Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | cherryappleberry | 89362 | ||
OK I don't want to offend anyone and it didn't say anywhere on here stuff about adult questions, but this is definately an adult question so if u r not an adult preferrably a married adult is who i want to talk to, please disregard this question thank you. To my question, my husband and I are having a discussion regarding oralsex. He believes that it is sodomy and therefore a sin and should not b performed i on the other hand do not agree with him, we have both searched the Bible but can't seem to find an answer to our question. If anyone can answer this, is oral sex sodomy, if it is then is it considered wrong for married couples to engage in oral sex, and if it is not sodomy, is there any sin attached to it. I am of course talking about this happening between a married couple. Thank You |
||||||
2 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 89363 | ||
Your question concerned what sexual acts constitute sodomy. SODOMY: "1. noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex. 2. copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal." "SODOMITE: one who practices sodomy." --from Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. The definition of sodomy makes no distinction between whether the participants are single or married. ..... "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9,10 NKJV). --Hank | ||||||
3 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 89376 | ||
With all due respect to Hank's opinion, which is noted with the most serious mind, I submit that the modern dictionary definition is not necessarily biblical. Nowhere in the bible is the term "sodomy" defined with anything like the same level of detail given by Mr. Webster. Peace, Parable |
||||||
4 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 89388 | ||
Parable, as an English major I submit that it has been my training and experience that writers of both secular and sacred works use words as vehicles by which to convey thoughts, and that it is not their burden to supply a definition alongside those words, although a contextual analysis of the passage in which the word appears, or of the entire context of the whole opus frequently, but not always, gives us a fairly good clue to its intended meaning. Therefore, it is not infrequently desirable but necessary to consult a good dictionary for both the exact meanings and the etymology of words. .... In all of Old Testament Scripture in which the Hebrew idiom traditionally translated "knew his wife" is used -- the first instance of which appears in Genesis 4:1 "Adam knew Eve his wife" -- it pertains to normal sexual union, i.e., coitus, between a husband and his wife: "and she conceived and bore Cain." [Conception is not the result of oral sex.] Accordingly, one's burden is not to attempt to justify other forms of sexual behavior, many of which the Bible soundly condemns as being perversions, but to show that they fall into the same category as coitus between husband and wife, which is the only form of sexual activity that the Bible explicity sanctions. The Bible does not attempt to catalog in detail every sin and aberration of which man is capable, but one is hard pressed to justify biblically, regardless of what the mores of a permissive society dictate, any other sexual act except the act of coitus which God has made clear that He both sanctions and encourages, but which He has expressly reserved for the marriage bed. --Hank | ||||||
5 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 89391 | ||
You capably defend the faith with gentleness and respect, and for this I thank you. If I may respond in kind... To your statement "the Bible does not attempt to catalog in detail every sin and aberration of which man is capable..." I offer "the Bible does not attempt to catalog in detail every good work and loving act of which man is capable..." And to your "but one is hard pressed to justify biblically....any other sexual act except the act of coitus which God has made clear that He both sanctions and encourages, but which He has expressly reserved for the marriage bed" I offer "...one is hard pressed to condemn biblically, any sex act other than those He has explicitly condemned, except those which violate the law of Christ, i.e. the law of love." My point is, the Bible does not explicity condemn nor condone oral sex in the marriage bed. Hence, arguments for condemnation may be equally countered with arguments for acceptance. For example, if coitus is the only permissible conduct, then all conduct other than penetration via intercourse is prohibited. Is this really what the bible teaches? |
||||||
6 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 89398 | ||
Come, come, Parable! I did not say that coitus is the only permissible CONDUCT between a man and his wife sanctioned by Scripture. The subject is SEX -- sexual modes, coitus and all the rest. If oral sex is fine, why not anal sex? Why not sadism and masochism and transvestism, if that turns a couple on (being sure, of course, that they are wedded to each other!). Where do we draw the line? How far do we dare lower the bar? I suspect we might even be able to rationalize to the point where we, like a certain former chief of state, could justify in our own mind that oral sex is really not sex, and along the same line of reasoning, argue what is is :-) Now Parable, you may well think my position puritanical, and if you do, I will accept the label with unbridled joy. You are doublessly knowledgeable of the etymology of the word 'puritanical' and of what it means in current usage. The word, coined in 1607, came from the Puritans, of course, and it relates to or is characterized by a rigid morality. That is precisely the definition that the secular world ascribes to the moral laws of Scripture! So, I'm puritanical, and thanks be to God that I am! --Hank | ||||||
7 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 89405 | ||
Of course, I was referring to sexual conduct, not conduct in general. I apologize for not being more clear. The issue for me is not "where do WE draw the line" or "how far do WE dare lower the bar" but rather, "where does Scripture draw the line" and "where does Scripture place the bar?" We must be vigilant against reading into Scripture what we'd like to find. We can rationalize anything, including and most especially our own agendas, values, and prejudices, be they puritanical or hedonist. I think we agree that marriage is holy because it is a covenant between a man, a woman and God. While marriage also has a social function, i.e. recognition by the community, according to Scripture, it is not primarily a social institution. Thus, conduct in marriage is a matter for the three participants to decide, not society. The limits on conduct commanded by Christ are clear, love each other. |
||||||
8 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 89414 | ||
Hello, Parable ... again! You summed the matter up rather nicely at the end of Post #89405. Physical relationships are important in marriage, of course, but those relationships are not designed to provide and are not capable of providing the marriage with everything that it needs to flourish and be happy and satisfying. There is love and respect, there is caring and sharing -- without these things a marriage will not be complete nor likely long endure. I'm so thankful to report that September 13, God willing, will mark my wife and my 44th wedding anniversary, and a happy 44 years it has been and we have been 'fruitful and multiplied' to the extent of having three fine children (one of them now deceased) and three indescribably cute and bright grand-children. :-) --Hank | ||||||
9 | Adult Question young people please do no | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 89469 | ||
I concur completely, brother. Congratulations on your 44th! I can't imagine how painful it must have been to lose a child, no parent should outlive their kids...yet Praise Him for his wonderful gift of grandchildren! As usual, it has been a pleasure to dialogue with you. Peace! |
||||||