kinky sex and the christian

i guess it's my fault for using both the terms "kinky sex" and "christian" in the thread title.

 

Nope. No harm, no foul, as far as I'm concerned.

 

Are you going to offer the same advice to Builder. He showed me the door before I said anything to him?

 

I spent all morning researching every verse and commentary I could find (online) on sex in the Bible. I've got a Word document 6 pages long full of highlighted and bolded verses and notes.

Jesus didn't talk about sex much, but when He did, he used the phrase "sexual immorality", and associated it with things He called "unclean" (Matthew 15:19; Mark 7:21; Revelation 2, 9, 21, 22). Jesus wouldn't pay any homage to a man-made tradition, so if He's calling something 'immoral', that has to mean there's a 'moral' code somewhere He's referring to. The only moral code regarding sex I could find was in the OT (Leviticus 18:1-24), which has been the source of much debate and controversy. What's interesting to me is that (by my inference) He seems to be legitimizing that part of the OT law, but in the same breath discounting the legitimacy of the food laws.

What seems to be an inconsistency still makes sense to me, though. In studying both Paul's letters and Genesis' description of the "one flesh" relationship between man and woman (Genesis 2:24), the Biblical take on sex (particularly for Judeo/Christian people) is that it's a very spiritual act that incorporates much more than just the physical attributes. If I'm correct, that puts sex in a different, superior category than the other more mundane attributes of the Mosaic Law (i.e. diet, etc.).

The phrase "sexual immorality" is the one used repeatedly by Paul, Barnabas (Hebrews), and Jude throughout the NT. Most of the time it's used within the context of people who do not believe. And Paul is quick to follow up in 1 Corinthians 5 with the question, "Who am I to judge those outside the church? God will judge them."

Paul does single out homosexual behavior for both men and women (Romans 1:27; 1 Corinthians 6:9), but the context of the 1COR 6:9 citing seems to be referring to those who had chosen homosexual activity, and that it was a behavior that could be and should be changed by the supernatural transaction of becoming a Christian. I only found 2 or 3 instances where it was referred to as "unnatural". But my question is, if it's possible to be born homosexual (and I tend to believe it is), what then? It is the act that's outlawed by Leviticus, not the desire. Pursuing a heterosexual relationship doesn't seem right either -- it would be living a lie, unless somehow the person had both desires. In that case, the person could pursue the hetero and try to supress the homo. Otherwise, it would seem a Christian who was born homosexual would be looking at a life of celibacy as his or her only option to living a 'righteous' life. And that brings me to my next point.

The NT is not so much about rules and boundaries as it is about striving toward an ideal. The practical question isn't "Have I stepped out of bounds yet?", but rather, "How far away am I from the ideal, and why?"

The Biblical "ideal", as best I can tell is an exclusive marriage relationship between a Christian man and a Christian woman, committed to God first and each other second. The mindset is one that says "My body doesn't just belong to me -- it belongs to both my spouse and to God, and is to be used to serve both." (Ephesians 5:22-33) Sex is to be an act of love and emotional and spiritual bonding. Pleasure seems to be a wonderful, but secondary benefit, and really isn't mentioned outside of the Song of Solomon (a.k.a. Song of Songs). However, the "serve one another" aspect of marital sex Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 7 would indicate that keeping one's spouse sexually satisfied is part of his or her marital obligation, so it would seem pleasure would be a factor there.

Finally, Biblical sex is called to be "pleasing to God" as part of a 'holy' life (1 Thessalonians 4), and in conjunction with the characteristics of the Holy Spirit which are: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Galatians 5:21-23). I would infer from that concept that domination, humiliation, and physical abuse are ruled out.

I'm sure that was probably a longer and more vague answer than you were looking for, SN, but that's what I found. :huh:

 

No, because of your comment, "One man and one woman constitutes a marriage." Granted, that is true in a Christian sense, and this is a thread about Christian doctrine. But in your recent NOTD threads, you established a reputation for stating your beliefs (which I share, for the most part) as absolute truth, which is offensive to some -- especially in here.

Still, your comment is noted, and I will be keeping a close eye to make sure you receive the same respect in here everyone else is entitled to.

 

so did i! okay, well, maybe not restricted to just the bible...

where does the female menstruation cycle enter into this? i would think that's a sex related thing, yes?

so you're saying it's practice not unlike the kosher food deal with jews? if you're a jew you must eat kosher, but if you're not have a ham and cheese and enjoy. moseltov!

where does it mention lesbians? neither romans 1:27 nor corintians 6:9 mentions women having sex with women.

we hear so much of the "sodomites" but little description of what they did. what did they do? what makes somebody a sodomite?

 

I appreciate that. Just so you know I was not looking to start a fight. I was merely stating my beliefs on the subject.

 

god seems to be a fuddy duddy

 

Leviticus 18:19
" 'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period."

Non-messianic Jews are still bound to the Mosaic Law. That is their standard, and what they depend on to save them as far as I know. Why they stopped the sacrifices, I don't know. Maybe the answer lies in the Talmud. :huh:

Romans 1:26 says "Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones." Now that covers a lot of ground and does not single out homosexual behavior specifically, but it is mentioned in the context of male homosexual actions. But again, that condemnation seems to be referring to those who were born straight but were having homosexual sex for what appears to be reasons of pure pleasure.

 

I was always under the impression that sodomy was forced anal or oral sex between two men, making it a form of rape. The story in Genesis, I feel, tends to support that interpretation, particularly at the end when the angels come to evacuate Lot and his family.

Here is what dictionary.com turned up for "sodomy"...

sod·om·y
n. Any of various forms of sexual intercourse held to be unnatural or abnormal, especially anal intercourse or bestiality.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

sod·om·y
n. Anal copulation of one male with another.
Anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
Copulation with an animal.

Source: The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary


sod·omy
noun
Etymology: Anglo-French sodomie (sexual intercourse between men), from Old French, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom, from the supposed homosexual practices of the men of the city in Genesis 19:1-11:

the crime of oral or anal sexual contact or penetration between persons or of sexual intercourse between a person and an animal; especially : the crime of forcing another person to perform oral or anal sex

Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law


sod·omy
noun
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex

Source: Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary


sodomy
n. [From Sodom. a country mentioned in the Bible: cf. F. sodomite.] Carnal copulation in a manner against nature; buggery. --Gen. xix. 5.

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary


sodomy
n : anal intercourse committed by a man with a man or woman [syn: buggery, anal sex, anal intercourse]

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University


Some sources say it's forced anal sex between men. Some say it's forced anal or oral between men. Some say any anal between men is sodomy. Some say any non-coital penetration is sodomy, even if it's hetero. It would seem that the authorities don't all have the same take, wouldn't it?