Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Questions on Sexuality and the Bible (vanity)
12/15/04 | self

Posted on 12/15/2004 3:35:31 PM PST by walden

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
To: xzins
One chaplain, two chaplain, three chaplain.......


61 posted on 12/16/2004 6:15:05 AM PST by Gamecock (The GRPL: Boldly celebrating one year of defending the Reformed Faith on FR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Did you ever hear the "I can do two pushups for every one that you do" challenge?


62 posted on 12/16/2004 6:20:05 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
Aside from some long dead theologians

Wrong.

All of Christianity for 2000 years has been unanimous on this. A very small minority of 20th century "christians" have adopted a diametrically opposed interpretation.

Yet those "christians" look back on all the Christians that preceded them mockingly, and state they were all wrong while we enlightened 20th century christians are right.

Most wise Christians would realize their views are diametrically opposed to the entire witness of 2000 years of Christianity, and reevaluate their own views, not mock the continual, unanimous universal teaching of all of Christianity for all time on this issue.

This is the textbook example of worldly wisdom of men opposed to the Wisdom of God.

But modern non Catholic, non Orthodox Christians have fallen so far into heresy on this, you probably, hopefully, are not culpable.

63 posted on 12/16/2004 6:48:14 AM PST by St. Johann Tetzel (A fool [esp. a bigoted Christianophobic fool] can ask more questions than a wise man can answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc
I see nothing in the Song of Solomon relating in any way to oral sex.

But when an entire religious system is based on private interpretation of scripture, how can any of its adherents possibly claim one interpretation of the Song of Solomon is the "right" one?

Oral sex is now OK by the the Song of Solomon? That's the fruits of Sola Scriptura and private interpretation of scripture, unfortunately, even though such a conclusion is diametrically opposed to all Christian moral theology tradition.

By the way, your posts on this thread are superb. Thank you.

64 posted on 12/16/2004 7:35:20 AM PST by St. Johann Tetzel (A fool [esp. a bigoted Christianophobic fool] can ask more questions than a wise man can answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

GarySpFc: "I think this boils down to one major point. Christ has done so much for me I am going to try in all ways to give Him my best and not my least."

I concur with your statement that we should give our best to Christ. God calls for our firstfruits, not our tablescraps. At the same time, how do you resolve Christ's call to love one another? Especially within the bounds of marriage, we are called to be selfless. When we are selfless, eager to serve others, and aspire to give others reason to rejoice, we are following Christ's commission:

John 13: 34-35
34 "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

This is especially true of a Man for his wife. Can a man be faulted for giving joy or pleasure to his wife? Is this an abomination? All Christian love comes from Christ, but obviously not all is directed toward Him.

I believe in Christian freedom and hence if God does not prohibit something, it is permitted. If we add to God's law, we become pharisees. God also gives us Christian conscience and his spirit will convict us if we do these things for self-serving reasons instead of selflessly.


65 posted on 12/16/2004 7:57:17 AM PST by visually_augmented (I was blind, but now I see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
You claim this to be true, you supple the sources. What makes you think they got it right. Last time I looked, the Roman Catholic Church does seem to have a real positive view of Luther or Calvin.

I think you need to read the Council of Trent's findings, they have never been withdrawn and are still in effect today. They continue to be affirmed by modern day popes

So I do not think that Rome now looks at Luther or Calvin in a favorable light

I'm not all that impressed with Calvin myself, but for far different reasons. Maybe his wife died at a young age, in part, from sexual frustration. it's not like Calvin was a real lovable or affectionate type of guy.

Do you know how slanderous that is.. no proof ...just pure hatred. Why did your wife leave you CTD ? You would not appreciate us speculating on that would you ?

66 posted on 12/16/2004 9:01:06 AM PST by RnMomof7 (because I'm good enough , and smart enough and darn it I deserve it ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
You will hear some people say that Onan sinned when he "spilled his seed", but the real sin of Onan was his disobedience to a command of God.

You are entirely correct, ctd. Onan was obligated to get Tamar pregnant, so that she could bear a son which would continue the Judah family line (and their inheritance) within Israel...

"If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her. And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel"
(Deut. 25:5-6).
Onan's specific sin wasn't the spilling of his seed - it was his refusal to perform his duty as a brother-in-law to Tamar, knowing it would cause the complete disinheritance of the Tribe of Judah from the house of Israel, because he harbored hatred towards his brother's family. Genesis 38:8-9 spells this out for us:
"Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother. Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother's wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother."
(Genesis 38:8-9)
If we are to believe Onan's most grievous sin was the spilling of his seed and not the attempted disinheritance of Judah from the house of Israel, then why the emphasis on the latter, and not the former, in the inspired text?
67 posted on 12/16/2004 9:17:25 AM PST by Alex Murphy (Psalm 73)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: walden

I believe in Christian liberty "there is now no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus "

The only restraint should be not having the agreement of the other partner.


68 posted on 12/16/2004 9:26:55 AM PST by RnMomof7 (because I'm good enough , and smart enough and darn it I deserve it ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
I would say that a major prohibition would be adulterous thoughts while having relations with your spouse. Our secular world (and some in the religious world) insist that it's okay to fantasize about having another partner during sex to "spice things up". But in reality that is the same thing as doing it in God's eyes.

I agree Doug, I think scripture speaks to that pretty clearly (sinning in your heart )

69 posted on 12/16/2004 9:29:15 AM PST by RnMomof7 (because I'm good enough , and smart enough and darn it I deserve it ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Gamecock

There's going to be a wet spot no matter what you do. It's not untidy; its normal.


70 posted on 12/16/2004 10:18:44 AM PST by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
It's not untidy; its normal.

Thank you for your expert testimony.

71 posted on 12/16/2004 10:26:23 AM PST by Gamecock (The GRPL: Boldly celebrating one year of defending the Reformed Faith on FR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I believe in Christian liberty "there is now no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus " The only restraint should be not having the agreement of the other partner.

I would add to that Paul's words:

"All things are lawful for me," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything.

72 posted on 12/16/2004 10:42:27 AM PST by Frumanchu (I fear the sanctions of the Mediator far above the sanctions of the moderator...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
"All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything.

This is the key, as was mentioned by another poster there are many that call themselves "Christian" that are slaves to sex . It is all about me and my pleasure. THAT is a sin .

73 posted on 12/16/2004 10:57:10 AM PST by RnMomof7 (because I'm good enough , and smart enough and darn it I deserve it ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: walden

Differing religions appear to have differing teachings -some not reconciled with others -what is your religion?


74 posted on 12/17/2004 12:48:20 PM PST by DBeers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson