Sex

Re: Sex

Postby Bill » Fri Jul 25, 2014 7:36 am

Luke 17:34 "I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left."

In this context, to be taken is to be granted salvation.

p.s. "fornication" in its modern sense was coined in the 14th Century. If you are going to quote scripture to support your personal opinion, putting modern words in the mouths of the ancients smacks of dis-honesty.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby psyadam » Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:44 pm

Chapabel wrote:Sorry for the confusion Adam. My point is that Paul clearly wrote more letters than are contained in the Bible. God, in His omnipotence, ensured only those that were inspired by Him were preserved in the pages of the Bible. To say that man inserted incorrect doctrine into the Bible is to limit God's power and actually makes Him out to be a liar.


This is where you and I disagree. My thoughts here are that God allows there to be errors in the Bible.

Chapabel wrote: God said that His words were pure words and would be preserved through the ages (Ps.12:6-7). If one doctrine is in error, then that calls all doctrines into question. This allows people to pick and choose what parts they accept and which ones they reject. This makes God's Word ineffectual.


I find Psalms to be highly suspect, since it is generally just a collection of disconnected poems, anecdotes, or random thoughts. In any case, just because a book claims to be written by God or a book claims to be inerrant doesn't make it so.

Chapabel wrote:Fornication refers to sex outside of marriage while going after strange flesh refers to homosexuality. Again, I'd like for you to produce Biblical evidence that God condones homosexual relationships. As Christians we need to be able to point to specific scriptures that support our positions. When asked by a nonbeliever why we believe what we do, just to say "Because I think so." is inadequate.


My understanding is that fornication is an ambiguous term. Perhaps I am wrong on that. If you have evidence about fornication meaning that specifically, send a link or a citation. I'm not interested in wikipedia as an accurate source of information because it is often taken over by one side or another of a debate. Case in point--wikipedia has recently been taken over by the feminist side on the feminism/men's rights debate and the site is very biased and misleading when it comes to information about the subject. Same goes for "strange flesh"--I'd need some more evidence that this specifically means homosexuality.

As far as Biblical evidence that God condones homosexual relationships, there is no Biblical evidence. I do believe there is evidence from NDEs that say that God is ok with it. There is some speculation, however, about whether Jonathon and David had a homosexual relationship, since David said that Jonathon's love "surpassed the love of a woman". If someone said that today that would be suspect.

In any case, there were many unethical sexual relationships in the Bible-- (I think there was something in there about Abraham being seduced into having sex with his daughters and having a child because he was drunk--correct me if I'm wrong) that does not mean God condones it, even if Jonathon and David did have a sexual relationship.
psyadam
Senior Member
Senior Member
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:47 pm
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby Chapabel » Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:25 am

Adam, if the Bible does contain errors, who is to determine what sections are true and which are not? You do not believe God really condemns homosexuality, but what if someone comes along and does not believe God forbids bestiality? What if a person thinks God’s condemnation of incest was just inserted by man. What you eventually end up with is people determining for themselves what portions of the Bible to follow. Since different people believe different things you end up with people just like those found in the book of Judges21:25…every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

You admit that there is no Biblical indication that God condoned any type of homosexual relationship. Every reference to homosexuality in the Bible is in negative terms. Again, as a Christian, we must be able to support our positions with Biblical evidence. Without that all we can offer are personal opinion.

In Hebrew there are two words that are translated as “fornication”.
One is “זָנָה” pronounced zaw-naw': to commit adultery (usually of the female, and less often of simple fornication, rarely of involuntary ravishment); (be an, play the) harlot, (cause to be, play the) whore, (commit, fall to) whoredom, (cause to) go a-whoring, whorish.
The other word is תַּזְנוּת. Pronounced taz-nooth': harlotry, i.e. (figuratively) idolatry:—fornication, whoredom.
In Greek the word fornication is πορνεια. Pronounced por-ni'-ah: harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively, idolatry:—fornication. (This is the Greek word we get the English word “pornography” from).


It was Lot who got drunk and had sex with his two daughters after fleeing from Sodom. His girls had been raised in a society where fornication and homosexuality were rampant. That culture contributed to the girl’s sense of right and wrong to become twisted. It is this same developing culture that I believe is leading young people down dangerous paths today.
The Bible will always be full of things you cannot understand, as long as you will not live according to those you can understand. – Billy Sunday
User avatar
Chapabel
Distinguished Prognosticator
Distinguished Prognosticator
 
Posts: 2102
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:27 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tn.
Blog: View Blog (3)
Affiliation: Christian
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby Bill » Sat Jul 26, 2014 6:39 am

Judges 21 extols the use of near genocide in order to capture 400 virgins to be the enforced wives of an Israelite tribe that was in danger of dying out. The tribe had no king, so the members had to decide what was to do. This seems to be a simple commentary on the administration of a tribe without a leader to make decisions on civil disagreements.

But - hey - if you can put to death an entire rival township in order to breed naturally with the captured girls, it does put everything into the correct perspective.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby psyadam » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:19 pm

Chapabel wrote:Adam, if the Bible does contain errors, who is to determine what sections are true and which are not? You do not believe God really condemns homosexuality, but what if someone comes along and does not believe God forbids bestiality? What if a person thinks God’s condemnation of incest was just inserted by man. What you eventually end up with is people determining for themselves what portions of the Bible to follow. Since different people believe different things you end up with people just like those found in the book of Judges21:25…every man did that which was right in his own eyes.


I think that is exactly what people should be doing--deciding for themselves what is moral and what is not moral. Remember what I was saying about Lot sleeping with his daughters--the Bible contains stories but that does not mean that God endorses all the human behavior in the stories. We need to decide for ourselves what is moral and what is not. (Of course, the exception is the four gospels, since these are teachings from Jesus himself)

Chapabel wrote:You admit that there is no Biblical indication that God condoned any type of homosexual relationship. Every reference to homosexuality in the Bible is in negative terms. Again, as a Christian, we must be able to support our positions with Biblical evidence. Without that all we can offer are personal opinion.


It is true I have no Biblical indication that God condoned any type of homosexual relationship. Given that at first glance, the few references we do have seem to be negative, I can see how Christians can make the argument against homosexuality. However, not everything is clear and simple. The story in Sodom and Gomorrah could have referred to gross in hospitality, as some Talmudic scholars have said. The story could have referred to homosexual rape (even more likely).

I contend that the scriptures in Leviticus (The Holiness Code) were specific to a time and group of people (the Isrealites).

I contend that the Pauline books in the Bible were simply letters written by Paul, that Paul had no intention for his letters and writings to be canonized as Scripture, and that Paul had an aversion to homosexuals, just as many straight men have through the ages.

Chapabel wrote:In Hebrew there are two words that are translated as “fornication”.
One is “זָנָה” pronounced zaw-naw': to commit adultery (usually of the female, and less often of simple fornication, rarely of involuntary ravishment); (be an, play the) harlot, (cause to be, play the) whore, (commit, fall to) whoredom, (cause to) go a-whoring, whorish.
The other word is תַּזְנוּת. Pronounced taz-nooth': harlotry, i.e. (figuratively) idolatry:—fornication, whoredom.
In Greek the word fornication is πορνεια. Pronounced por-ni'-ah: harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively, idolatry:—fornication. (This is the Greek word we get the English word “pornography” from).


By your own definition then, fornication does not refer to homosexuality, under any circumstance?

Chapabel wrote:It was Lot who got drunk and had sex with his two daughters after fleeing from Sodom.
His girls had been raised in a society where fornication and homosexuality were rampant.
That culture contributed to the girl’s sense of right and wrong to become twisted.
It is this same developing culture that I believe is leading young people down dangerous paths today.


Upon further research, it appears you are correct on this one (that it was Lot that had sex with his daughters).
psyadam
Senior Member
Senior Member
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:47 pm
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby Chapabel » Sun Jul 27, 2014 4:56 am

If you believe every person should decide for themselves what is moral, where do you draw the line Adam? There may be someone who believes bestiality is acceptable. Are you ok with this? What about incest; are you good with this too? Maybe someone feels that another person needs a good beating. Would you respect their opinion on the morality of their decision? Hitler felt justified in the extermination of the Jews. Do you believe he had the right to do so? If people are allowed to set their own morals then why even keep a Bible around? I'm sorry Adam, but I cannot disagree with you strongly enough on this issue. Just look at the corruption in Washington and on Wall Street because people set their own moral standards.

What makes you believe the book of Leviticus was simply some type of "Holiness Code" that only applied to Israelites? I have an idea where that notion comes from, but there is nothing in scripture that indicates that to be the case.

BTW, if the Gospels are to be followed, what do you do with Jesus' explanation of God's intent for marriage to be between a man and a woman (Matt.19:4-5)?
The Bible will always be full of things you cannot understand, as long as you will not live according to those you can understand. – Billy Sunday
User avatar
Chapabel
Distinguished Prognosticator
Distinguished Prognosticator
 
Posts: 2102
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:27 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tn.
Blog: View Blog (3)
Affiliation: Christian
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby Bill » Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:11 am

Matt.19:4-5 is too ambiguous to be taken as an edict: it simply confirms that the process by which children are bred and raised is not sinful. There is not a single hint that anyone who does not leave his parents to get wed is a sinner for willfully refusing to get wed.

And in any case, all biblical scholars agree that Matthew contains more imaginative flourishes than the other oral traditions than eventually got approved to become the official catholic line.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby romansh » Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:20 am

In practice societies and communities get together and define what is acceptable or not. Should you as an individual feel otherwise and act on that feeling be prepared to accept the consequences of those actions.

For example Bertrand Russell was ostracized for being a conscientious objector and his belief it was wrong to kill under any circumstances. Now is this a valid moral position? And who gets to decide? The literal Bible is definitely unclear on this aspect.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Douglas Adams
User avatar
romansh
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4673
Images: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: BC/US border - in the woods
Affiliation: Agnostic

Re: Sex

Postby psyadam » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:05 am

Chapabel wrote:If you believe every person should decide for themselves what is moral, where do you draw the line Adam? There may be someone who believes bestiality is acceptable. Are you ok with this? What about incest; are you good with this too? Maybe someone feels that another person needs a good beating. Would you respect their opinion on the morality of their decision? Hitler felt justified in the extermination of the Jews. Do you believe he had the right to do so? If people are allowed to set their own morals then why even keep a Bible around? I'm sorry Adam, but I cannot disagree with you strongly enough on this issue. Just look at the corruption in Washington and on Wall Street because people set their own moral standards.

I am extremely liberal when it comes to sex. My view is that the Bible is mostly silent on sex because we are to make up our own minds on it, given the teachings of Jesus. I'm sorry you disagree with me so strongly on this. As far as incest, I am not really sure I have a strong thought other than from my understanding in grade school they taught that it could cause genetic problems if people have children. Of course I oppose wife-beating, but I think that's not really sexual. As far as bestiality, I don't think that is safe. But generally, my view is that if it is safe and consensual, I don't see anything wrong with it. As far as morality is concerned, I think most people would arrive at a moral instead of an immoral code of ethics as a result of looking to their heart rather than blindly following an authority, whether that authority is a person or a text.

Chapabel wrote:What makes you believe the book of Leviticus was simply some type of "Holiness Code" that only applied to Israelites? I have an idea where that notion comes from, but there is nothing in scripture that indicates that to be the case.


I hate to bring up Wikipedia, but is one of the sources I am going to cite here: (it appears wikipedia is down at the moment, but search holiness code when it's back up). Matthew Vines also mentions the holiness code and gives pretty much the same arguments I have: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... zQjNJUSraY

Chapabel wrote:BTW, if the Gospels are to be followed, what do you do with Jesus' explanation of God's intent for marriage to be between a man and a woman (Matt.19:4-5)?

I don't know, really. I assume it's a case of there being too much of a backlash against Jesus if Jesus preached anything differently in that respect. Look, that passage in the Bible is particular is a difficult one for gays to answer. I'll concede you that point. But I have to look at the problem holistically. I don't have all the answers.
psyadam
Senior Member
Senior Member
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:47 pm
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Sex

Postby Chapabel » Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:40 am

Well Adam, my friend, it looks as if we have come to an impasse. You began this thread questioning what the Bible and Jesus taught concerning sex. I feel that I have provided the answers from the Bible and from Jesus, Himself. The Bible condemns fornication (porneia ie pornography); Jesus taught that God’s plan for marriage was intended to involve a man and a woman. You admitted that there were no passages that supported your view. Instead, you believe every person should decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. Since that is the case, I’m not sure why you started this thread.

I have enjoyed discussing this topic with you and I appreciate the graciousness with which you have responded. I hope I was as polite in my replies to you. I encourage you to continue in your Christian walk. If I can ever be of any assistance don’t hesitate to give me a shout. Good luck Adam.
The Bible will always be full of things you cannot understand, as long as you will not live according to those you can understand. – Billy Sunday
User avatar
Chapabel
Distinguished Prognosticator
Distinguished Prognosticator
 
Posts: 2102
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:27 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tn.
Blog: View Blog (3)
Affiliation: Christian
Country: United States

PreviousNext

Return to Ethics, Morality, & Laws

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron