Do you think that using inappropriate contentography is equal to cheating?

[Hazelelponi]

Absolutely.

In general I agree with that. And that is EXACTLY what our western logic minds come up with.

But it is interesting that it is never actually mentioned; even in passing. And I have found sometimes the eastern mindset behind the Hebrew text will go off in an unexpected direction.

So that is likely that they were married, but I will not stake a doctrine on it. There is a slim possibility they were not.

And what would THAT say to us???

That book blows my mind sometimes.

I think we just sometimes forget what the marriage covenant actually is.

and yes, I would stake doctrine on it. But that's me. I simply feel that sure.

 

[Deidre32]

IMO they had an almost idolatrous worship for virginity.

Do you remember what Joseph told his brothers (who had sold him into slavery) when he revealed himself? "What you meant for evil God meant for good."

This approach turns that on its head. What God meant for good, the ECFs (and the whole church world after them) turned into evil.

The early ''church fathers'' were celibate, I believe, because they were following Jesus' example. I think it's just another way to control the masses, and distort the beauty of Christ. Jesus had a mission, he wasn't partnered with anyone, because he knew he'd be here a short time and that wasn't God's will for him.

 

[RDKirk]

The early ''church fathers'' were celibate, I believe, because they were following Jesus' example. I think it's just another way to control the masses, and distort the beauty of Christ. Jesus had a mission, he wasn't partnered with anyone, because he knew he'd be here a short time and that wasn't God's will for him.

Deidre32, have you ever read Anne Rice's "Christ the Lord: Journey to Cana?" Set in the months prior to Jesus' miracle of the wine at the wedding at Cana, her very good novel has an interesting take on that aspect of Jesus' life before His ministry.

As a Jewish man growing up in a small town, by age 30 the community would not only expect Jesus to have been married, but they'd even have decided by then who He was to marry, having determined it from the small pool of local women in the appropriate age range. She would even know that she was Jesus' best option, and her own family would be expecting Jesus any day to propose a marriage covenant.

They would have been totally puzzled that He had not already. Even Mary might have been puzzled, because although she knew her son was destined for greatness in God, that might not have meant to her that Jesus couldn't be married. After all, Abraham had been married, Moses had been married, and David had been married.

 

[Deidre32]

Deidre32, have you ever read Anne Rice's "Christ the Lord: Journey to Cana?" Set in the months prior to Jesus' miracle of the wine at the wedding at Cana, her very good novel has an interesting take on that aspect of Jesus' life before His ministry.

As a Jewish man growing up in a small town, by age 30 the community would not only expect Jesus to have been married, but they'd even have decided by then who He was to marry, having determined it from the small pool of local women in the appropriate age range. She would even know that she was Jesus' best option, and her own family would be expecting Jesus any day to propose a marriage covenant.

They would have been totally puzzled that He had not already. Even Mary might have been puzzled, because although she knew her son was destined for greatness in God, that might not have meant to her that Jesus couldn't be married. After all, Abraham had been married, Moses had been married, and David had been married.

I haven't read that, no. That sounds interesting.

But, if you believe in the Trinity, then you'd believe Jesus was Divine, and Divinity doesn't need a spouse? I think there are probably a few ways to view it all.

 

[tall73]

ng. Lust is sin. Period. Whether it is for your spouse or a stranger, it is still lust.

Proverbs 5:
1 My son, pay attention to my wisdom,
turn your ear to my words of insight,
2 that you may maintain discretion
and your lips may preserve knowledge.
3 For the lips of the adulterous woman drip honey,
and her speech is smoother than oil;
4 but in the end she is bitter as gall,
sharp as a double-edged sword.
5 Her feet go down to death;
her steps lead straight to the grave.
6 She gives no thought to the way of life;
her paths wander aimlessly, but she does not know it.


7 Now then, my sons, listen to me;
do not turn aside from what I say.
8 Keep to a path far from her,
do not go near the door of her house,
9 lest you lose your honor to others
and your dignitya]">[a] to one who is cruel,
10 lest strangers feast on your wealth
and your toil enrich the house of another.
11 At the end of your life you will groan,
when your flesh and body are spent.
12 You will say, “How I hated discipline!
How my heart spurned correction!
13 I would not obey my teachers
or turn my ear to my instructors.
14 And I was soon in serious trouble
in the assembly of God’s people.”


15 Drink water from your own cistern,
running water from your own well.
16 Should your springs overflow in the streets,
your streams of water in the public squares?
17 Let them be yours alone,
never to be shared with strangers.
18 May your fountain be blessed,
and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth.
19 A loving doe, a graceful deer—
may her breasts satisfy you always,
may you ever be intoxicated with her love.
20 Why, my son, be intoxicated with another man’s wife?
Why embrace the bosom of a wayward woman?

21 For your ways are in full view of the Lord,
and he examines all your paths.
22 The evil deeds of the wicked ensnare them;
the cords of their sins hold them fast.
23 For lack of discipline they will die,
led astray by their own great folly.


We are to rejoice in our wife, and shun the adulteress. I don't see any other way to understand let her breasts satisfy you always, other than the obvious sexual connotations.

In I Corinthians 7 both the husband and wife are understood to have sexual desire and needs based on that. And it is sinful to withhold for long times without agreement. The issue is not procreation in that passage, and the union of the spouses is seen as legitimate and a hedge against sexual immorality outside of the marriage.

God joins together man and woman in marriage, and the sexual union is part of that one flesh relationship. It is a bonding experience, and not sinful.

God created the sexual organs to experience pleasure. He set the bounds of that within marriage, the one flesh relationship.

 

[tall73]

I believe there are a couple reasons we should have a literal reading of Song of Solomon, but even if your not a prudish person, standing in front of a pulpit preaching it would be uncomfortable especially with children present and so forth.

I have preached on married sexuality, but it helps to announce the topic ahead of time so parents can be aware if they need to visit another church, prepare their kids ahead, etc.

If we only preach on the dangers of sex outside of marriage, and don't reference God's intention for sex within the marriage, then people get a skewed view.

People instinctively recognizes that sexual desire is a powerful inborn drive. Therefore we have to explain how that drive works in the life of a Christian, as God intended. As the church we need to make it clear this is God's intention for man and woman in marriage. If you are married you should have sex with your spouse, with the usual caveats of health, or other unavoidable factors at time interfering.

 

[RDKirk]

I haven't read that, no. That sounds interesting.

But, if you believe in the Trinity, then you'd believe Jesus was Divine, and Divinity doesn't need a spouse? I think there are probably a few ways to view it all.

Yes. Rice's novel is fully reverent to Christ' divinity. He knows in her story that marriage and a typical life is not going to be for Him, but at that moment He was patiently waiting for the Father to give Him the "go" while dealing with the culture around Him that wanted Him to go in a different direction. Everyone recognized there was some kind of yet-unrealized leadership potential in Him, and everyone wanted to tap that potential for their own causes.

 

[Jon Osterman]

We are to rejoice in our wife, and shun the adulteress. I don't see any other way to understand let her breasts satisfy you always, other than the obvious sexual connotations.

You should read it in context (which shouldn't be too hard since you posted the entire chapter). It is warning you against being tempted by the adulterous woman. So this section that you highlight is telling you to appreciate your wife instead. This is in love, not sex. It explicitly tells you to be "intoxicated with her love".

In I Corinthians 7 both the husband and wife are understood to have sexual desire and needs based on that. And it is sinful to withhold for long times without agreement. The issue is not procreation in that passage, and the union of the spouses is seen as legitimate and a hedge against sexual immorality outside of the marriage.

Yes, I don't deny that. Some husbands and wives have physical needs, and marriage can be used as a way to purge these needs. Have sexual intercourse with your spouse so that you do not burn with lust. It is intended to prevent lust, should you be prone to it, but as Paul says it is better for you never to need this remedy for your vile disease.

God joins together man and woman in marriage, and the sexual union is part of that one flesh relationship. It is a bonding experience, and not sinful.

The union is a holy experience if done without lust for the creation of children, but like all holy acts can be perverted by sin.

God created the sexual organs to experience pleasure. He set the bounds of that within marriage, the one flesh relationship.

No - sinful lust is a product of the fall. This is very clear in Genesis. It is only after eating the apple that Adam and Eve feel shame in their nakedness. And where does that shame come from? It comes from the shame of their new and sinful lust for each other, awoken by the apple.

 

[Dave-W]

As a Jewish man growing up in a small town, by age 30 the community would not only expect Jesus to have been married, but they'd even have decided by then who He was to marry, having determined it from the small pool of local women in the appropriate age range. She would even know that she was Jesus' best option, and her own family would be expecting Jesus any day to propose a marriage covenant.

Not how it worked in that day.

Marriages were arranged between the future husband's and wife's families, usually when they were about age 7-10.

When they reached age 11 or 12, the families would sit down and negotiate out the details of the Ketubah - marriage contract. As soon as that was done the boy would start building a house for his future family, under his dad's supervision. When he finished, he would go and bring his bride back to the house and they would be fully married.

So why did our Lord not get "arranged" as a child? IN John 8, our Lord says the pharisees are not true sons of Abraham. So they question HIS father. Apparently, there was a minority of people around that questioned why Mary turned up pregnant BEFORE she was fully married to Joseph. That meant there was a possibility of Him being illegitimate; and one who was illegitimate could only marry another illegitimate person.

