licentiousness

[Ohioprof]

1.sexually unrestrained; lascivious; libertine; lewd. 2.unrestrained by law or general morality; lawless; immoral. 3.going beyond customary or proper bounds or limits; disregarding rules.

IMHO it depends. Mans law, then the answer is no. God's law then then answer is yes.

That depends on your interpretation of "God's law."

 

[Ohioprof]

God's declaration of fornication doesn't revolve around man's measure of a committed relationship. Opens the door to everyone's judgment and confusion as to what a committed relationship is. That way is your way. It is not of God.



And this would all be relevant if God had to ask the ELCA , a housing association, a social, religious, or political community what sin was before He declared it to be sin.

He is God ALONE and did not have to ask anybody. He declared what was sin long before any of the aforementioned ever existed.

And in accordance with His Word, if you're fornicating in your long-term relationship, it's just as much a sin as is the fornication of a one night stand.

But as was said, licentiousness is a product of a person's own selfish desires and vices. It's a rebellious, sinful attitude. And it results in there being no repentance because the person can justify to themselves that what they are doing is not a sin.

Being gay is not a sin. Loving one's spouse within a committed relationship is not a sin. If you disagree, then don't get into a committed same-sex relationship.

 

[Ohioprof]

Okay, to all you hyjackers and flamers, Please stop.

Continuing with the OP, what would be the straght and narrow way for sexual morality?

To love within a committed, caring relationship, whether that is an opposite-sex relationship or a same-sex relationship.

 

[HaloHope]

To love within a committed, caring relationship, whether that is an opposite-sex relationship or a same-sex relationship.

100% Agree

 

[Brieuse]

And because the truth of man is conditional and based upon his own selfish desires, God has given His Absolute Truth that is His Word.

As demonstrated by Uber's examples, licentiousness will make you think you're free when you're actually living in bondage to sin. It is a product of a person's own selfish desires and vices. It's a rebellious, sinful attitude. And it results in there being no repentance because the person can justify to themselves that what they are doing is not a sin.

18They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more. Ephesians 4:18-19

Uber's rendition of the truth is tainted by his own desire to be licentious and thereby justify his wrongdoing as right.

His examples accommodate man's desire to appease the flesh.

If his examples are truth, then God is a liar. And as God cannot lie, then Uber's truth is WRONG.

The Bible says 1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 1 Cor. 7:1-2

The Bible also says 4Marriage 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

Taking God's Word over Uber's word, there is no gray area to qualify a "longterm, unmarried sexual relationship" as anything other than what God's WOrd says it is: sexually immoral.

He recognizes the sin of the person going to the baths and having sex outside of marriage. But somehow has availed himself to miss the point that his sin is the same, and becomes no less sin just because he CHOOSES to be sexually immoral with one person instead of ten.

And keeping with the FULL COUNSEL of GOD'S unified Word, the heterosexual in such a longterm sexual relationship with one person outside of marriage is ALSO being sexually immoral.

Sin is not an issue of repetition. And it does not stop being sin just because of longevity or because licentious men think it should be less than what it is because they have been dedicated to the one person with whom they CHOOSE to commit the sin.

So far from the truth. And God's Will.

 

[jad123]

That depends on your interpretation of "God's law."

You are right. Do you interpret the Word in a way that allows for justification of sin or in a way that holds you accountable for your sin. All this talk of interpretation and whether or not a word means what we say it means etc etc. is ridiculous at times. Genesis 2:24 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Do you interpret this differently than I do? We live in a world that does what we think. Judges 17:6 "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Sound familiar? When we ignore what God says then tthere’s no absolute authority to decide right and wrong and everyone has their own opinion as to what they should do. No interpretation necessary to understand what Jesus is saying here in Matthew 19:4-6 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

 

[Ohioprof]

You are right. Do you interpret the Word in a way that allows for justification of sin or in a way that holds you accountable for your sin. All this talk of interpretation and whether or not a word means what we say it means etc etc. is ridiculous at times. Genesis 2:24 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Do you interpret this differently than I do? We live in a world that does what we think. Judges 17:6 "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Sound familiar? When we ignore what God says then tthere’s no absolute authority to decide right and wrong and everyone has their own opinion as to what they should do. No interpretation necessary to understand what Jesus is saying here in Matthew 19:4-6 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

It sounds like I do interpret this differently from you. This Bible passage sounds to me like a proscription against divorce.

Nowhere did Jesus say that everyone should marry someone of the opposite sex. Indeed, Jesus himself did not marry someone of the opposite sex. Everyone is not the same. Some people choose to stay single. Is that a sin because of this particular Bible passage? I don't think so. Most people are born heterosexual; some people are born gay.

People are not all the same, and this diversity among people is one of the great features of being human.

 

[jad123]

]It sounds like I do interpret this differently from you. This Bible passage sounds to me like a proscription against divorce.

