Have a look on this and tell me... Is it a tricky monologue? :P
Certain day, a casual talk between friends became a religious
unresolved issue no one knew… :P
-Next time, when someone tells me “I
love you” (if she is old enough) I
will be compelled to ask her discretely, if that said really would
mean sexual exclusivity;
otherwise, I have no way to know if that was mere emotional rhetoric.
-I have heard that some believers believed that having sex
with an unmarried woman (who is not actually a virgin) is not a real
sin...
-The sinful relationship is when we´re:
-
Having sex with no real love, without the inherent responsibility
-
Dishonoring GOD´s commands and
-
Dishonoring the person WHO ACTUALLY could have fallen in love with you.
That sin is not "loving" their souls or bodies. The
spiritual sin is “sex” with lust. “Love” being done without
love -purposely and repeatedly- bypassing what TRUE LOVE is. Sex must
be committed to one partner and, it´s known the way it shouldn´t be
done. (Deut. 22:25-29)
-Ah! - That´s just another theory. He! He! :P
- “Spiritual” lies are also common sins inside many religions,
and these are worst than uncommitted or occasional sex. Just because
lies are frequent -they tend to be recurrent- Am I stubbornly blinded
to see those things well?
-I would have liked more you´ve told me which sins are not sins. He!
He!
-Look at what I already said above, first.
-I will grab some of items of that theory and, later on I will
do what I want.
-Let´s say WE have GOTTEN MARRIED to have sex, legally... Was it an
act of LOVE, or a convenient legal arrangement to lay down in bed?
-Unfortunately, that is part of the marital agreements.
-Jesus saw a Samaritan woman who had had five (5) men and NONE was
her “legal” husband... What was Jesus´ real concern with her,
promiscuity or keeping the law?
-He didn´t approve that type of relationship.
-So, Did He invited HER to be married?
-Yes!
-Since you´ve believed it in that way: (1) Would you marry a man who
lives another place you are not? (2) Would you marry a man you are
not sure if "HE" would give you whatever thing YOU need,
evenly on the bed and inside a new home?
-Probably not.
- (1) Once a woman is NOT virgin, she is more aware of her sexual
needs (2) Once a woman has indulged -herself- in masturbating with
toys (BIG toys) her sexual needs are quite different than an innocent
virgin who, probably, had ignored those needs that she never explored
willingly until marriage.
- Is it adultery a sin? It is! And if Jesus came here while we are
"playing" with it, we could be sent directly the hell.
-Are you aware of those two points (“1” and “2”) that
believers have tried to ignore "by following the Bible"?
Of course, adultery is a sin (like coveting) but Jesus never
belittled (by using any discriminative adjective) that Samaritan
woman He met. Was she an ADULTERER? No, she wasn´t! She was a
fornicator, simply... However, emotional adultery is a big sin hidden
inside people´s minds and, it has caused many couples had
experimented sex outside their own beds. Because OUR minds can lie to
our bodies, and to our core human needs.
-And what´s the point?
-That Samaritan woman had had 5 men, at that time. Did she?
-I don´t know! I was not there.
-Are you saying Jesus lied?
-He never lied!... She said she had had five men.
-It wasn´t the Samaritan woman who told that! It was Jesus... He
foretold that before she opened her mouth but, what was it that Jesus
wanted her (and me) to know (and do) before being indulged in sex?
-I don´t know, you tell me.
-Joh 4:16 Jesus told her, "Go and bring your husband."
Then, it goes: Joh 4:17 The woman answered, "I don't have a
husband." "That's right," Jesus replied, "You're
telling the truth. You don't have a husband. You have already been
married five times, and the man you are now
living with isn't your husband."
-That is not an acute translation! It doesn´t say "husbands"
neither "married"... but men.
-Perhaps! (And I´m glad you
saw and know it) But whenever I read "husbands" I
read (instead of that) "men"; not those supposed "husbands"
they said euphemistically... If she was actually "married",
Jesus would have invited HER to come back to her 1st
HUSBAND (and, according to our religious mindsets, she would have
been called a Samaritan "adulterer", instead).
-Ok! I´m listening.
-Since you are so fond of the Torah… Would you ask me to go back to
my Ex wife, friend?