And if there were no illegitimate little girls around ...

The other possibility is that our Lord Himself refused the arrangement. Either the boy or girl could refuse the relationship up until the Ketubah is signed. Afterward, it required a formal divorce to break it.

 

[RDKirk]

You should read it in context (which shouldn't be too hard since you posted the entire chapter). It is warning you against being tempted by the adulterous woman. So this section that you highlight is telling you to appreciate your wife instead. This is in love, not sex. It explicitly tells you to be "intoxicated with her love".



Yes, I don't deny that. Some husbands and wives have physical needs, and marriage can be used as a way to purge these needs. Have sexual intercourse with your spouse so that you do not burn with lust. It is intended to prevent lust, should you be prone to it, but as Paul says it is better for you never to need this remedy for your vile disease.



The union is a holy experience if done without lust for the creation of children, but like all holy acts can be perverted by sin.



No - sinful lust is a product of the fall. This is very clear in Genesis. It is only after eating the apple that Adam and Eve feel shame in their nakedness. And where does that shame come from? It comes from the shame of their new and sinful lust for each other, awoken by the apple.

By "sinful lust" are you meaning a lust that someone has allowed to lead them to sin (James 1:15), or are you saying that all the lusts (physical needs) of the flesh are inherently sinful?

If you're saying that all physical needs of the flesh are inherently sinful, then you're talking gnostic stuff.

 

[Guy Incognito]

You should read it in context (which shouldn't be too hard since you posted the entire chapter). It is warning you against being tempted by the adulterous woman. So this section that you highlight is telling you to appreciate your wife instead. This is in love, not sex. It explicitly tells you to be "intoxicated with her love".

Is sex and the sexuality displayed to ones spouse not a display of your love of them? Your intoxication of them? It also says 'may her breasts satisfy you always' - apply that unsexually, unpack it man, cause like the original poster, I don't see a non-sexual application for that part.

Yes, I don't deny that. Some husbands and wives have

physical needs, and marriage can be used as a way to purge these needs. Have sexual intercourse with your spouse so that you do not burn with lust. It is intended to prevent lust, should you be prone to it, but as Paul says it is better for you never to need this remedy for your vile disease.

Huh, you'll have to walk me through this one, cause I have NEVER ONCE heard ANY Christian pastor or marriage counsellor when talking about sex or sexual thoughts/desires for ones own spouse as 'a vile disease'.

The union is a holy experience if done without lust for the creation of children, but like all holy acts can be perverted by sin.

So, just to be clear, sex cannot be holy at all if it is for pleasure (that's to remedy my vile disease?), it is only holy if it is for procreation?

No - sinful lust is a product of the fall. This is very clear in Genesis. It is only after eating the apple that Adam and Eve feel shame in their nakedness. And where does that shame come from? It comes from the shame of their new and sinful lust for each other, awoken by the apple.

So again, I ask for clarification - are you saying that if I have sexual thoughts of my wife - it's lust and I'm sinning?

 

[RDKirk]

Not how it worked in that day.

Marriages were arranged between the future husband's and wife's families, usually when they were about age 7-10.

When they reached age 11 or 12, the families would sit down and negotiate out the details of the Ketubah - marriage contract. As soon as that was done the boy would start building a house for his future family, under his dad's supervision. When he finished, he would go and bring his bride back to the house and they would be fully married.

So why did our Lord not get "arranged" as a child? IN John 8, our Lord says the pharisees are not true sons of Abraham. So they question HIS father. Apparently, there was a minority of people around that questioned why Mary turned up pregnant BEFORE she was fully married to Joseph. That meant there was a possibility of Him being illegitimate; and one who was illegitimate could only marry another illegitimate person.

And if there were no illegitimate little girls around ...

The other possibility is that our Lord Himself refused the arrangement. Either the boy or girl could refuse the relationship up until the Ketubah is signed. Afterward, it required a formal divorce to break it.

You ended up admitting that something did not go according to Hoyle with regard to Jesus' not being betrothed, but you don't know what that variation might have been.

So you can't actually say what it wasn't.

 

[Dave-W]

Is sex and the sexuality displayed to ones spouse not a display of your love of them?

Not necessarily. It could be just a physical desire that any reasonably attractive person of the appropriate gender could satisfy.

 

[Dave-W]

You ended up admitting that something did not go according to Hoyle with regard to Jesus' not being betrothed, but you don't know what that variation might have been.
So you can't actually say what it wasn't.

According to hoyle of the western 21st century?
Or the first century in Judea?

The culture only gives a couple of options. The one I replied to was NOT one of them. There was no "by age 30." It was more "by age 14." And it was not the community, it was the parents of both the boy and the girl.

If it had been important WHICH one was the case, scripture would have recorded it.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Is sex and the sexuality displayed to ones spouse not a display of your love of them? Your intoxication of them? It also says 'may her breasts satisfy you always' - apply that unsexually, unpack it man, cause like the original poster, I don't see a non-sexual application for that part.

It can be, yes. There is nothing wrong with that and sex done in love (instead of lust) for procreation is fine. It is when you are doing it with lust in your heart that you are being sinful.

Huh, you'll have to walk me through this one, cause I have NEVER ONCE heard ANY Christian pastor or marriage counsellor when talking about sex or sexual thoughts/desires for ones own spouse as 'a vile disease'.

Well, obviously I don't know your religious background, but it is fairly ubiquitous that Christians believe lust is a sin.

So, just to be clear, sex cannot be holy at all if it is for pleasure (that's to remedy my vile disease?), it is only holy if it is for procreation?

So again, I ask for clarification - are you saying that if I have sexual thoughts of my wife - it's lust and I'm sinning?

Yes and yes (though I suppose it depends on what you mean by "pleasure" and "sexual thoughts").

 

[Jon Osterman]

By "sinful lust" are you meaning a lust that someone has allowed to lead them to sin (James 1:15), or are you saying that all the lusts (physical needs) of the flesh are inherently sinful?

If you're saying that all physical needs of the flesh are inherently sinful, then you're talking gnostic stuff.

I was using "lust" in a sexual sense, though I admit that the word often translated as lust in the bible can be interpreted as, as you put it, physical needs. But I suppose it is the same for all of them. If, for example, you eat when you are hungry in an "unlustful" way, it is not a sin, but if you eat for pleasure and not to satisfy your physical need for food, then you are sinning (gluttony).

 

[Hazelelponi]

Not necessarily. It could be just a physical desire that any reasonably attractive person of the appropriate gender could satisfy.

I disagree with you here. Used properly, sex strengthens the marriage bond.. a wife isn't just a _____ dumpster, for lack of a better descriptor.

The endorphins and hormones expressed/created due to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] are some of the same hormones a mother makes when she breast feeds her child and is seen as the endorphins/hormones which are at least partly responsible for or aid in the mother/child bond..

So along the same lines, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] and the endorphins and hormones that creates also is responsible for a strong bond between husband and wife.

And to keep a marriage alive, we actually need that bond. Two people living together can create tension no matter how good they are, that bond is therefore important, essential even for the marriage.

In this manner, sex is necessary to a bond in love/of love between husband and wife. It can't just be had with anyone.. if you try its destructive because your creating bonds and then walking away and trying to sever them - a most difficult thing.

See if you can pry a womans child from her, and you'll see what the bonds of marriage are like when healthy. It's a different type of love, but the same type of bond.

I likely digressed, but I'm just saying that bond which is created between man and wife makes it different than just any pretty girl...

 

[Dave-W]

I disagree with you here. Used properly,

I was not saying that what I described was using sex PROPERLY.

sex strengthens the marriage bond.. a wife isn't just a _____ dumpster, for lack of a better descriptor.

That I agree with, at least in theory.

I likely digressed, but I'm just saying that bond which is created between man and wife makes it different than just any pretty girl...

YEs - the bond is certainly different and deeper when it is within the covenant of marriage. (having never done it otherwise I do not have personal experience on that one) But I do know that even in marriage, sex can be so much less that that.

 

[Hazelelponi]

YEs - the bond is certainly different and deeper when it is within the covenant of marriage. (having never done it otherwise I do not have personal experience on that one) But I do know that even in marriage, sex can be so much less that that.

Ive had two marriages. One prior to being Christian and one to a Christian where I later became Christian myself.

Can it be something less outside of Christianity even within marriage?

Yes... most definitely. Although Im fairly certain due to my own circumstances within the first unsaved marriage I likely can't speak much to that. there was nothing typical about it.

So - maybe some of what's in the Godly marriage has to do with God Himself and/or love and choice in the first place.. I suppose I don't know.

I do know young men and women who run around having sex with everything that moves are constantly hurt, constantly upset over the latest "break-up" and in general destructive to some of them near to the point of suicide.. (saw it all the time when I worked, and my husband complains of the kids daily at his work)

So, while sex can be something else I think God created us all in the same manner.. sex creates a bond for everyone - some people just fight that and/or don't respect it.

 

[Dave-W]

So - maybe some of what's in the Godly marriage has to do with God Himself.. I suppose I don't know.

Perhaps. I do not know really.