Oral Sex...

Discussion for Christian perspectives on ethical issues such as abortion, euthanasia, sexuality, and so forth.

Postby ochotseat » Wed May 04, 2005 4:41 am

Adam and Eve must have committed fornication then.

Nah. After they ate the forbidden fruit, they became wiser, which is why they realized they were nude. After they were cast out of the Garden of Eden, it is likely they got married.

Kurieuo wrote:[bible]1 Cor 6:15-17[/bible]
Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

[bible]Genesis 2:24[/bible]
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

[bible]Eph 5:31[/bible]
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh."

Corinthians talks of one uniting themselves with a prostitute. "Uniting" is obviously a reference to uniting sexually with a prostitute. After uniting sexually, the two become one in body—our created design being fulfilled. For when God took out a portion of Adam's side to create Eve, Adam was less whole than what he was originally. And when Eve was given that portion, man then became dependant on woman in order to be completed.

This brings up a question, is not marriage the union of a husband with his wife? This union, according to God's Word, "generally" (but not necessarily) happens when a man is united sexually to a woman. Therefore the act of sex is the seal of marriage before God despite anything else. Once a couple have sex, they are in His eyes one unit yoked together.

Kurieuo.
Wrong again.
The Bible stresses: "Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral" (Hebrews 13:4). The Bible also says that God so strongly condemns fornication and adultery that those who practice these sins will be excluded from God's kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). However, the Lord is willing to forgive such sins and transform the lives of those who have committed them (1 Corinthians 6:11).
You will need to separate from the one with whom you are living, recognizing that you have no right to live as husband and wife without marriage. You cannot, of course, have Christ as your Lord and continue in such a relationship. We would suggest that you seek the counsel of a Gospel-preaching pastor in your community for further support and direction.

That's from Billy Graham's website. Ask most ministers and priests and they'll tell you the same. You shouldn't traduce the Bible in order to justify your own ideas and lifestyle. :lol:
ochotseat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 5:16 am

Postby Kurieuo » Wed May 04, 2005 5:54 am

ochotseat wrote:The Bible stresses: "Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral" (Hebrews 13:4)

I don't know what you're reading in my words, but where did I argue against this?

ochotseat wrote:The Bible also says that God so strongly condemns fornication and adultery that those who practice these sins will be excluded from God's kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

[bible]1 Cor. 6:9[/bible]—
"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers..."

I believe this is what you're refering to, correct? The word for "fornicators" (pornos) in the above is defined in Strongs as one who prostitutes themself, which only goes to back what I said earlier that the Bible only states prostituting yourself (that is, engaging in sex with multiple partners) is wrong. The word "fornication" which has come to be understood as "any" sex outside a legal marriage, wasn't even used until 1303 (see http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fornication).

This is perhaps why the NIV translators chose not to translate pornos as "fornication" in verse 9: "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes..."

ochotseat wrote:Ask most ministers and priests and they'll tell you the same.

What ministers do you know? I've studied theology and have mixed with a few. I can tell you there are many who'd go much further then I do, their positions seemingly unfounded in Scripture.

ochotseat wrote: You shouldn't traduce the Bible in order to justify your own ideas and lifestyle. :lol:

The jokes on you since I'm married.

Kurieuo.
Image
User avatar
Kurieuo
Old School
 
Posts: 4371
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 6:25 am
Location: QLD, Australia

Postby LittleShepherd » Wed May 18, 2005 12:13 am

Whether the actual <B>act</B> of premarital sex is wrong or not is actually irrelevent. You have to commit at least <B>two</B> other sins before you even get to this point -- covetousness and lust.

First, you desire someone when you have no right to desire them.

Second, your desire turns sexual and becomes lust. You want to have sex with someone that you have no right to have sex with.

If you did not lust after the person, then you would never even <B>think</B> about having sex with them outside of marriage, much less actually go through with it. The only exception I can think of is rape, where you have no choice in the matter.