-I would, probably.
-Really? Look at what your "Jewish" friend here
thinks. The Torah says: "Deut. 24:4 …her first husband
who married her and divorced her earlier must not remarry her,
because she was defiled, since this is detestable to the LORD.
Don't defile the land that the LORD your God is about to give you as
a possession. " I know nothing about her spiritual defilement
but, I know anything about the emotional cost, the price to forgive a
spouse sleeping with several men.
-Okey! I got it.
-Whatever is UNDONE should be undone. That Samaritan woman has NEVER
been married. She wasn´t an adulterer, but a fornicator and
many people are using that lesson to lead hurt believers to go back
with those who have been divorced (and utterly defiled) just by
laying down in another´s bed (it doesn´t matter they were a woman
or man).
-I must reread the Torah, many times, while I am alive.
-Good! And I know that some hypocritical RELIGIOUS modifications were
added to the “original” Gospel (and surely those religious
euphemisms saying “husbands”; instead of “lovers” or “bedroom
mates”). Don´t you think it so? Whenever you read Hebrews (13:4),
inside one of those Paul´s celebrated letters, He said “bed”
(κοιτη)
to mean “sex”. Does a “bed” sins? Or sex is simply done on a
couch and not in the minds of those who lust coveting sexually? These
writers have used the Greek root of the known word for “coitus”,
and there in Hebrews, it was used as "bed"; when Greeks
surely understood it meant human "sex". I cannot deal -or
believe- in those letters they´ve valued as “acute, inerrant
and totally inspired” when I see something incorrect...
Oooopss! That´s why I will not follow a church, nor any of their
church leaders. I dislike hypocrisy and those religious euphemisms.
-I must follow the Torah!
-Just remember what Lot´s wife did... Don´t look back at whom you
left. I have chosen to follow Jesus, particularly, each time I
grasped what He probably said; because I´m not sure if He
-ultimately- taught Israel like this: “Mat 28:19 Go to the people
of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the
name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”… Why,
in the Old Testament, God showed Himself as being One and, later on,
when Jesus came down, He looks as He had said: God is “triune” or
“We are three in One”.
-He is God! That way He said.
-I´m not sure Jesus is God, but a divine being God sent to live in a
human body to accomplish His will and purposes here. But I respect
whatever thing you´ve believed… I used to believe that Trinitarian
way too but, if I´ve believed the teachings of the Old Testament, I
needed to checked them with what The N.T. also said and, as long as
Jesus was with those 12 men He chose, He never asked them to do that:
“...in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”.
This is one of the an add-ons the RCC placed to trade with its
syncretisms.
-Are you sure you still being a Christian? -She said so, without the
proper intonation of a doubt.
-No! He never said I´m God, the Father... As many
believers think He said. I´m being re-assured that I´m not a RCC´s
follower. I'm against any creepy Catholic syncretism, though.
-Hmm! If you believed that, that way, you probably will be cast into
hell.
-And why am I here? He asked. Why haven´t I been sent “there”
each time I sinned by killing, stealing or lying to my neighbors? Why
haven´t I been sent when I cheated on my ex-wife or with any of my
teachers in the school? Did He want me to repent from “luring away”
people by telling them what I thought or what I´m thinking? If I´m
sinning for human lack of knowledge, has He missed what human kind
thought several centuries before I was born? I´m not the only one
longing for wisdom, particularly when cheap gospel sell the idea God
needs me to be worshiped: He lacks nothing, while I have
lacked everything about Him and me. How could I love an unknown
person -an alien- without knowing who He is or what His needs are
(regarding me) as a servant or as a living soul? I wish He was more
close and personal.
-You´re asking too many things at the same time -She said. You don´t
deserve that answer.
-That´s right! But if I tried to love a distant person in nowhere I
know, if she whispered the same thing you´ve said without any doubt
of reluctance: “You don´t deserve this nor that from me...”
