Is it a sin for a man to touch a women to whom he is not married?

Oh.. goodness....

I hope noone here ever fist bumped a member of the opposite sex!!!!

OR worse yet...

A member of the SAME sex!!!

 

Women with ugly elbows simply aren't tempting to me.

 

I know some of you men are pure of heart, and that Heidi Klum could walk in front of you naked and your only thought would be to compliment her nail polish. I'm not talking to you, and neither is the verse in consideration.

I and the verse are talking to normal, single men, and the touching is not "petting," but touching. It's saying it's good (expedient) not to touch a woman. This isn't saying that helps, mercies, necessities and what proper decorum may require are not good.

It's saying that it's expedient for men to avoid touching women (they find attractive). Why? Because (normal) men can be enticed thereby. I remember a Ken Burns documentary on the Civil War. The Union army advertised for nurses to tend the wounded. The requirements? Over 60 years of age, or plain and unattractive. (I wonder what it would be like to live in a society where people aren't enslaved to political correctness or to the dishonest appraisal of the hearts of men.)

I also remember Elisabeth Elliot's recalling what Jim told her when, on one of her dates, they merely clasped hands. (A cursory Internet search did not reveal it.) Maybe someone here has read it? I think it's in Passion and Purity, but I don't recall exactly.

And, I recall the godly advice to teens who are dating, why it is good that they abstain from physical expressions of affection until their marriage is solemnized.

These things are good. I would not accuse those of sin who did otherwise (necessarily), but I couldn't commend them of doing well, and neither would Paul.

 

Goodness, if you want a sex education just ask your grade five youngster. They know all about "touch" and go.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I think one reason this issue has gone on for so long (other than it's on the BB) is because our society is so sexualized.

Remember when the military schools integrated and they put women on ships with men? Everyone said this was just fair and women could be in with men, it was just work, yada, yada, yada. And now, years later, there are sexual harrassment suits, allegations of rape, women getting pregnant on the field and on ships (fathers are not husbands), etc. I am not saying this comes from innocent touch, but it comes from close quarters.

I am not sure how this relates to the thread, but somehow, I think it does. I have not figured it out yet and it's 1 a.m. So good night to this thread!

 

Aaron, I don't disagree with your examples or analysis, except that I think "touch" here, based on the context, has to do wtih touched with a sensual purpose.

I don't think it has to do with bumping into someone on a crowded subway (even if their elbows are gorgeous ), or a greeting that is non-s*xu@l
(such as a handshake).

 

People (not everyone) seem to be so overly sexually charged that nearly all they can think about is sex. I've known people like that who can't talk about anything but sex. It's on TV; it's on the magazine racks; it's talked about at work and at school; it's on the computer. Children are bombarded with sexual talk and Internet porn and rushed into sex before they're emotionally ready.

Sex has become SO important to people that many will even pay for it, which is why prostitution is big business and makes some people a lot of money. Most people seem to consider it as important as breathing. They don't think they can live without it.

I've lived without it for about 44 of the 49 years since I reached puberty. I never paid for sex, and I never had sex with anyone to whom I wasn't married. There was never any petting or intimate touching of anyone. It can be done when pleasing God becomes more important than pleasing one's sexual desires. Of course, since I'm now impotent it doesn't matter any more. Even if I wasn't, I wouldn't be participating in sex. I have no desire to marry again.

 

TMI, Jon-Marc!