More people would benefit from reading that 10th commandment, which goes straight to the heart of all other sins. You're trying so hard to justify an action when what you need to be looking at is your heart, and the motives behind your actions. Are you coveting? Are you lusting? The obvious answer is yes, so you're sinning when you have premarital sex.
User avatar
LittleShepherd
Established Member
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Georgia, USA

Postby marys_little_one » Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:45 am

First of all any kind of sexual activities outside of marriage is MORALLY WRONG!

Now within marriage oral sex could also be wrong. I say COULD because oral sex could NOT be a sin in certain cases.

If a couple is using oral sex as some kind of sexual enticement...that will ULTIMATELY end in FULL sexual intercourse with their spouse, then it is NOT wrong. It is not wrong because the couple is still having sex meaning they are being OPEN to life.

BUT....if a couple uses oral sex as a way of "releaving" their sexual desires and FULL intercourse is not followed...then it is considered a sin! It is a sin because the couple is closing the doors to the possibility of new life!!

I hope this clears some things up for some of you guys. I've gone to a private school MY WHOLE life...so I know a lot about religion and stuff. Personally, I think oral sex is just gross!
marys_little_one
Acquainted Member
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 6:27 am
Location: somewhere in the world

Postby Prodigal Son » Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:59 am

i think oral sex is cool. i think it rules! so, if one is married, they HAVE to have sex with their spouse after all sexual exchanges? and they have to do it with the intent to have a child? doesn't sound right.
New Creation
2 Corinthians 5:7
User avatar
Prodigal Son
Senior Member
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 5:49 pm

Postby marys_little_one » Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:57 pm

Prodigal Son wrote:i think oral sex is cool. i think it rules! so, if one is married, they HAVE to have sex with their spouse after all sexual exchanges? and they have to do it with the intent to have a child? doesn't sound right.


Remember that a woman can only get pregnant 3 to 4 days of the whole month. So all the other 20 something days of the month she is not able to get pregnant. When a couple has sex during these days....of course they are not going to get pregnant....but they have sex to show their love to each other.

When the couple has sex...they are still being open to life (if they don't use contraception). It doesn't mean that they are having sex to ONLY have a child and that's it....They are having SEX to show their love....but they are NOT closing the possibility of getting pregnant! With having that in mind and having that attitude towards sex....they are being open to life! That's what that means...to be open to life!
marys_little_one
Acquainted Member
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 6:27 am
Location: somewhere in the world

Postby XenonII » Fri Aug 26, 2005 2:17 am

Prodigal Son wrote:i think oral sex is cool. i think it rules! so, if one is married, they HAVE to have sex with their spouse after all sexual exchanges? and they have to do it with the intent to have a child? doesn't sound right.


Are you a liberal by any chance? Oral sex is a perversion. Oral sex is sodomy. Can you get a woman pregnant by cumming down her throat or shooting your load up her ***? NO. Therefore oral sex is unnatural.
XenonII
Established Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Australia

Postby XenonII » Fri Aug 26, 2005 2:22 am

marys_little_one wrote:First of all any kind of sexual activities outside of marriage is MORALLY WRONG!

Now within marriage oral sex could also be wrong. I say COULD because oral sex could NOT be a sin in certain cases.

If a couple is using oral sex as some kind of sexual enticement...that will ULTIMATELY end in FULL sexual intercourse with their spouse, then it is NOT wrong. It is not wrong because the couple is still having sex meaning they are being OPEN to life.

BUT....if a couple uses oral sex as a way of "releaving" their sexual desires and FULL intercourse is not followed...then it is considered a sin! It is a sin because the couple is closing the doors to the possibility of new life!!

I hope this clears some things up for some of you guys. I've gone to a private school MY WHOLE life...so I know a lot about religion and stuff. Personally, I think oral sex is just gross!


Just because a perversion is comitted inside a marriage doesn't somehow make it right. Oral sex is of homosexual origin. That alone should tell you it's wrong. This filthy disgusting practice of oral sex (sodomy) replaces the normal "face to face" relationship God intended in a marriage.

