fornication?

[dancingqueen]

I was looking up the definition of "fornication" and on dictionary.com there where some definitions that specified "Fornication" as "voluntary sex between an unmarried <u>man</u> and an unmarried <u>woman</u> so, by this definition the act of homosexuality does not fall under this definition. Thoughts?

(I really want to have a legitamet discussion about this, I have yet to see a mature discussion on this topic. any mud-slinging and I will ask a moderator to edit this)

[Soundbear]

Obviously this definition is incomplete if homosexual marriage is legitimate. Since from my point of view it is not, that hardly leaves homosexual sex out of the definition of fornication.

Intimacy in sexual relations has a profound effect on every human being. Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results.

[dancingqueen]

in making my question I was assuming that gay marriages are not legitamate (as it says in the Bible) so my question is as this deffinition specifies sex between consenting unwed man and woman. My second inquiery then is
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Code:</div><div class="ubbcode-body ubbcode-pre" style="height: 34px;"><pre> Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </pre></div></div> is it not possible to have a loving commited relationship without being married?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">in making my question I was assuming that gay marriages are not legitamate (as it says in the Bible) so my question is as this deffinition specifies sex between consenting unwed man and woman. My second inquiery then is
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Code:</div><div class="ubbcode-body ubbcode-pre" style="height: 34px;"><pre> Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </pre></div></div> is it not possible to have a loving commited relationship without being married? </div></div>

The bible doesn't comment on gay marriage for the simple reason that it was just so far outside the thoughts of the Jewish society of the times. Gay marriage that is, not homosexuality, obviously. Because homosexual acts were considerd sin, gay marriage would not even be thought of.

I suppose it might be possible to have a loving commited relationship without being married. But please consider the following.

It's pretty obvious from our society that a marriage is much more stable and better for children than the alternative. The vast majority of messed up kids come from broken or non-existent marriages. And it doesn't help the adults either.

Second, I have heard many times over the years men joking about marriage and saying something like, "The sex he's getting now is NOTHING like the sex he's gonna get!", the reality being that a woman reacts VERY differently when the man makes a firm commitment to her. So something is different.

[dancingqueen]

This question has been asked many times, and not really answered as far as I can see. Aside from the verse that says man shall not lie with man as he does with woman, (I still do not belive this verse has anything to do with the homosexual relationship, but the issue has been beaten to death, so I will move on) where else in the Bible are homosexual acts said to be forbidden? I don't belive homosexuality to be fornication because I have seen it defined as the willing sex between an unwed woman and an unwed man. I would be interested to know if God or Jesus define it differently in the Bible.

[kuietgrl (got lost)]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's pretty obvious from our society that a marriage is much more stable and better for children than the alternative. The vast majority of messed up kids come from broken or non-existent marriages. And it doesn't help the adults either.</div></div>

My parents separated a few years ago. I had been telling them since I was about 5 to divorce eachother. So no, marriage is not always a better environment for a child.

As for fornication, personally, I wouldn't care how the dictionary chose to define it. I strongly believe that you do NOT have to be married to have a loving, lasting relationship. Marriage (for some) is just a defining ceremony to commit once and for all. These days, marriage really doesn't mean the same as it did 50 years ago. With divorce rates so high, people seem to be getting married because it's the "right" thing to do.

I'm not married. I've never been married and I never plan on getting married. That certainly doesn't mean my relationship is destined to fail or that my daughter will grow up in an unstable house.

And I suppose fornication is all I will ever have /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif If it's fornication when you are not married...what is it called when you are married?

[binky]

"what is it called when you are married?"
rare

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: *kuietgrl*</div><div class="ubbcode-body">what is it called when you are married? </div></div>

apparently that's just sex /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: *kuietgrl*</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

My parents separated a few years ago. I had been telling them since I was about 5 to divorce eachother. So no, marriage is not always a better environment for a child.

As for fornication, personally, I wouldn't care how the dictionary chose to define it. I strongly believe that you do NOT have to be married to have a loving, lasting relationship. Marriage (for some) is just a defining ceremony to commit once and for all. These days, marriage really doesn't mean the same as it did 50 years ago. With divorce rates so high, people seem to be getting married because it's the "right" thing to do.

I'm not married. I've never been married and I never plan on getting married. That certainly doesn't mean my relationship is destined to fail or that my daughter will grow up in an unstable house.
</div></div>

I wish you all the best.

Statistically your chances are poorer than a married couple.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: yo_chooch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"what is it called when you are married?"
rare </div></div>

I feel really sorry for anyone who thinks this. Because it's just not true.

[Soundbear]

“Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but *****mongers and adulterers God will judge.” (Heb 13:4 AV)

The corollary is that sex outside of marriage IS defiled.

[kuietgrl (got lost)]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I wish you all the best.

Statistically your chances are poorer than a married couple. </div></div>

I've never been one for statistics.

Think about it. Obviously, the number of unmarried couples that break up will be higher than that of married couples. People go through quite a few duds before finding Mr or Mrs Right. Just because my S.O. and I don't feel we need to get married to commit fully to one another doesn't mean we will break up.

It makes perfect sense.

However, I am in no way whatsoever religious. So sex outside of marriage and God judging me for it...I couldn't care less. It means absolutely nothing to me. I'm sure there are VERY few (if any) people who go into marriage as a virgin /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif

[Soundbear]

I understand. Thanks.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but *****mongers and adulterers God will judge.” (Heb 13:4 AV)

The corollary is that sex outside of marriage IS defiled.


</div></div>

that just tells me God will judge these people. Is God's judgment always a bad thing? People pass judgment all the time, it's not always bad

[Soundbear]

I think the answer to part of that is in that little story I told, true, about the sex being better AFTER marriage. The reason that is true is that (especially) women are designed in such a way that security is a major concern to them. Once that security is assured, as in a marriage, she feels freer to give more of herself. I realize that marriages break up and security in this age is poor at best, but that's the way she is made. Please note this is NOT a religious observation, but one I have heard from decidedly NON-christians over the years.

The bible says God will judge, but He also knows that only within marriage are the man and woman truly complete.

Is God's judgement a bad thing?? Only if one passes into the next world still determined to reject God. All of us sin, but, like our own children, once we are "in" the family, nothing can separate us from the love of God.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The reason that is true is that (especially) women are designed in such a way that security is a major concern to them. Once that security is assured, as in a marriage, she feels freer to give more of herself.</div></div>

I like to think that a woman (or man) that marriage is not the only means by which they can feel their security is assured, espesially in this ay and age where it happening more often that a there really is no absolute garuntee of security, therefore marriage not being required to feel secure.
so, with times is it unreasonable to belive God too can know differently?

This last phrase you make:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> like our own children, once we are "in" the family, nothing can separate us from the love of God. </div></div>
are you saying that a person who once loved God but no longer does, in fact hates all he stands for is still protected under the grace of God?
The reason I ask is because this was me at one point, I was a very devout Christian who turned to not only ignore the word of God but I outright defied it, I had a complete hatered for all he stood for. I have since then grown to analyze my belifes and now although not a Christian grown to respect the word of God more.

[bluekrissyspikes]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: yo_chooch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"what is it called when you are married?"
rare </div></div>
lol

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I like to think that a woman (or man) that marriage is not the only means by which they can feel their security is assured, espesially in this ay and age where it happening more often that a there really is no absolute garuntee of security, therefore marriage not being required to feel secure.
so, with times is it unreasonable to belive God too can know differently?

This last phrase you make:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> like our own children, once we are "in" the family, nothing can separate us from the love of God. </div></div>
are you saying that a person who once loved God but no longer does, in fact hates all he stands for is still protected under the grace of God?
The reason I ask is because this was me at one point, I was a very devout Christian who turned to not only ignore the word of God but I outright defied it, I had a complete hatered for all he stood for. I have since then grown to analyze my belifes and now although not a Christian grown to respect the word of God more. </div></div>

Re security. This age we are in is hardly the only time in history when the security of the family, and men and women is threatened. I believe that God DID let us know the best way, the most secure way for a family to exist, and that is through a committed man/woman marriage relationship.

Re "Once loving God". God knows the heart, and a true committed person becomes His child. Consider that the slightest, most insignificant sin is enough to separate man from the holiness of God. But, just as if your own son challenged your authority, left home and defied you, nothing and no one can change the relationship.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Doc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Seeing as how this topic has stayed on course, I'll stick my toe in the water. With regard to marriage as mentioned several times so far, how long has marriage been a formal ceremony as it is now, and not just a declaration of joining under God? </div></div>

I wonder. Have to look.

From what I know now, marriage has always been something recognized, and celebrated, by the community.

[GenX]

Marriage was simply a matter of contractual agreement for centuries . It was the Catholic Church that turned it onto something profound and sacred.

[Soundbear]

http://www.modern-communism.ca/mc43103.htm

"In Western Europe, it was not until the Middle Ages that marriage in churches began to occur. However, church marriages were not the norm until the 17th century, and then only for the nobility."

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marriage was simply a matter of contractual agreement for centuries . It was the Catholic Church that turned it onto something profound and sacred. </div></div>

Our best biblical example, Joseph and Mary, indicates that marriage was much more than a "contractual agreement" long before the ROMAN Catholic church came along.

[KDawg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marriage was simply a matter of contractual agreement for centuries . It was the Catholic Church that turned it onto something profound and sacred. </div></div>

You truly are brainwashed. Are you seriously claiming that what the Catholic Church says trumps the Word of God?

Genesis 2:18-24 reads:

And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.
And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
And Adam said:
“This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Call me crazy, but I believe that what transpired in the Garden of Eden preceded the Catholic Church. God and God alone decides what is sacred.

[Soundbear]

"Are you seriously claiming that what the Catholic Church says trumps the Word of God?"

Yes.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marriage was simply a matter of contractual agreement for centuries . It was the Catholic Church that turned it onto something profound and sacred. </div></div>

You truly are brainwashed. Are you seriously claiming that what the Catholic Church says trumps the Word of God?

Genesis 2:18-24 reads:

And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.
And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
And Adam said:
“This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Call me crazy, but I believe that what transpired in the Garden of Eden preceded the Catholic Church. God and God alone decides what is sacred.


</div></div>

You totally took it out of context, which is common MO for Protestants who know their theology is usually not based on theories more than 150 years old.

Be that as it may...

Of course God made marriage holy. way before the Catholic Church. But it was the Catholic Church that provided the theological and philosophical foundations to the rest of the world, through the Church Fathers.

Who else called marriage a holy union of the One God before Christianity, or its predecessor, Judaism? No one. And who expounded on that profound theory? The Catholic Church.

You guys should really attempt to address what was said, and not what you need to be said, in order to keep your charade going.

Divorce was once forbidden in Protestantism, now it is okay.

Birth control was once forbidden in Protestantism, now it's okay.

Abortion was once forbidden in Protestantism,now some sects are making their peace with it, and no doubt others will follow.

Why?

Because Protestantism is a man-made creation, born out of the political atmosphere of 16th Century Bavaria. Much of your theology runs no more deep than one hundred years.

Protestantism changes with the times.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Are you seriously claiming that what the Catholic Church says trumps the Word of God?"

Yes. </div></div>

You're answering for me???

You can't even support your own beliefs, but you can speak to mine?

Show me one instance where I said the Catholic Church trumps the word of God.

How sad you Protestants are. You must twist things in order to somehow score a point.

[Soundbear]

Generalizations.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://www.modern-communism.ca/mc43103.htm

"In Western Europe, it was not until the Middle Ages that marriage in churches began to occur. However, church marriages were not the norm until the 17th century, and then only for the nobility." </div></div>

so why would a marriage be only for nobility if it is supposed to be the only means by which people can have sex without being guilty of fornication? That would tell me only nobility can procreate.

about the middle ages where marriages began occuring, you said marriages in churches where not the Norm, I wonder if there where other places marriages began occuring

[KDawg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You totally took it out of context, which is common MO for Protestants who know their theology is usually not based on theories more than 150 years old.

Be that as it may...

Of course God made marriage holy. way before the Catholic Church. But it was the Catholic Church that provided the theological and philosophical foundations to the rest of the world, through the Church Fathers.

Who else called marriage a holy union of the One God before Christianity, or its predecessor, Judaism? No one. And who expounded on that profound theory? The Catholic Church.

You guys should really attempt to address what was said, and not what you need to be said, in order to keep your charade going.

Divorce was once forbidden in Protestantism, now it is okay.

Birth control was once forbidden in Protestantism, now it's okay.

Abortion was once forbidden in Protestantism,now some sects are making their peace with it, and no doubt others will follow.

Why?

Because Protestantism is a man-made creation, born out of the political atmosphere of 16th Century Bavaria. Much of your theology runs no more deep than one hundred years.

Protestantism changes with the times.</div></div>

What did I take out of context? You said:

"Marriage was simply a matter of contractual agreement for centuries . It was the Catholic Church that turned it onto something profound and sacred."

I'm saying God did that in the Garden of Eden. As for your other claims, I'll take your word for them.

Does the Catholic Church allow divorce?

BTW, I'm no agent with any Protestant organization who has an "MO." You don't need to look for enemies to battle here.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm saying God did that in the Garden of Eden. As for your other claims, I'll take your word for them.</div></div>
I didn't read that.
I read a couple of verses from the Bible explaining how and why Eve was created. There was nothing mentioned of a marriage in what you posted

[KDawg]

Most of that quote was about how Eve was created, but here's the first couple of sentences:
And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

The last part of the verses reads:
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

That's a description of marriage isn't it (minus the white gown and drunk wedding party)?

[dancingqueen]

it's a description of how we see a marriage in this day and age, but I don't see this as being valid in defining a marriage as God sees it. I'm saying this because in the passage you quoted it does not say anywhere that God called this a marriage. I am speaking only of the term marriage. Besides this issue, the passage you read also openes up more questions for me. but are of an unrelated topic.

[KDawg]

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

That pretty much sums it up doesn't it? The Bible uses the word "wife."

[dancingqueen]

What your doing here is you (not just you but many others who define the Bible) take passages and wordings that are abstract or could have different meanings and make them to mean other things. To you this passage is about creating a marriage from a man and a woman, to me this could be about creating a marriage out of two people that are comparable to each other.

[KDawg]

I'm no expert in ancient languages, but the word "wife" is there.

What else does could mean?

[dancingqueen]

so, what if the way He intend to mean by "Wife" is not nessesaraly that it has to be a woman. Wha if he meant wife as the person that is comparable to the other? and the sex of the person does not matter? What I'm saying is what is said in the Bible has no definitions, no clear measurable lines. how can we take what is said in the bible as law for man to follow?

[KDawg]

We have to look at the context in which the term "wife" was used. In Genesis 2:18-24, it was used in reference to Eve.

[dancingqueen]

so if there is only one context a word or subject is used in the Bible, then there is only one possibility? how then, would you define something that is not mentioned in the Bible?

[KDawg]

It's not used only in one context:

Genesis 16:1: Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. And she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar.

Matthew 1:20: But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.

Etc. As far as the term "wife" goes, there is no doubt that it is always in reference to a woman.

[dancingqueen]

I don't mean only the term Wife by my question. Examples cannot define. Examples help to define, but they alone cannot define terms. It is very well known that a much smaller percentage of the world is homosexual. So is it that hard to belive that a homosexual relationship was not used as an example in the Bible?

[KDawg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it's a description of how we see a marriage in this day and age, but I don't see this as being valid in defining a marriage as God sees it. I'm saying this because in the passage you quoted it does not say anywhere that God called this a marriage. I am speaking only of the term marriage.</div></div>

I thought we were talking about the term marriage, as defined by God, in the Bible.

[dancingqueen]

I'm talking about fornication, which in order to understand that we need to know about marriage, and how it is defined in the Bible. I have not seen anywhere in the Bible where it is defined (I could be wrong I am not an avid rader of the Bible) All I see in the Bible are examples, however, you cannot define something through examples alone. I am wondering if you, or anyone else can tell me how a marriage is defined in the Bible.

[Verotik]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obviously this definition is incomplete if homosexual marriage is legitimate. Since from my point of view it is not, that hardly leaves homosexual sex out of the definition of fornication.

Intimacy in sexual relations has a profound effect on every human being. Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </div></div>

no friends with benefits for you

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm talking about fornication, which in order to understand that we need to know about marriage, and how it is defined in the Bible. I have not seen anywhere in the Bible where it is defined (I could be wrong I am not an avid rader of the Bible) All I see in the Bible are examples, however, you cannot define something through examples alone. I am wondering if you, or anyone else can tell me how a marriage is defined in the Bible. </div></div>

By defined you mean "This is blah lah blah"???

How many commonly understood concepts in the bible are defined like that? I think you're splitting hairs.

[dancingqueen]

I would excpect that if one is to live their life by something, they would want to know things in fairly deep detail. Otherwise, it is just blindly following the word of one person cause they say you have to does that make sence?

[Soundbear]

I'm not going to follow the word of one person. I'm going to read what scripture says about the matter (any matter) and seek God's guidance to understand it. What God thinks about marriage is quite clear to me.

[KDawg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> All I see in the Bible are examples, however, you cannot define something through examples alone. I am wondering if you, or anyone else can tell me how a marriage is defined in the Bible. </div></div>

Actually you can, if the examples are always the same (marriage = man + wife, where wife is a woman).

[Soundbear]

Using examples only breaks down where there are contradictions.

[Soundbear]

I think you don't really know what sex is all about.

[dancingqueen]

How does God define Fornication in the Bible?

Barry, just ignore KWB, he/she is a troll, and this thread is going really well

[Soundbear]

Here's a definition from a book I have:

FORNICATION
[for nih KAY shun]-- sexual relationships outside the bonds of marriage. The technical distinction between fornication and ADULTERY is that adultery involves married persons while fornication involves those who are unmarried. But the New Testament often uses the term in a general sense for any unchastity. Of the seven lists of sins found in the writings of the apostle Paul, the word fornication is found in five of them and is first on the list each time &lt;1 Cor. 5:11; Col. 3:5&gt;. In the Book of Revelation, fornication is symbolic of how idolatry and pagan religion defiles true worship of God &lt;Rev. 14:8; 17:4&gt;.
Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary 1986

I think that's quite correct.

[dancingqueen]

but how does the Bible define it?

[Flawless Disaster]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Intimacy in sexual relations has a profound effect on every human being. Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </div></div>

I know a few people who enjoy having sex outside of a relationship and have had many positive results. As long as both parties (or multiple parties in some cases) agree with the fact that there are to be no strings attached and it is simply sex. Sex can be one of the best workouts the body can have. I remember reading in some magazine that 20 minutes of continuous sex equates to a 1 hour workout.

[KDawg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but how does the Bible define it? </div></div>

how does the Bible define stealing?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Flawless Disaster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Intimacy in sexual relations has a profound effect on every human being. Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </div></div>

I know a few people who enjoy having sex outside of a relationship and have had many positive results. As long as both parties (or multiple parties in some cases) agree with the fact that there are to be no strings attached and it is simply sex. Sex can be one of the best workouts the body can have. I remember reading in some magazine that 20 minutes of continuous sex equates to a 1 hour workout. </div></div>

How do you define positive results??

I would define them as a life long intimate relationship made deeper by physical intimacy, and when the desire for sexual intimacy diminishes over time, the trust and love continues, un-damaged by the faithlessness of sex outside the marriage.

[Flawless Disaster]

I define positive results as two consenting people having sex and both being satisfied. Maybe a relationship comes out of the sexual encounter or maybe its just friends with benefits. I know a few people who have gone through the friends with benefits thing and it worked out quite well for them. Both parties knew that no strings were attached and it was simply sex. The only reason why they dont do it anymore is because one of them got into a relationship.

[Soundbear]

"The only reason why they dont do it anymore is because one of them got into a relationship."

There ya go. Why did they stop?? You make my point. If sex is just sex, there would be no reason to.

[Flawless Disaster]

They stopped because one of them entered a relationship. I dont see how I made your point. a positive thing came of this. Two people get sexually satisfied with no strings attached. I dont see the harm in that simply because it could be a lot worse.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Two people get sexually satisfied with no strings attached </div></div>

Certainly we are more than just animals who must satisfy urges at any cost necessary. But, one would be hard pressed to think so, judging by your comment.

Do we need sex like we need food? Air? Water?

Sex is a consummation of something much larger. It is part of the process, not the entire process. The giving of one to another has a spiritual and physical component. One without the other is incomplete. That is why all those so-called 'one night stands' have brought much more misery and confusion than happiness.

[Flawless Disaster]

Well certainly you have different views on casual sex than I do. In answer to your question "Do we need sex like we need food? Air? Water?", to some people yes. To me, no. Some people need sex like they need to eat. Its more of an addiction than anything else.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but how does the Bible define it? </div></div>

how does the Bible define stealing? </div></div>

this thread is not about stealing. I hav a vauge idea of what Fornication means according to Webster, but hat does fornication mean according to God? I imagine it is not defined as in "Fonication is......." but from what I understand between KDawg and Barry that we use the examples given to us by the Bible and use those to define what God wants/means in the Bible. So I wonder, has God used the example of two men or two women having sex as an example of Fornication or are all examples in the Bible using a man and a woman having premarital sex as his examples?

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but how does the Bible define it? </div></div>

how does the Bible define stealing? </div></div>

I hav a vauge idea of what Fornication means according to Webster, </div></div>

http://www.project80s.com/television/photos/webster.jpg

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Flawless Disaster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They stopped because one of them entered a relationship. I dont see how I made your point. a positive thing came of this. Two people get sexually satisfied with no strings attached. I dont see the harm in that simply because it could be a lot worse. </div></div>

Hey, if people can get sexually satisfied with no strings attached, why should entering a relationship stop that with somebody else??

