness and promiscuity

.....This title was written on her forehead MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. Revelations 171-18
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/sex_and_the_city.jpg
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/play.jpg
Notice how the Propagation of this Fornication/Adultery Show is Centered around "Eve and the Forbidden Apple" as a Mockery.
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/desparate.jpg
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/des2.jpg
http//i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/rickrivero305/scripture.jpg

I think what many fail to realize is the Sacredness of SEX. The Physical Fluids, and the Spiritual Energy that is within them. Both Good religious People and satanic religious people will agree, that there is Much Power and energy in sex. You can learn alot from this Statement!

Then it would come as NO SUPRISE, that "Good Religions" would encourage its Followers to Respect and Obstain from Promiscuous Activity that is outside of Marriage. and It would also come as NO SUPRISE that the majority of TV networks and Society, would Push their satanic agenda of Encouraging People to engage in Sexual Activities outside of Marriage. WHY? I assume that its all within the Fluids and Energy. Depending on your Intention and Connection to that individual, it will determine what may arrise out of it.

If you are having sex with people outside of Marriage, or At Least outside of ANY Relationship, it is Obvious Negitivity will arise.

Now, Personnaly, I think that if two people are Boyfriend and Girlfriend and they have sex, Stay committed, and UNITE togeather, I think they are basically Married. Almost Married...All they really need to do now is the Symbolic Ritual and Physical Ceromony in front of 4 witnesses so that the community will recognize this.

However, I think in an Effort to Create the Best Working Society, Marriage is known to be the ONLY way to have sex. It is a Protection, to Help Ensure More that the two will stay commited and not Break the family structure OR mix spiritual Fluids and energy, thus spreading negitivity.

So, I believe one of the MAIN reasons for Marriage, is for Spiritual/Energy Protection. Then the next good reasons are Financial, Moral, etc...

CASE AND POINT---- there are a MILLION and One good reasons for marriage, and there is probabily 1 or NO good valid reasons for Promiscous/Fornication/pre-marital activitys.

(marriage is more than Physical by the way, Marriage is more than just a piece of paper. It is a Spiritual and MENTAL Bond created between two or (more in some cases up to 4) Entities. It is the Union and Solidarity of people who want to further their spirit and physical Body toawrds the striaght path (Thats what I beleive marriage is) D

nsws1988

wow this is so creepy ra786. Are you a mind reader or something? &

RA786

wow this is so creepy ra786. Are you a mind reader or something? &

Haha No why where you thinking the same thing? lol? D

Naw, actually alot of this articles and pictures came from a Thread/Articles I posted in the past on a different website but with the same Subject Matter.
The Wake Up Project. www.wakeupproject.com
Alot of the Issues that interest me are the relevant issues in todays society. Sociology, Anti-christ/Dajjal, New World Order Conspiracy, Religion, Sex, Energy, Magic etc...

It is NO Coinsodence that Promiscous Matterial is being Propagated in Music,Movies, and TV wile.....Marriage, Family, and Divine Love is faded Away.
Wether you believe in a Real Manifestation of the Anti-christ/Dajjal or the symbolic Ant-christ/dajjal being a representation of Society/Structure...It does Exist. There is no Doubt.

That is why I must Stress Marriage, LOVE, UNION, FAMILY, and things that are Quranic in Nature. (the powers that be hate those concepts in society)
I guess I believe the Quran is a sort of al-mahdi aginst this Dajjalic System.

And that is why We are here Debating Whether the Quran Allows Dajjalic type Sex....or if the QUran Allows True Good Sex.
Personnally, it is Obvious with the Context of the QUran, that Marriage is Closer to the Goodness and Promiscous/Fornication is closer to the Dajjalic Nature of Evil.

D Peace/Salaam

nimnimak_11

I meant if there was a legal contract between them or at least they are known to the public as a couple, then the father can't flee from his responsibilities. You might think this won't happen but it does and single mothers are left to take care of their child on their own with no financial help from the father.

Oh i see. But this is only the case If in a country the law is such that the husband must provide for the child. But this is a good law and would be there in an ideal society. So I agree on that there is clear benefit in marriage for protection of pregnant women and the child. But i can't agree on 2233 being exclusive to married parents on that argument alone. The verse is clear on ALL parents and IMO shows no signs of being exclusive to marriage. I'm looking at the verse without bias and this is how i'm concluding this

I first thought where the verse was placed could imply it was exclusive to marriages. But then i came across the two sandwiched verses on "salat". More importantly i thougt wouldn't 2233 be clearer? then i though perhaps it's taken into account divorced parents who are no longer married. But then again i though why not mention divorced. like it was mentioned a few verses ago when it was talking of pregnancy. This would be clear like in 2228

nimnimak_11

@ riseup & ninimak
that is also the way i see it
also, this interpretation of "those with which you are bonded through an oath" (imo implying reciprocity) is more acceptable than the one seeing malakat aymakoum as slave girls...
LK

Salam Riseup and Elke

That's what's on mind. I think Q to be against causal sex but it does not make sex exclusive to marriages. I EXTREMELY doubt MMA could mean slaves. That would be the exact defenition of causal sex IMO. I think oath is very important in all of this but i havn't had a proper look at it yet but the issue with MMA needs to be properly solved first.

nimnimak_11

Hi San

A very interesting thread, i must say.

Thanks.

If you've made up your mind about this--maybe the only thing left to do is ... practice? Because i can't help but notice so many could be's in this thread. So why not just let it be? Or at least, maybe steal other ppl's experiences for more insights? Maybe friends, relatives who've been there done that. Just maybe...

I havn't made up my mind on this at all yet. I just think that sex with MMA is permitted based on AQ. It could be that MMA are those your engaged with or it could be less then this. Maybe more.
I fear consequences in practicing this. Someone experience advised me to Go ahead! But the same person said to me that sex sparks very powerful feelings. So i said what if i end up wanting to end the relationship and the other side doesn't? How much emotional pain will that cause? He gave me such a weak answer that it is not worth mentioning IMO.

Also, anyone noticed the youngest age we've known yet of two human beings having sex (by their own will)? Or youngest mothers to give birth ever?

What i mean is, what is/are the boundary/ies for sex then, if not marriage--age? biology? psychology/emotion? self-control? economy? supply/availability? An oath? Oral or written? And how binding is this oath? One-to-one relationship only, or something more than that? (if there's any limit, where in AQ do we have that reMMA?)

What are the boundries for marriage with regards to age? or for one to be able to decide their own diet instead of being forced green vegtables and fruits by their mother? I think that it is when you consider that a child is no longer a child and that they are mature adults. The question is, when is that according to AQ. Hopefully we can progress on these questions by looking more into them. I can't really answer you right now. But really good questions. Especially about the limit of MMAs. But then i would think that multiple partners, would be a type of fahsha....but that is my subjective feeling. It may be that this is not fahsha in the sight of God. I don't know. I think there will be more things in AQ to solve these questions.

I'm in for good discussions )

Good to know
welcome

nimnimak_11

Peace all

It's 531 a.m here. I need to sleep. I will reply to others tomorow.

nimnimak_11

Salam Zubairus

Let us look at it like this
The post basically was meant to prove a point, which is non prohibition of premarital sex by quran and the argument essentially was based on the understanding that MMA are among the group we can have sex with yet they are not our spouse/wives.Ref 424

Yes

But if we understand MMA to mean slaves, the argument for premarital sex is arrested.

Yep. For this generation anyway. It would be questionable whether sex with slaves would have been permitted prior to marriage in the past.

Now,an argument against MMA = those possessed by your oath/those you have bond with is that, In 3350-52, the merciful lord mentioned woman that offered herself to the prophet.This woman offered herself, a bond, yet not label as MMA, still and more importantly,in the same verse the prophet was told not to mary any more except MMA. This to me is proving that MMA is not = those you have a bond with.Note, I am not unaware of the fact that the provision therein was meant for the prophet alone.

Omeiza advised me to look at those verses but I did not fully understand what he wanted me to pick out then. I'l quote 3350 and highlight what i think your directing me towards and comment on it. If i've commented on the wrong thing, please correct me. So heres 3350
You, you the prophet, that We, We permitted/allowed for you your wives/spouses those who you gave their rewards (dowries), and what your right (hand) owned/possessed from what God bestowed upon you, and your paternal uncles' daughters, and your paternal aunts' daughters, and your maternal uncles' daughters, and your maternal aunts' daughters, who (F) emigrated with you, and a believing woman if she presented herself to the prophet, if the prophet wanted that He marries her, clearly/purely for you from other than the believers, We had known what We had commanded/imposed/stipulated on them in their wives and what their right (hands) owned/possessed, so that strain/blame/sin not be on you, and God was/is forgiving, merciful.