I would be assured she deserves nothing from a partner, not my
attentions as a potential friend, just at least from me. Who am I to
say: “You don´t deserve this nor that”. If I said that,
no doubt it will show how selfish I am and, as far as I have read the
Gospels, it says God wants to be worshiped, more than being
obeyed or believed; as if that was His weakest side, the thing
lacking in His strength (or inside His “humanized” needs). Am I
being lied by what Jesus probably spoke? (...God is Spirit,
and those who worship God must be led by the Spirit to worship Him
according to the truth.) Jesus asked water to a woman. He
naturally has needs but, He could have gotten Himself a glass of
water, if He wanted (by doing a miracle) but this time He needed a
servant… Can you tell me why? He already said: “...When he
comes, he will explain everything to us."
-Where is it that in the Scripture?
-In John 4:24-25 -He replied-. I´m sure God is a Spiritual Being
but, the flaw the RCC largely taught about that He needed
to be worshiped... I don´t believed it. He has not that
need and, if it was so, He is not showing up to get it,
neither to tell me: I need you! (the way I need Him)
-Why don´t you believe that? Most of Christian believers worshiped
Jesus, Won´t you worship Him, too?
-Good questions! Allow me to tell you that, if I wanted to be known
or loved by those I liked, I would be in the predicament -or in the
need- to let them know who I am, where I am or what I´m doing here.
If I wanted to be heard, if I needed to be hugged or obeyed, I would
have done something more than leaving some letters to be read (and
dogmatically believed) BY FAITH. If I was online, thinking about
those things my potential partner needed to know me, physically, I
would have sent them some pictures, some articles written by me but,
if I really needed to be known, as I am (Yes! As I AM) I would
be in the dilemma to give her a phone call, to appear somewhere by
giving the slightest token of kindness I could to show a friendly
display… And, if she sees I am selfish, if she sees I´m reluctant
to show up, unwilling to spend some time with her: Another person
would come to give her fill!
-That´s another thing! Your are comparing God with your own ways to
behave. I think you are wrong.
-Yes! I´m wrong. Each time I needed to be in a relationship I needed
to interact with people. If I ever wanted friends, I needed to show I
was THEIR friend, being close to them and, whenever I wasn´t
present, I gave them a phone call, at least. Just to show anything
more than an icy old-fashioned letter and, if distance and time never
met, that friendship would get cold (void and empty). This is what I
feel each time I read: “Rom 6:23 Sin pays off with death. But
God's gift is eternal life given by Jesus Christ our
Lord.” What kind of eternity I want if this huge distance
already exists between Him and me, now? I don´t want to be loved
by God, but just by the person I dreamed my whole life, and I
never met her alive (perhaps in my dreams) and, if God really needs
me “to be worshiped” (as Jesus said to the Samaritan Woman
He met) He surely would have done anything of what I have done: a)
Approaching to those I have liked, physically. b) Each time I
had the hunch I had found the woman I liked (or a person I could be
liked) I did the best I could to be sure I had found the exact person
I thought I needed to love. I never wanted a fan! (Except
those days of “hot” seasons). Ha! Ha! Ha!
-YOU cannot compare your feelings -and those emotions- with God´s!
-Why not? Doesn´t the Scripture says “men were created in His
image and likeness”? (Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make
man in our image, after our
likeness...) No doubt I need no one to worship me but I´m
sure I always wanted a woman who would please me in everything I
thought I am.
-It seems you “know” the Bible, but you don´t understand it
well.
-Sure! I don´t understand it. That´s why I agreed with you when you
said I was wronged.
-Listen! ”Image and likeness” there, that moment and
instance, is connected to dominion and spirituality; but not that
we´ve been made like God´s feelings or His physical appearance.
-I don´t know God´s creative scope nor His limitations when making
men´s hearts but, as far as I see, in that verse of Genesis, He
seemed to talk to another “beings” (or, perhaps, He was thinking
to Himself) but, what concerns me -here- it is He had a dream: He had
His project achieved and, as a Creator, He gave His “image” His
feelings. He showed what his feelings were -that moment there-
by blessing Adam with something he “earthly” lacked, as long as
he was modeled out from mud but, when God gave him His breath
-His spirit- that piece of “soil” got a new-brand shape, to
breathe with his own Human Soul. I think we reflect the nature of our
Creator (or creators), one way or another. Although, I don´t believe
we´re Body, Soul and Spirit. I´ve believed I was
lied, because I´m sure I am a Spirit dwelling in a body.