The Bible describes the sex act in Song of Solomon Chapter 4. In this chapter it speaks of this "face to face" relationship by describing looking into his lover's eyes and kissing his lover's lips and fondling his lover's breasts. Oral sex is not normal or natural as it is an unclean act.
XenonII
Established Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Australia

RE:

Postby Ark~Magic » Fri Aug 26, 2005 2:34 am

I doubt the homosexuals were the first to invent oral sex, although it is a possibility. Nobody knows, nobody can except God. And Xenon, quit it with your dumb fanatacism. Your have more mental disorders than you think. You call other people liberal and satanic and you're the one taking ***** up your *** and astrally projecting.
"And I shall slay them who partake of futurism, for in the preterist light there will be everlasting salvation, truth, and peace." ~ Faust
Ark~Magic
Established Member
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 2:25 pm

Re: RE:

Postby XenonII » Fri Aug 26, 2005 2:42 am

Ark~Magic wrote:I doubt the homosexuals were the first to invent oral sex, although it is a possibility. Nobody knows, nobody can except God. And Xenon, quit it with your dumb fanatacism. Your have more mental disorders than you think. You call other people liberal and satanic and you're the one taking ***** up your *** and astrally projecting.


Bible.com which I think would be a reliable enough source says that homosexuals invented oral and anal sex (sodomy), which stands to reason when you consider that's the only type of sex they can have amongst themselves. Dumb fantacism? :roll: I've never taken anything up my *** you judgemental fool. I'm celibate and have been for years unlike a lot of you in the straight community. And I haven't astral projected for 4 months, since my last annointing of the Holy Spirit, something that was never my will in the first place. And just what other mental disorders am I supposed to have then? :lol:
XenonII
Established Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Australia

RE:

Postby Ark~Magic » Fri Aug 26, 2005 2:54 am

So you only look at one site for information? Bible.com isn't the only source. it could have still been possible that straight couples engaged in it as well before homosexuals did, and it's been documented before in ancient cultures, so don't [love] with me about it (because I know you might want to).
"And I shall slay them who partake of futurism, for in the preterist light there will be everlasting salvation, truth, and peace." ~ Faust
Ark~Magic
Established Member
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 2:25 pm

Re: RE:

Postby XenonII » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:00 am

Ark~Magic wrote:So you only look at one site for information? Bible.com isn't the only source. it could have still been possible that straight couples engaged in it as well before homosexuals did, and it's been documented before in ancient cultures, so don't [love] with me about it (because I know you might want to).


Well whatever "straight" couples engaging in something as sick and disgusting as that is no better yet where's the moral outrage from you conservative christians? There is none! Talk about a bunch of hypocrites. There's WAY MORE of that sort of behaviour going on in the filthy "straight" community than there is in any others. Sodomy is one of the favorite perversions of the heterosexual male that and the disgusting filth that is the [lesbian]. And no I got no interest in [love] you i'm living a celibate life for Christ because I love Jesus (and no not in some "gay" way sicko). So take your sick delusions and shove them up your ***! I guess for a bigot like you the idea of someone with same sex attraction disorder who doesn't act on that illness must be too hard to swallow (pun intended). :lol:
XenonII
Established Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Australia

Postby ochotseat » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:44 am

XenonII wrote:Oral sex is a perversion. Oral sex is sodomy.

The more popular definition of sodomy is anal intercourse between two people of the same sex (usually male). I'm sure most people, at least decent ones, will agree that anal intercourse is the dirtiest form of sex for a variety of reasons: feces, greater chance of getting an STD, anal damage, and association with homosexuality. Will they be as up in arms about oral sex? Probably not, because it isn't as unclean, and it's the safest form of sex.

Can you get a woman pregnant by cumming down her throat or shooting your load up her ***? NO. Therefore oral sex is unnatural.

Oral sex isn't as natural as vaginal sex, but it's not as dreadful as anal sex.

Well whatever "straight" couples engaging in something as sick and disgusting as that is no better yet where's the moral outrage from you conservative christians?

There is outrage. That's why they decry fornication, homosexuality, and anal sex.

There's WAY MORE of that sort of behaviour going on in the filthy "straight" community than there is in any others.

Not from the looks of this, because there's a huge difference between 20 and 80 percent:

http://www.muhlenbergweekly.com/media/p ... al-Sex.The

Who has anal sex? Statistics are uncertain: the Journal of Adolescent Health says eleven percent of sexually active college students participate in anal sex; Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, a book by Edward Laumann notes 20 percent of heterosexuals have engaged in anal sex; and Alfred Kinsey quoted a participation close to 40 percent. These heterosexual findings coupled with the lack of homosexual anal intercourse research (although Laumann suggests 80 percent of homosexual males have engaged in anal intercourse), makes it difficult to deduce exactly who engages in anal intercourse. Yet historically, nearly every culture has engaged in rectal intercourse.

Sodomy is one of the favorite perversions of the heterosexual male that and the disgusting filth that is the [lesbian].


Homosexuality is morally repugnant, but if one had to choose, gays are probably worse than lesbians.
ochotseat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 5:16 am

Re: RE:

Postby ochotseat » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:49 am

Ark~Magic wrote:I doubt the homosexuals were the first to invent oral sex, although it is a possibility. Nobody knows, nobody can except God. And Xenon, quit it with your dumb fanatacism. Your have more mental disorders than you think. You call other people liberal and satanic and you're the one taking ***** up your *** and astrally projecting.


:lol: :o How do you astrally project anyway :?:

Oral sex could have been invented by either heterosexuals or homosexuals, since both groups resided in Sodom and Gomorrah. If homosexuals invented a form of sex, it was probably anal intercourse, since it's impossible for two men to have any type of sex that resembles vaginal sex except through the anus.
ochotseat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 5:16 am

Postby XenonII » Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:19 am

ochotseat wrote:The more popular definition of sodomy is anal intercourse between two people of the same sex (usually male). I'm sure most people, at least decent ones, will agree that anal intercourse is the dirtiest form of sex for a variety of reasons: feces, greater chance of getting an STD, anal damage, and association with homosexuality. Will they be as up in arms about oral sex? Probably not, because it isn't as unclean, and it's the safest form of sex.


The legal definition of sodomy is any form of unnatural sex. Sodomy includes anal sex, oral sex, masturbation and bestiality.

Oral sex isn't as natural as vaginal sex, but it's not as dreadful as anal sex.


Sin is sin, both are sodomy.

There is outrage. That's why they decry fornication, homosexuality, and anal sex.


Not in the proportion to what it occurs however.

Not from the looks of this, because there's a huge difference between 20 and 80 percent:

http://www.muhlenbergweekly.com/media/p ... al-Sex.The

Who has anal sex? Statistics are uncertain: the Journal of Adolescent Health says eleven percent of sexually active college students participate in anal sex; Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, a book by Edward Laumann notes 20 percent of heterosexuals have engaged in anal sex; and Alfred Kinsey quoted a participation close to 40 percent. These heterosexual findings coupled with the lack of homosexual anal intercourse research (although Laumann suggests 80 percent of homosexual males have engaged in anal intercourse), makes it difficult to deduce exactly who engages in anal intercourse. Yet historically, nearly every culture has engaged in rectal intercourse.


80% of homosexual males do NOT engage in anal intercourse and besides even if those bogus "statistics" were true 20% of 99% of the population is a LOT more than 80% of 1%. :)

Homosexuality is morally repugnant, but if one had to choose, gays are probably worse than lesbians.


Says you. [lesbians] are far more worse than gays. At least gays use their body parts. Its a crying shame [lesbians] "cant get" AIDS. [lesbians] are disgusting and repulsive looking, more masculine than most men! You only like [lesbians] coz you have a fetish for them. AND just how is a guy thinking guys are hot worse than a [lesbian] thinking some girl is hot? At least the guy is right!! :D
Last edited by XenonII on Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
XenonII
Established Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Moral and Ethical Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests