Ainesis
Leaning on Him
I remember some of your posts in this area.Polycarp1 said:Ainesis: In other threads, it's been my burden to point out that people are using the term "homosexuality" in two distinct meanings -- the orientation of being romantically and sexually attracted to someone of the same sex, and the sexual actions taken by some of those people. For obvious reasons, it makes a big difference which meaning you're implying when you say the word.
I would also add that God's directions relating to sex not only address activities outside of marriage, or for personal gratification at the expnse of others, but also acts that were deemed by Him to be unclean.Polycarp1 said:I think that a similar problem with sodomy exists here. Bypassing for the moment Ezekiel's description of the "iniquity of Sodom" -- which I think has some important things to say to the rest of us on Christian morality -- what God condemns regarding sex is a wide assortment of sexual practices outside marriage and for personal gratification at the expense of another.
I would disagree. The word for whoremonger covers all illicit or unlawful sexual activity. I have seen no Scriptures indicating that illicit sexual activities are no longer illicit when practiced between husband and wife. I have seen no Scriptures that say illicit sexual practices are no longer illicit when the parties mutually consent to it.Polycarp1 said:Certainly a married man can be a whoremonger or adulterer -- but not with his wife. By definition of those terms he is having sexual relations outside the marriage bond and in violation of his vows in committing them. Consensual sexual activity between a married couple for mutual pleasure and perhaps procreation cannot be adulterous by definition, and one would need to strain "whoremonger" to the limits of the credible to find any way to apply it to consensual marital sex.
The framework for what is sinful is not dictated by the relationship expressing the sin, but by God who alone defines what is sinful. So, unless you can show where God states that these acts are not sinful in a marriage, I would have to go back to His classification that these acts are sinful.
I would agree that God is not interested in laying down a generic set of rules for sexuality within marriage. He does not have to because He has already indicated what is forbidden regarding sexual actvities. Therefore, why would He need to address sex in marriage specifically unless those prohibitions change for married couples?Polycarp1 said:My conclusion in an earlier post is that God is not particularly interested in laying down a generic set of rules for sexuality within marriage -- He created us to enjoy sex within marriage, after all -- but rather that what is offensive or sinful to you individually, that you should not do, because for you it is sin. But for a couple to take pleasure in each other's bodies within a loving marital bond is not sinful but the reason for which God created us as sexual creatures. I encourage the reading of Romans 14 and the analogies which Paul draws there, as to what the proper use of Christian liberty in His service might be, and seeing how it may apply to this question.
Yes, we certainly have liberty in Christ. I am a strong proponent of that. However, that liberty does not give us a license to sin.
Paul has not written this text to say that our own feelings are the determinants of what is sinful. But he encourages us to let each other's faith grow so that we can each in our own time and way, come to appreciate the liberty that we have in Christ.
Paul is not saying that if we don't believe something to be sinful, then it isn't. Nor is he encouraging us to use our feelings as a barometer for identifying sin. It is not our belief that makes something sinful, but what God determines to be sinful.
Upvote
0