oops, sorry Ryan. Missed this:
I didn’t say there were quotations, just interpretations. There’s a very strong theological argument that the Bible never actually says anything about the Rapture, either (at least as some Christians conceive of it), but obviously it’s an interpretation accepted by some. Right, Pounders? 
-andros-
And one more. Then I’m done, really.
Because as I mentioned earlier, he’s the only one so far to come out and say that he feels “unnatural” sexual acts to be sinful.
Of course it’s his opinion. That’s what the OP is soliciting, I believe.
-andros-
ARG220:
Umm, Adam?
Bestiality and necrophilia are not inside marriage. (At least, no religion you or I profess countenances marrying your sheep or a nearby corpse.)
OTOH, my perspective is Whatever, Whenever (providing both parties consent and you don’t scare the kids).
Tom~
D’oh! I knew that. Just making sure you’re awake Tom.
Let me restate my beliefs, and make them clearer. Anal sex, is bad. IMO, we were not made to put…stuff…well, it’s anatomically incorrect. And I believe that God frowns upon it.
Oral sex however…is a different story. I don’t see a problem with it. In fact, I’ve heard it preached that it’s ok. Actually, considering the way we are made (like Brain was saying), it does make a lot of sense. Go figure, I’m agreeing with Satan.
What True Christian whould ever agree with Satan?..
JK
B^D
Probably the ones who can spell - would - correctly…
(This thing really needs a spelcheker)
Hiya Satan… 
and thanks…
It is only here that I can say this and not feel bad about it…
Satan called me his pal!!! YEAH!! GRIN
“Over at LBMB, I could tell that you were opinionated, not willing to back down when right but willing to admit when wrong, and overall a pretty oppen-minded and nn-judgmental person who was open to learning and didn’t mind a debate.”
Kewl!! Opinionated!! grin best compliment I have gotten in a while laugh Oh… the rest was good too wink
So… what was I doing over there to begin with? Honestly? I am new back to the faith. I was saved back when I was 14… but 5 years ago stumbled away… a loooong way away. I have rededicated my life to Christ (just this past Dec. 1st). So… what was I doing there? Taking baby steps
***bigred1 ducks for cover as well!
On the topic of sodomy… there was a town called Sodom where the people wanted to perform in homosexual acts and who were VERY inhospitable according to the custom of the times. So… we get the word sodomy from there (probably because Gomorrahdomy was too hard to say LAUGH I just crack me up sometimes). So how do present day Christians get that the destruction of a town is the same as anal sex? I think I missed something there… and boy am I glad I missed it. I want specific passages here. I think the Bible is pretty clear on adultery and what it means… and homosexuality… as sexual sins. Beyond that… “sexual immorality” is kinda up in the air in my opinion.
For now… I will stear clear of that other can of worms… let’s just say that I don’t tend to fall on the same side as most women. I will address it when I have more time
Beth
I love you too Nishi!
Now, forget about that… Someone tackle my postulate above… It’s a damn good one, and was an incidious reason I had in the back of my mind when I started this damn thread!
Oh, and ARG, thank for agreeing with me. I’m sure it is all about you giving ratheer than receiving, right? wink, wink! nudge, nudge!
Just kidding, dude… Glad you’re back. Especially since you seemed to learn a thing or two while away… And I mean that with respect, not sarcasm, sir!
Yer pal,
Satan
First Place
Most Popular Poster of the 20th Century Competition
As overseen by Coldfire
I myself am into BDSM and D/S Have been for about four years. THere is a great mailing list I was on called CADS that discussed alot of the subjects here.
My thoughts on this subject are taken from something T.D. Jakes said once. If God cared about sex there would have been more written about it. The only thing that was really delved with was homosexuality, and keeping your bed whole by staying a virgin till marriage. I believe deeply God created sex, he did it so we could exchange a beautiful act of love, I also believe as long as both partners are comfortable it is ok.
Oh boy!So Adam thinks oral sex in marriage is okay.Thats a sure sign of the apocalypse(or his agreeing with Satan)!I’ll have to agree wtih arg’s last post,though.
But zSatan,I seem to be one of the few women who Don’t want oral sex.Just the regulation type works fine for me.
Brian! I didn’t throw anything at you!! walks away whistling and hiding stones behind my back…
As for the Can of Worms, I agree with whoever said it’s ok, just so long as you mix in some good, old-fashioned copulation.
Don’t worry Nishi! He didn’t welcome me in any such way either!!
Since RTF brought up the spotted owl, and I received this in email. This seemed somewhat appropriate.
† Jon †
Phillipians 4:13
Sodomite originally meant someone who was impure. It was only long after the bible was written that it came to mean someone who has anal sex.
bigred1:
Well, when Lot had the angels as guests, the other Sodomites demanded that the angels (who appeared as ordinary men) be handed over to them “so that we [the Sodomites] may know them.” “To know” is one of several euphemisms that the Bible uses for sex, thus, according to some interpretations, the Sodomites were demanding that the angels be turned over for homosexual rape. Hence the name “sodomy” for certain sex acts often associated with homosexuality (although also possible for a heterosexual couple).
Chaim Mattis Keller
cmkeller@compuserve.com
“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
Proven? PROVEN???
Thought we’d agreed (see assorted c/e threads, including Archangel’s latest) that we couldn’t really prove much in the physical sciences - that we could only produce evidence for or against a theory.
Personally, I wouldn’t consider the evidence for that proposition to be very solid until I’d had the chance to try alternative methods on a large enough sample of women so that the results could be said to apply to ‘most’ women. And since I’m married, that’s right out. (Gotta keep that marriage bed undefiled, and all that. ;))
I never really gave it much thought before. I always figured if the husband and wife both agreed to whatever it was ok.
bigred1 mentioned 1Cor. showing where it tells us to engage in sex. It not only tells us to, it says not to deprive each other.
