Originally posted by dj2beckerSorry, your sources are incorrect. The term 'porneia' refers to prostitution, not to fornication. There is no evidence 'porneia' was used to refer to anything broader or more inclusive than the what the term meant in common usage at the time. Look at the etymology of the word. It comes from 'porne' (a prostitute), which comes from 'pernemi' (to sell). You are simply stipulating, without any evidence, that 'porneia' is used in some some idiosyncratic way.
Regarding divorce, Jesus Christ stated: "Whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery." (Matt. 19:9) "Everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of fornication, makes her a su ...[text shortened]... "to prostitute, debauch."
http://quotes.watchtower.ca/oral.htm
Other Christians may have translated 'porneia' as 'fornication', but this was a mistaken translation on their part. Apparently, they allowed their own disgust for human sexuality to color their interpretations.
So, there is no evidence that 'porneia' includes the practice or oral sex (though it would include the selling of such a service). Further, even if there was such evidence, it wouldn't include oral sex practiced consentually between husband and wife. So, oral sex itself is not a sin.
Originally posted by bbarrI wonder if Dj2becker realized that his source was a website for Jehovah's Witnesses. Somehow, I doubt it.
Sorry, your sources are incorrect. The term 'porneia' refers to prostitution, not to fornication. There is no evidence 'porneia' was used to refer to anything broader or more inclusive than the what the term meant in common usage at the time. Look at the etymology of the word. It comes from 'porne' (a prostitute), which comes from 'pernemi' (to sel ...[text shortened]... ude oral sex practiced consentually between husband and wife. So, oral sex itself is not a sin.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by bbarrporneia - "Fornication, lewdness, or any sexual sin" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.1201, emphasis added)
Sorry, your sources are incorrect. The term 'porneia' refers to prostitution, not to fornication. There is no evidence 'porneia' was used to refer to anything broader or more inclusive than the what the term meant in common usage at the time. Look at the etymology of the word. It comes from 'porne' (a prostitute), which comes from 'pernemi' (to sel ...[text shortened]... ude oral sex practiced consentually between husband and wife. So, oral sex itself is not a sin.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by bbarrSorry, your sources are incorrect. The term 'porneia' refers to prostitution, not to fornication.
Sorry, your sources are incorrect. The term 'porneia' refers to prostitution, not to fornication. There is no evidence 'porneia' was used to refer to anything broader or more inclusive than the what the term meant in common usage at the time. Look at the etymology of the word. It comes from 'porne' (a prostitute), which comes from 'pernemi' (to sel ...[text shortened]... ude oral sex practiced consentually between husband and wife. So, oral sex itself is not a sin.
The Greek word that is alternately translated as "fornication" or "sexual immorality" (depending on the Bible version) is porneia. Some claim this word only refers to prostitution and not pre-marital sex in general.
The word is defined by Louw and Nida's Greek-English Lexicon as, "to engage in sexual immorality of any kind, often with the implication of prostitution - 'engage in illicit sex, to commit fornication, sexual immorality, fornication, prostitution.'"
Then there's 1Corinthians 7:1, "Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman." The context of this passage indicates "touch" refers to touching a woman in such a way as to "ignite" the man's or the woman's sexual passions (see verse 9). Oral sex would most definitely qualify, along with other forms of sexual touching.
Putting all of the above together, sexual intercourse, oral sex, seeing the nakedness of another, or even touching someone in a sexual way that "ignites" either person's sexual passions are all indicated as being wrong Biblically if the persons involved are not married. Unfortunately, there is no one English word that could be used to translate porneia which would include all of these concepts.
http://www.dtl.org/ethics/article/pre-marital/always-sin.htm
Originally posted by dj2beckerThe first sentence from that source:
I found this site to be useful for a Bible believing Christian:
http://achristiancounselor.com/oralsex.html
"There may not be a specific passage in the Bible on the subject of oral sex, but for sure scriptures leading to NOT to practise this."
Apart from making no sense this also contradicts what you are trying to say.
This is from that site dj2becker linked to...
First, oral sex is not natural. It is contrary to natural law. If oral sex is OK, then are anal sex or nasal sex also OK? There must be some natural parameters to sexual expression. Otherwise, we have little reason not to permit homosexual activity or even sex between humans and animals. Something must be natural, and therefore other things unnatural.
Second, I have been asked to counsel over a hundred married couples about oral sex as foreplay. After some time of discernment, not one has maintained that oral sex was a true expression of love. The motivation behind oral sex is often lust. The spouse is not the focus of the sexual foreplay; rather, sexual stimulation is the focus. It could almost be said that one spouse is having sex with sex rather than with the other spouse. This focus on sex rather than on the spouse is a poison to love and marriage.
I have a few comments on those comments...
One of the great problems with organized religion is sexual repression, resulting from the tendency to fear the body, to regard it as something of an impediment to spiritual development. This is mostly a wrong view, and one that is potentially psychologically poisonous as well.
Sex is condemned as something "unholy" or "sinful" when it's regarded as something separate from one's self. That is, when lust is made wrong, seen in a fearful light, it gets mentally excised from our nature and regarded as something unfortunate that we somehow have to battle with.
Sexual energy is not only completely natural, it lies at the basis of the procreative forces of life. To come to an understanding and acceptance of our humanity, we need to embrace the body, not dissociate from it. Many organized religions teach and counsel a dissociation from the body, and a repression of natural forces. Repression generally leads to perversion. That such repression is unnatural can easily be seen in the numerous examples of sexual perversion found amongst priests, for eg.
The problem lies not in the specific sexual act being undertaken, the problem lies in the mind of the one judging and fearing sexual energy, and in specific, their own sexual desires. Whenever we fear and condemn our own desires, we will tend to project such fear exterally, and begin "seeing" perversion everywhere. People who are sexually repressed "see" sex all around them. Much like people who repress their anger tend to be hypersensitive to anger, etc.
In terms of psychopathology, deviancy is generally born out of an upbringing that involved abuse and/or repression, but mostly, the deviant was made to feel guilty, or wrong, about their sexuality. When a young person feels guilty about their natural sexual desires, they repress the desires and begin to "split" internally into two people -- a socialized person (or a "religious" person) and a lustful person who dreams of whores at night, or indulges in endless masturbation -- or if more powerfully repressed, moves into deviancy of other orders, or lastly, controlls the repressions but becomes militantly judgmental of others.
Much of the Inquisition was likely fueled on such pathology. The ancient imagery of the Christian "devil" as a goat or horned animal is largely a derivation of the old pagan Horned God, sometimes called "Cernunnos", or the Greek Pan or Roman Faunas. These were archetypes that represented virility and passion, male power. But because the religious ecclesiastical authorities were mostly celibates what was getting projected were the results of repressed male sexuality -- hence the masculine, goat-like imagery of the devil. The Christian devil is mostly an symbol of repressed male sexuality. Hence the perverted imagery associated with it.
The issue is not what kind of sexual acts we are engaged in, the issue is feeling innocent about one's sexuality and comfortable within one's body. One then naturally relates to others with more heart, and so in ways that are not harmful.