Huh. I see God's plan for sexual union "one flesh". Man and woman. Not man and man. Not woman and woman.

Nowhere did Jesus say that everyone should marry someone of the opposite sex. Indeed, Jesus himself did not marry someone of the opposite sex. Everyone is not the same. Some people choose to stay single. Is that a sin because of this particular Bible passage? I don't think so. Most people are born heterosexual; some people are born gay.

Yep. There it is Jesus never says that everyone should marry someone of the opposite sex so it must be fine. This is an absurd argument on face value. Jesus did not mention pedophilia, bestiality, wife beating, rape, or number of other sins so they must all be OK as well.

People are not all the same, and this diversity among people is one of the great features of being human.

I agree, people are not the same. Some are Christians, some are Jews, some are Islamic, some are white, some are black, some are men, some are women, some have brown hair, some have blonde, some are homosexuals, some are heterosexuals, some are tall, some are short, some rich, some poor, some are adulterers, murders, rapist, and child molesters, some are not. Some are saved and some are. The road is narrow, diversity does not get you into heaven so what is your point.

 

[Zaac]

Clearly I disagree with you about this. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

No we won't. If you're gonna disagree, you disagree with GOD's WORD .

You can go on thinking that my love is a "sin," which is easy for you to do if you are not gay.

Then it must be just as easy for you to think that your loveis not a sin because you are gay.

But for the record, I didn't say anybody's love is a sin. The only way I said that is if we are now equating love and the committing of fornicative homosexual/heterosexual acts.

It's easy to point fingers at what you judge to be someone else's sin. It's especially easy for someone who is heterosexual to point fingers at gay people and say, "Those people are sinning." It's harder to look at yourself and remove the log from your own eye.

If I were fornicating with someone I'd call that fornication too.

As has been said, sin is sin. Your fornication is the same as heterosexual fornication. The issue in this forum is that many don't think their fornication is sin.

 

[Zaac]

Being gay is not a sin. Loving one's spouse within a committed relationship is not a sin. If you disagree, then don't get into a committed same-sex relationship.

I didn't say being gay was a sin. God speaks to the sexual acts that you perform in that relationship as sin. You CHOOSE to commit sin.

 

[UberLutheran]

So, what? You have a theory but don't want to back it up?

I told you what I thought, and that's all I need to say about it.

 

[UberLutheran]

You are right. Do you interpret the Word in a way that allows for justification of sin or in a way that holds you accountable for your sin. All this talk of interpretation and whether or not a word means what we say it means etc etc. is ridiculous at times. Genesis 2:24 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Do you interpret this differently than I do? We live in a world that does what we think. Judges 17:6 "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Sound familiar? When we ignore what God says then tthere’s no absolute authority to decide right and wrong and everyone has their own opinion as to what they should do. No interpretation necessary to understand what Jesus is saying here in Matthew 19:4-6 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

No — we interpret it in a way to let God do the god-ing, instead of using the Bible in such a way so that WE can do the god-ing.

God does not cease to be God just because a law written in Leviticus 3,000 years ago (and canonized 2,000 years ago) doesn't apply — but then again, I would think that fundies had read enough of Galatians and James to know that if you start adding in one law, or breaking one law — you're now beholden to the ENTIRE law and if you've broken one law, you've broken them all (and there are 612 other laws besides the one about homosexuality).

 

[UberLutheran]

"Fundies, Conservatives, Liberals, Gays" Call each other people!

How about:

"Them durned fundies..."
"Them durned conservatives..."
"Them durned liberals..."
"Them durned gays..."

(just kidding! )

 

[Tonks]

Closing for thread clean up.

 

[Gwenyfur]

The thread's been cleaned up

Remember to address the Topic not the poster

Theology Rules

 

[david_x]

To love within a committed, caring relationship, whether that is an opposite-sex relationship or a same-sex relationship.

Wouldn't the right thing be to obstain from anything sexual? Or in the extreme, get married?

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Wouldn't the right thing be to obstain from anything sexual? Or in the extreme, get married?

Marriage is preferable...and it's only a matter of time.

 

[UberLutheran]

Marriage is preferable...and it's only a matter of time.

I'd be perfectly happy with civil unions for both straight and gay couples; and leave the churches free to marry and bless whomever they wanted.

 

[david_x]

Marriage is preferable...and it's only a matter of time.

Not to the early church. Celibecy was preferable, unless you had to get married.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

I'd be perfectly happy with civil unions for both straight and gay couples; and leave the churches free to marry and bless whomever they wanted.

I will accept civil unions, for the time being.

My priest actually says we GLBT people should consider NOT fighting for marriage...that God has a special purpose for us. He wonders if our relationships can reflect a deeper relationship with God that regular marriage.

He may have a good point.