It says it is our right as a married man/woman to have sexual intimacy. That we give each other authority over our bodies. That we aren’t to deprive each other of sexual relations except by mutual consent for time of prayer. The NIV and KJV versions are worded a little differently.
I’ve been saved for several years, but only recently decided to make a real commitment. I have a lot of questions on the Bible in my learning. I don’t understand alot of what I read in it. Maybe someone who has been at it longer than me is getting a different meaning when they read this. I think sexual intimacy or sexual relations could mean a variety of things to different people. Oral sex is being sexually intimate.
Reading this brings up another question. So if one of the people involved is wanting to try something, and the other doesn’t. That isn’t a mutual agreement to not do it. Even if it is something one of them doesn’t think is wrong, and still wouldn’t want to, it isn’t mutual. Especially if we are to give each other the authority. Which I don’t think means to take advantage of each other. So is one depriving the other of something? I’m just trying to understand. Frankly, alot of it confuses me.
As to the birth control thing. I’m not Catholic but I do remember reading on the topic over on LB before that someone said it is mutilating your body to have a vasectomy or tubal ligation. I guess I’ve failed there to, according to them anyway, since I’ve had a tubal. I don’t feel my body was mutilated because of it.
Just a whole bunch of historical-perspective points:
[ul][li]First, whether the Bible condemnation of some practice or other is applicable to modern morals is not something you can just jump to conclusions on … a lot of the Holiness Code (most of the various prohibitions in Leviticus, generally headed by something along the lines of “You shall be holy, for I the Lord thy God am holy” and a shopping list of shalt-nots) are applicable to particular circustances. E.g., the (a) prohibition and (b) requirement to marry your brother’s widow, depending on whether there were children. The whole idea was to ensure inheritance – if she had a son, you had no claim on your late brother’s possessions (including his wife) because the lands passed to your nephew, and if you married her, you’d be tempted to give them to your own kids. (What she was supposed to do is left nebulous.) If, on the other hand, he left no children, you were supposed to marry her and beget on her a son, who would be “officially” your brother’s (early case of legal fiction!) and inherit his property. According to the legend in Genesis 38, God was not punishing Onan for spanking his monkey, but for posthumously dispossessing Er, his dead brother, by refusing to get his widow pregnant with the kid that would be officially Er’s heir. (Why it was a brother’s job is obvious to anybody with a knowledge of genetics.) (That “whooosh” you hear is the combined sighs of relief of one million 13-year-old boys ;))[/li][li]A fair amount of the stuff in the Holiness Code was prohibited, apparently not because it was in and of itself sinful, but to keep the Jews from taking on the Canaanite culture that practiced it. (On this I’m quoting authority and don’t have any specific examples, but apparently there are things that are just fine in Genesis but against the Holiness Code.)[/li][li]What is “the purpose of sex in marriage?” This is not so dumb (i.e., obvious) a question as it sounds. If it is purely for procreation, then anything that does not lead to children is counterproductive and therefore forbidden. (That is, if you are being legalistic.) If, on the other hand, sex is “sacramental” – a physical enactment on the love of husband and wife – then, obviously, different rules apply.[/li][li]Most of the stuff that is translated as “impure” or “unclean” is read by all of us as “sinful” – after all, it’s in a “religious” book. What you need to keep in mind is that, (a) the Holy Land was a dry country, and (b) the Bible was considered the practical rules for living in God’s grace by the Jewish people. “Unclean” means precisely that: if Grandma just died, and you had to haul the old biddy’s corpse out to the graveyard, don’t be handling the family dinner. The hygienic logic of this is pretty obvious. If you had a wet dream, don’t be getting the stuff all over everything. That this is not “sinful” is made plenty obvious by the fact that the same term is used in rabbinic literature for the state of menstrual blood and of the Torah…handling either makes you “unclean.”[/li][li]Final point is that on the opinion of some leading scholars the sin of the men of Sodom was not having homosexual desire in itself, but the idea they wanted to gang-rape the guests of a fellow townsman – at once a sin against hospitality (which the Bible makes a much bigger deal of that is immediately obvious) and against the dignity and humanity of the guests.[/ul][/li]
There was a neat line I ran across somewhere that said, “There’s nothing wrong with what two people want to do that doesn’t involve former food or former people.” I personally cannot see the Lord of All having a major hangup over how two people who love each other get their jollies. It sounds more like a frustrated control freak than a compassionate deity to get these detailed rules. (Of course, Phil regularly points out how the O.T. makes God look like a frustrated control freak, but that gets us into a completely separate school of thought.)
Re: Chaim’s post…it makes a significant difference on the classic line, “I want to get to know you better.”
Sorry, I forgot to put that it is in the New Living Translation that it is phrased as sexual intimacy and sexual relations.
Adam said:
"James Dobson did say that masturbation is ok for singles. When I heard that a while back I was rather shocked. Even though I repect him, I believe he is wrong, and that masturbation outside of marriage is a grave sin. "
Wow, I’m surprised no one mentioned this. How many fundamentalists believe this is correct? Was anyone out there able to not masterbate their whole life? I mean, even when you were like 13,14,15,16, etc.? There’s no way I could have resisted back then; I think maybe I would have exploded. Maybe some women are able - I don’t know. But teenage boys… I highly doubt it. To think that it is a grave sin would be condemning nearly every male on the planet… Ah, more evidence for the 144,000!
PeeQueue