I´m a living soul and that soul is my very spirit of life, but I´m
aware you´re not dualist, like me. Can we cope with being
doctrinally different? I don´t need people´s approval and, when
needing answers, I wish God gave me His exact answers, not more men´s
theories (like all of these, that I have already shared with you,
here).
-You are out of your mind! His faith is well founded.
-I won´t contradict you, though. Some people might call it holy
“faith”. Don´t you think God is something bigger than aliens? I
was used to say that I wasn´t afraid to affirm that people
have made the Bible something bigger than the One who inspired men to
write it down.
-Hmm! If you were not my friend, I´d think this talk had finished
several minutes ago.
-That´s your right! And it is my privilege to talk alone but, let´s
ponder these few Biblical facts: a) Adam was made with earthly “mud”
(elements of the ground). b) God (and the agents He got involved)
were not humans; unless His image and likeness were
cloned elsewhere, somehow, as I think it is in us. c) Angels kept on
visiting human race on earth, evenly God left (or set us apart) far
away from that unknown or lost “Paradise”.
-Stop it! You are out of your mind.
-Am I? You have “Faith”, but I´m a nut reading what the Bible
says… Have you read that God´s children kept on visiting humans
(to marry their women)? That´s on Gen. 6:2. Each time I heard
preachers talking about this THEY explained “Angels cannot marry
women… Just because they are spiritual beings” but, is that
Biblical record mistranslated, as also happened to a defiled “bed”?
Coitus is the exact word for marital sex, and Genesis 6:2 also talks
about “intergalactic” or “multidimensional” sex.
-You are crazy! God's sons were men, not angels.
-Sure! I'm crazy. God came down here with His sons and, before men
were created, angels were first in His creation... Did God asked a
sword to guard His tree of life, without a serving angel?... I
have believed I needed to ignored those things they said I should…
If I needed to “know” what an angel is, I can compare what the
Scripture taught and, here few “concepts” are (in case you
needed, to read another day): “Gen 6:4 The Nephilim were in the
earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came
unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them:
the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.”
Will you mind telling this crazy man, they had no sex to get
children? If that wasn´t “intergalactic” or
“multidimensional” sex, or something wicked and evil in their
union, why God grieved and regretted before He destroyed the earth
with water? I can bet one dollar that, when a bunch of demons (a
Legion) asked Jesus permission to enter into the body of pigs, they
never imagined Jesus would get rid of two problems, by throwing one
single stone away.
-Job had mentioned, several times, God´s children in Job 1:6, 2:1 or
at 38:7.
-Oh! Thanks, dear friend! You have read it (and there´s more about
them).
-Wait! Before you keep on talking about aliens, tell me more about
that stone thrown by Jesus.
-Wow! I´m glad you heard it. Jesus visited a Goyim area near Kersha
(It wasn't the exact Gadara). There was a demon possessed man there
and after that “Legion” left him “flying”, 2.000 pigs were
drowned into the sea lake: Waters! Same way God got rid of
Nephilims, and wicked ones, in ancient days. Don´t tell me it is a
figure that “means baptism alone”... It also means Jesus
permitted that huge herd of pigs were finally got rid of, with those
evil spirits inside. That part of the Gospel reminds me those days of
Noah, where sinners died drown out with “spiritual” beings having
had sexual intercourse with men´s daughters. It´s known
that Jews were not allowed to consume unclean food like pigs but,
Goyim people in that area got them to feed Romans and their homes.
Antonio needed to know if he was lied. It's easy to talk to words
when they are left on a screen on a wall, mute and unnoticed.
-What I dislike from this Biblical account is its several
contradictions. Matthew says they were two men demon possessed (Mat
8:28, 33) while Mark and Luke said it was one (Mk 5:18; Lk 8:35). So,
to my dull understanding, I can infer: a) Two or three different men
saw (and wrote) that “biblical” incident differently. b) Only one
of them could have been an eyewitness, while the other
“author” (or written sources) could have been a hired writer
making an imperfect copy, a simple odd version.
If you want to make a transcendent story, if you want to write down
real facts and a sharp history, you would do the best to make things
clear. How do I know that truth? Can I get it by comparing
complementary sources? (Here is my sigh)
-It hurts me when I see “a little” mistake like that. If God had
actually inspired those writers -literally- such faults shouldn´t be
evident there, particularly when I expected an acute account from
actual eyewitnesses. But, I´m sure THEY worked separately, out
of common agreement, in different times/places and not certified by
an organized “writer” association. Each time I have compared both
accounts -if those were “originals” enough- I could see they´re
well harmonized, except for two or one single man who “missed”
the information which another writer saw (or that happened when one
man unnoticedly ignored it when delivering the final version he
wrote).
-Where is faith, if that was correctly done?
-You, as a lawyer or judge, need proofs, verifiable evidences, to
deliver a long lasting verdict and, those who have inherited
Christianity from a second-hand source always have been in the need
of something bigger than “It is written...”. Beside that,
the O.T. always asked two witnesses to judge things well, as it
happens when you read Chronicles and Kings, in the O.T.
It is said God didn't create a single man and his woman. It is said
there was a parallel “creation” where there were more men and
women... If that was so, some men were created by God and, those men
who lacked their mates (Children of God) would have found
their companionship in that paralleled human hood we know nothing
about, except by speculations about Gen 6:2
-Jesus said that, those who had faith without seeing Him will
be specially blessed. (John 20:29 (...) The people who have faith
in me without seeing me are the ones who are really blessed!"
)
-Of course! Thomas needed something bigger than a thing called
“faith”. A reasonable doubt is a need, sometimes. Particularly
when you would play a role in a court, when a man's life is under a
trial.
-Sure! But human life is not a tribunal and stubborn minds need
exactitude.
-God wants to be loved with all men's might. He wants to be loved
with our souls, strengths, volitional mental faculties and human
minds... Did He also said this: “Mat 13:16 But God has
blessed you, because your eyes can see and your ears can
hear! ” As long as I have these organs functioning,
as a man chained to this human body seeking the true to judge some
“evidences”, I won´t trust anymore in lying men, such as
Jeremiah once said (Jer 17:5, 7). No one is like God and, my whole
life I lied and was lied. I´m tired of secondhand spiritual
experiences. If God is personal being and real, like a Father, I long
to meet Him personally. I want to see He is real like those UFO I saw
-when I was praying- side by side with Mónica, several years now.
-What? Do you believe in UFOs and things like those?
-God is not an earthly human being. Jesus neither His serving angels
were... Don´t you believe in them, like “angels” God has sent? I
won´t quote Jeremiah´s vision but, if you don´t mind I shared what
I already said -at least- have a look on Matthew. How many stars have
you seen pointing out people´s ways and places? (Matt. 2:9 (...) And
the star they had seen in the east went on ahead of them until it
stopped over the place where the child was.) How many
of those STARS have you seen stopped above your head or certain
places?
-Ha! Ha! I´m not saying you are crazy... Ha! Ha! It is you, alone,
who said it.
-You´ve believed in X-mas, when you were a child. You´ve seen the
star your parents placed on the top of those X-mas trees they
brought home for you and, you never knew it represented the “star”
(the UFO) those wise men saw, before they met the actual place where
Jesus was born... It wasn´t a comet, but good! You´re smart while
I´m dull.
-How do you know it was an UFO?
-How do you know it wasn´t? If that report is acute enough, you´ll
know the Maggi never saw a star, but an Ovni. Herod asked his workers
about it, and that sign was seen (and followed) from the West, not
from the East. When Elijah was taken by a chariot of fire, they were
not horses, but an UFO (2 Kings 2:11 (...) Suddenly, some horses
and a chariot came and separated Elijah from Elisha. The
horses and the chariot were like fire. Then Elijah
was carried up into heaven in a whirlwind.) Is that
portion of the Bible lying with a rhetoric figure of speech?
-I wasn´t there! -She said jokingly- I don't know it for sure.
-Yep! And those who believed it, without seeing it, are also blessed
with that truth other people have seen, privately or publicly. Do you
also disbelieve the Apostles saw Jesus being served by angels,
coming up and down? (John 1:51) Whenever Jesus comes back, He won´t
be down here in “a cloud”, but in an UFO; the way He was taken up
by angels (Luke 21:27; Acts 1:11)
-No doubt you have celebrated the “Annunciation” more than me.
Ha! Ha! Since Luke 2:15 talked about angels.
-The sad thing of man-made “traditions” is that conventional
picture showing those “facts” occurring the same X-mas night;
when it happened at different intervals of time.
-Hmm! I don´t mind you would elaborate something more about that
theory.
-Angels appeared first than the Maggi visiting Herod home. If you
compared the Gospel account, you might feel the hunch I felt when the
UFO disappeared the moment “the Maggi” visited Herod´s palace to
get “additional” protocolar information from astrologers. They
followed the sign by night but, getting nearer the wrong place
(Herod´s wise men) the “star” disappeared, so they had nothing
to prove -as real- against the Lord´s life. It was an important
moment in Heaven and at Jesus´ earthly life: Jesus was recently
borne incarnated, and He needed to be understood, more than being
known (as it was a biblical setup, just for us).
-I´m afraid I´m falling asleep.
-Before your bedtime arrives, allow me to remind you that those who
believed there´s no need to marry a divorced woman to have sex (as
you mentioned “their” theory of no sin) I can recall a man who,
after receiving money for a deal of his trade, he paid a “prostitute”
to be sexually pleased.
-That´s sin! And I know what a sin is.
-Of course you do! We all are sinners, even emotionally… But one
day certain man needed physical release (since he was has no wife)
and -since he lacked credit card- he wanted to lay down without
paying in cash.
-What? I think you´re kidding. Ha! Ha!
-He told her something like this: “...Permit me to join with
you...”. She asked: “What will you give to me, to enjoy
me...” and, if this is properly recalled, he said he left his
wallet… and willing TO PAY, he promised a young sheep (Gen 38:17)
-Ha! Ha! I never read that… But keep it on, Antonio.
-That woman was not a fool (she regretted the idea of being fooled)
so she asked: “Will you give me a pledge, until you send it to
me?”
-Hmm! I´m not afraid to say there was mutual consent of adults.
Both were trading sexually, without any further commitment than a
future payment.
-And don´t tell me that, those days, there was no law to keep on:
“Your “Yes” be ”Yes” and your “No”
be “No”, because love is love and sex is sex.
-She asked for a warranty! She didn´t want to be fooled.
-And Judah needed sexual release, since he lost his wife (and have no
credit card).
-She responded, "Give me your ring and bracelet, and the
staff that you hold in your hand." (Gen. 38:18)
-More than a promissory note, more than a check and a token of
“love”, she wanted safety and a pledge to be sexually available
that moment. Is it too old fashioned? Who would take care of
children, society or women alone?
-That´s a personal choice affecting society -she said, as a judge-
It belongs to parents to take care of their children.
-But society, as a bulk, plays like the victim whenever I denied each
homeless children their dued parental care.
-What´s your point, Antonio?
-Do I have to take care for another man´s kids? If I´m engaged, if
I fell in love with a woman, am I obliged to take care of her whole
house and previous children?
-You have your own answers! I don´t know what you would do.
-Of course! If I had the chance to fall in love with a virgin, if I
knew she would be faithful enough -to me- I would marry willingly
but, if I needed a woman sexually, if she needed me to feed her
children, that´s not a loving relationship, but an agreement of
sexual consent with mutual benefits. Love cannot be traded
with money or anything convenient. True love is not seeking things
selfishly.
-But we all need things to raise a family. A woman needs a caring
man!
-Men need loyal women who sexually belong to one single man. I cannot
say all women belong to one single man, but I´m assured the last one
I loved wanted me to take care
of her 3 children and; when she also wanted me to seek for
her children´s approval, I had to tell her she was all wronged;
because my deepest concern was being approved by her love
solely and, if I fell short from being sexually or economically (not
being big enough to satisfy her expectations or human needs) I would
understand I lacked what she needed but, after witnessing she kept on
having some flirts with other men, I knew she had lived like those
who always sought their BBD. If she had found another man she liked,
as soon as she could, I would be kicked out in the back. So that
marriage she asked me was to receive a brand-new golden ring, not a
pledge of my love and that would have given me no real right of
sexual exclusivity, since I knew she still behaved like a
prostitute, trading things and paying with sex.
-That´s not fair! If you´ve loved her, you wouldn´t say that,
against her.
-She told me she prostituted once, and I loved her knowing that part
of her past life but, since I observed things closely, I knew I
couldn´t please her well. She still missed a man who was more
achieving -sexually- than me (she told me his name). I knew she still
missed another cheating man she loved (by economic reasons) who
served her to buy shoes, clothing, food and medicines I could not
afford to give the moment she needed them. Her daughter loved that
man as much as she could and, the reasons seem to be economically and
emotionally. Randy gave her good sex but, the other man, gave her the
money she longed and, before she knew the provider was a
cheater, she loved him for being a dad to her 3 children she
brought along... She got divorced from a military man (who also
cheated on her) and, when she needed help to raise “alone” her 3
kids, she met that Arabic man she finally loved… She got so hurt
(and broken hearted) the moment she knew he was another cheater in
her life; but she needed him to keep on receiving money. He was a
good provider! She regretted having known she had no sexual exclusive
right (that man had lovers) and, whenever she knew she lacked sex,
she “lived” with Randy, but this man was lazy to provide her
economically.
-Hey! You´re telling me her PRIVATE life. That´s out of my concern…
I will not tell you anything secret in the nearer future.
-Of course! That´s why we´re being lied. I don´t care what people
did but, if I´m engaged in a love relationship, I do care what they
do. What if I got AIDS? What is she likes to have more than one man
in her bed the moment I´m gone? What if I´m not pleasing her
sexually? But I was thought to be used economically, or at any other
odd convenience.
-I already told you that matchmaking needs some particular
agreements.
-That´s right! But I wanted real sexual exclusivity, if I found a
lover. I don´t want to lick a cunt another man had ejaculated. I
don´t want to love a woman who still longs for another men´s wallet
or dick. I don´t want to be wronged twice! I have a heart
which has been torn severely and, I know the picking up of those
broken pieces takes time; either it belonged to a woman or a man.
-What? Have you given your “heart” to men? -She looked puzzled,
this time.
-No! I just meant my heart worths the same joy a woman´s
deserves. If they have felt hurt, men also felt hurt. As long as I
lived, my whole life I have given my heart twice. It was hurt
severely and, after picking up my broken pieces, I´m aware love
hurts but, if I knew who was the best woman I should have loved, I
surely would too; but life has shown me there´s nothing sure. If God
really wanted men (or women) to be married, He´s not doing a job of
matchmaker. If He really wanted humankind married twice (after
they´ve learned several painstaking love lessons) He should
be leading people to meet His best options and -perhaps- divorced
ones (those having children). But these are not the best choice to
pick from: Virgins were the best!
-Why are you saying that discriminative argument to me?
-Two people, sometimes, are hard to make a simple agreement (Amos
3:3). Just imagine you had to deal with somebody´s else kids. Think
you need their approval to love a man you think you needed… The
moment you feel a man demands you to cope with people (his children)
those you don´t like spontaneously, you would feel “He is bossy”,
“He´s controlling” and love is free. That love sets you free
willingly, not by an obliging force.
-You surely regret her accommodative attitude. Did she ask you to
wear something in fashion?
-Do religious “leaders” ask people to follow up what God said? Or
what it seemed more convenient to bless their daughters and mothers?
-You would tell me… Don´t you?
-But I don´t know it! I wish I knew God personally. If I meet Him, I
can repent of those sins I willingly did but, as far a I knew what
love is, I always chose the wrong woman, like Samson did.
-Your theory is “Promiscuity is better” than being
married?
-My theory is God never told me who I should have loved endlessly.
Samson married goyim people outside his beliefs and race but, Moses
married an African woman and, the Sephora he chose never cheated on
him. Did she?
-Hmm! I see you´ve been hurt.
-What was the reason that Samaritan woman had had to having 5 men?
She had sexual intercourse with previous 4 men and, that day
He appeared to tell her “You haven´t lied...” (Jn 4:17)
He probably gave her the clue she needed to quench her life thirst.
Both men and women, wished they knew who they should have married.
Once a person has lost their virginity, each explores that sexual
area developing “habits” or “longs” no ones knows and, the
moment they have laid together in bed, the moment they´ve lived like
“married” couples, they have started to know how their lives
could be complementary (or not). If I have given´t my last lover
anything she needed -I don´t know- I would have remained with her
but, her children were a pain in the leg. If I could have pleased her
sexually (and economically) I would have married her to satisfy that
“social” expectation but, since she wasn´t alone, I remained
alone.
-Wow! Are you castrated?
-No! But I´m not the same man I was when I was 32 years old. I never
told her my turn off was the upsetting presence of her
children watching me (to get their blessing), the recurrent need she
has I was approved by her two sons, and by her demanding daughter.
None of them was economically independent from their mother! They
needed a provider, not a man with a parental role or figure. Can I
say my children also needed a provider more than a dad? I´m
not an achiever, either it was economically or as a love partner. I
don't know how to buy that love.
-Wow, Antonio! Are you telling me that? Aren't you ashamed?
-Sure I'm not! The moment I felt pushed to do things I don´t want
to do spontaneously, I leave them emotionally. I liked -and loved-
that woman but, when I realized she wanted me to be of her personal
use (another convenience she's got); when she asked me to buy her
a bed another man could use any moment I was outside, I knew I
chose wrongly. I´m glad I learned it soon and, if she was alone
outside, she wouldn´t have an impediment to do other things she
wanted: Although -at home- her children were a light deterrent
to do more things wrong.
-I don´t agree with you! -she said, upset- I won´t listen to you,
anymore.
-Okey! I forced no one to be heard and listened and, I´m not sorry
for having confessed what I thought and saw. Each time I´ve loved
-as a Christian- I wanted to give my best but, something deep in me
must be wrong, that I was wronged… In that sense, I´m sorry: I
don´t know how to make things worked better and, the moment God (or
Jesus) had told me: “Marry her!” I would but, since I´m
falling short often, I have no other way than fornicating so, my sin
would be marrying a person I do not love assured and completely. I
care nothing what a church says! The moment they have realized how
cheating on hurts, the moment those legalistic “leaders” knew
their wives gave -some of them- children whose parents weren´t
them (biologically) they would know the burden forced marriage
set on men. If God ever wanted men to be married, He should have
assumed the role of matchmaker and -in my life- I couldn´t see Him
well. That´s all my fault! I did everything wrong (to be wronged).
-Ha! Ha! What a remorse you have.
-It is! Just think of Tamar: She asked the ring on that cord Judah
had around his neck; she asked anything she would use to prove
he was loyal and trustworthy but, such a man simply needed a
physiological sexual release, someone to feel he was alive -as
a man- and, that chance he had (that day) was with a black widow
he knew “killed” two of his sons. Ha! Ha! What an irony!
He simply “slept” with his daughter-in-law... I never paid
someone for sex but, if I had “to feel” I was loved for being the
person I am, I think I will remain being the same hermit.
-That sounds disgusting! She was not a black widow neither a
prostitute!
-Legally it is! He paid her “with a promissory note” to
get sex and, that´s why I think we´ve been lied. I cheated on
several times when I was pagan but, if I had no real rights of sexual
and emotional exclusivity in marriage -as warranty- why do I need it?
I never wanted children, I never planned to live a family life
and, all I had as a want in life was sex (and someone I really liked
endlessly). Marriage gave me nothing I lacked (except children) and,
if currently people are free to do WHATEVER they want to be pleased
humanly, what is marriage set for today? I have seen (and heard)
several men whose children weren´t them, biologically. I know there
are women who called their lovers to have sex whenever their spouses
left home to work... I know there are spouses having love affairs
inside their offices and working places so, what is marriage for? Is
it a proven social convenience, not working any longer? Each
time I heard it preached -as a thing sorting out situations of
loneliness- I know I´m being lied… I spent 13 years in marriage. I
enjoyed that but, I was wronged. God never told me “she is the
one” and I have loved in vain.
We´re living in sins!
A.Toro
Sept 2015