Heres the root of the word
Waw-ha-Ba = to give/grant/bestow, dedicate, offer as a present/gift.

From this it is clear that the believing women is offering/dediate herself to the prophet. But this offering or dedication is with respect to marriage as is made clear with "if the prophet wanted that he marries her" now your argument is that the woman would first have to be MMA because of 3052 right? If so i still don't get how this becomes a problem. The woman is offering/dedicating herself as an MMA. What word or phrase would you have expected to have been used instead? This question might help me better understand your point.

There is also another point which i'm not sure on to make yet. It's dependent on your reply to my question.

Meanwhile, with the understanding that MMA means slaves, the interpretation for 424 is this ..and not allowed are muhsanat except that they become your slaves, in which case, their status as married becomes null and void.

This sounds highly unreasable. I meant this to be my main argument against MMA=slaves. Would it make sense for marrying muhsinat women to first have them to be slaves?

You have argued that in 2221, a different label was used for slaves, you see, language is our invention,and the lord spoke to us in that language,In any human language, we have words/labels representing a thing and sometimes,a word/label represent more than a thing.Infact, this is the basis of ambiguity in our languages.

Therefore, the fact that a different label was used for slaves is not enough to conclude that MMA can't be taken to mean slaves.

THINK ABOUT IT.

Yes I agree. It could be that MMA and the other word both mean slave. I have thought about this before. I just think it HIGHLY unlikely considering the requierments for marriage to muhsinat. Also, MMA is a phrase right? so why would a phrase that frqeuently occures be replaced by a word which is meant to mean the same thing. The phrase occures more then the word. Where the word slave does occure, it looks like it is clear that the verse is refering to slaves. Look at 2221 where slave does occure. Does that not make it clear that MMA are not slaves?

nimnimak_11

And that is why We are here Debating Whether the Quran Allows Dajjalic type Sex....or if the QUran Allows True Good Sex.
Personnally, it is Obvious with the Context of the QUran, that Marriage is Closer to the Goodness and Promiscous/Fornication is closer to the Dajjalic Nature of Evil.

D Peace/Salaam

Salam R

That's not what we're debating. We're discussing wether sex is exclusive to marraige or not. In other words wether sex before marriage is haram or not.

zubairus

Peace nimnimak

Salam Zubairus
Yes

Yep. For this generation anyway. It would be questionable whether sex with slaves would have been permitted prior to marriage in the past.

Omeiza advised me to look at those verses but I did not fully understand what he wanted me to pick out then. I'l quote 3350 and highlight what i think your directing me towards and comment on it. If i've commented on the wrong thing, please correct me. So heres 3350
You, you the prophet, that We, We permitted/allowed for you your wives/spouses those who you gave their rewards (dowries), and what your right (hand) owned/possessed from what God bestowed upon you, and your paternal uncles' daughters, and your paternal aunts' daughters, and your maternal uncles' daughters, and your maternal aunts' daughters, who (F) emigrated with you, and a believing woman if she presented herself to the prophet, if the prophet wanted that He marries her, clearly/purely for you from other than the believers, We had known what We had commanded/imposed/stipulated on them in their wives and what their right (hands) owned/possessed, so that strain/blame/sin not be on you, and God was/is forgiving, merciful.

Heres the root of the word
Waw-ha-Ba = to give/grant/bestow, dedicate, offer as a present/gift.

From this it is clear that the believing women is offering/dediate herself to the prophet. But this offering or dedication is with respect to marriage as is made clear with "if the prophet wanted that he marries her" now your argument is that the woman would first have to be MMA because of 3052 right? If so i still don't get how this becomes a problem. The woman is offering/dedicating herself as an MMA. What word or phrase would you have expected to have been used instead? This question might help me better understand your point.

There is also another point which i'm not sure on to make yet. It's dependent on your reply to my question.

This sounds highly unreasable. I meant this to be my main argument against MMA=slaves. Would it make sense for marrying muhsinat women to first have them to be slaves?

Yes I agree. It could be that MMA and the other word both mean slave. I have thought about this before. I just think it HIGHLY unlikely considering the requierments for marriage to muhsinat. Also, MMA is a phrase right? so why would a phrase that frqeuently occures be replaced by a word which is meant to mean the same thing. The phrase occures more then the word. Where the word slave does occure, it looks like it is clear that the verse is refering to slaves. Look at 2221 where slave does occure. Does that not make it clear that MMA are not slaves?

,

You may need to understand my concept of slaves/MMA in our context of discussion so that you can get me right, they are the captives of war. They could be men , women , married, unmarried.
By this, what I understand from 424 is that .... and not allowed for you are married womem except when you have them as captives/slaves/MMA. This implies that a married woman is not allowed for you except when she becomes yours as captive/slaves/MMA. I hope I ve made myself clear.

With regard to 3350-52, It says allowed for you are your wives that you have paid their dowries........ What do you understand from this? Allowed for you to have sex with or to marry them? I opted for to have sex with. This permission extends/covers the rest women mentioned there in the verse. But a provision strickly for the prophet.
My argument here is this, among those mentioned,we have a beliving woman that offers herself for the prophet. If a woman offers herself, this act of offering creat a bond, yet this woman was not described/label as MMA because MMA was mentioned seperately.Can you now understand my line of thinking?

Furthermore,daughter of the brother of prophet's father,daughter of the sister of prophet's father were equally mentioned.There were bonds between them and the prophet, yet they were not referred to as MMA.

This is my arguement againt the thesis of MMA=Those possesed by your oath/those you have bond with.

THINK ABOUT IT.

ZUBAIRUS

nimnimak_11

Peace Zubairus

You may need to understand my concept of slaves/MMA in our context of discussion so that you can get me right, they are the captives of war. They could be men , women , married, unmarried.
By this, what I understand from 424 is that .... and not allowed for you are married womem except when you have them as captives/slaves/MMA. This implies that a married woman is not allowed for you except when she becomes yours as captive/slaves/MMA. I hope I ve made myself clear.

Yes. I think I understand what you mean in this case clearly. So this would no longer mean slave then right? As a captive of war is surely different to a slave. Perhaps this is why a different word is used for slave and the phrase MMA for captives of war as you suggest. But there are some serious problems in my opinion with your understanding.

Let's begin with what I see as a problem in understanding muhsinat as married women
425 If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women (muhsinat), they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands

Can the above women really be understood as married women considering context?

More of a problem is this
235-6 talks of how there is no blame on an individual if they un-guard their private parts in front of their spouses and their MMA. If we take MMA to mean slaves or captives of war then that would mean that with no kind of oath or agreement you can just unguard your private parts to slaves and captives whom you do not even know. This would not make sense. Do you get my point?

With regard to 3350-52, It says allowed for you are your wives that you have paid their dowries........ What do you understand from this? Allowed for you to have sex with or to marry them? I opted for to have sex with. This permission extends/covers the rest women mentioned there in the verse. But a provision strickly for the prophet.

It is really unclear because this is only for the prophet and thus i think only he was meant to understand. But from what it looks like, i would take allowed for you to have sex as they are refered to as wives (azwaaj) but it could be something else that we are unaware of but i agree that most likely it is sex.

My argument here is this, among those mentioned,we have a beliving woman that offers herself for the prophet. If a woman offers herself, this act of offering creat a bond, yet this woman was not described/label as MMA because MMA was mentioned seperately.Can you now understand my line of thinking?

Sort of but i don't see how it creates a problem. You say that this act of offering creates a bond but MMA= those you have an oath with. So that's why i asked you how else would you have expected it to have been written in AQ. If a woman offers herself to a man in terms of an oath or as a fiance or something else, i don't get how some other word should be used in place of offer could you please further clarify? I've thought on this.

Furthermore,daughter of the brother of prophet's father,daughter of the sister of prophet's father were equally mentioned.There were bonds between them and the prophet, yet they were not referred to as MMA.

I thought MMA meant those whom you have an oath with and not a bond.