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but how does the Bible define it? </div></div>

how does the Bible define stealing? </div></div>

this thread is not about stealing. I hav a vauge idea of what Fornication means according to Webster, but hat does fornication mean according to God? I imagine it is not defined as in "Fonication is......." but from what I understand between KDawg and Barry that we use the examples given to us by the Bible and use those to define what God wants/means in the Bible. So I wonder, has God used the example of two men or two women having sex as an example of Fornication or are all examples in the Bible using a man and a woman having premarital sex as his examples? </div></div>

Of course this isn't about stealing. but the bible doesn't define stealing either. Do we continue to steal, or think that God must have meant something else just because the bible doesn't say, "Stealing is....".

Fornication is sex outside of marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Therefore sex between a unmarried people of any gender is fornication.

[Flawless Disaster]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey, if people can get sexually satisfied with no strings attached, why should entering a relationship stop that with somebody else??</div></div>

Simply because having sex outside of a relationship is cheating which is wrong. I dont know why someone entered a relationship but you fail to realize that sex outside of a relationship doesnt always yield negative results.

[Soundbear]

Forgive me if I find that totally contradictory.

BTW, I think you reversed what I said.

"Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results."

[Flawless Disaster]

I didnt find anything in my post that was contradictory.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results."</div></div>

Not always.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KDawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but how does the Bible define it? </div></div>

how does the Bible define stealing? </div></div>

this thread is not about stealing. I hav a vauge idea of what Fornication means according to Webster, but hat does fornication mean according to God? I imagine it is not defined as in "Fonication is......." but from what I understand between KDawg and Barry that we use the examples given to us by the Bible and use those to define what God wants/means in the Bible. So I wonder, has God used the example of two men or two women having sex as an example of Fornication or are all examples in the Bible using a man and a woman having premarital sex as his examples? </div></div>

Of course this isn't about stealing. but the bible doesn't define stealing either. Do we continue to steal, or think that God must have meant something else just because the bible doesn't say, "Stealing is....".

Fornication is sex outside of marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Therefore sex between a unmarried people of any gender is fornication. </div></div>

I don't think that just because it is not specified in the Bible that it is right or wrong. The problems I have with many Religious people and groups is not what is or is not said, but how people interperate the Bible. To my understanding and knowledge (which I will admit is not very vast) of the Bible and what I can gather from your ideas is that marriage is defined in the Bible as a man and a woman coming together as one under God. You further belive this as reinforced by the examples set forth in the Bible. What I am trying to say is that if examples are only put in the Bible being an unmarried man and unmarried woman having sex is fornication, why would the same logic not be used ie examples defining terms.
Another point I am wanting to get to is wondering, does God see fornication as unwed people or people that have not come together under God's grace?

[Soundbear]

Even those under God's grace, i.e. God's children, sin all the time, even to fornication.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Even those under God's grace, i.e. God's children, sin all the time, even to fornication. </div></div>

Well ,that's "once saved, always saved" for ya'! Why would you stop sinning, under that man-made theology?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Even those under God's grace, i.e. God's children, sin all the time, even to fornication. </div></div>

Well ,that's "once saved, always saved" for ya'! Why would you stop sinning, under that man-made theology? </div></div>

Perhaps you can explain then why so many Catholics seems to think that, once they are "in" the church they have nothing to fear from sin?? The classic example for all to see is the faithful attender at mass who is a gangster the rest of the week.

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God"

There's the truth. believe it or not.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Even those under God's grace, i.e. God's children, sin all the time, even to fornication. </div></div>

I know that to be true, but does not really address the post I had made prior.
thoughts?
I am wondering more about how things are defined in the Bible, if not by actual definition, then by examples set forth in the Bible.
In the Bible are examples of fornication made by couples that are man and woman, or are there examples of fornication through same sex couples?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...In the Bible are examples of fornication made by couples that are man and woman, or are there examples of fornication through same sex couples? </div></div>

Homosexual acts, though technically fornication, or even adultery if one person was married, fell under a different set of laws.

[dancingqueen]

that still doesn't answer my question /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">that still doesn't answer my question /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

OK, please forgive me, there's so much bouncing around here, what question do you mean?

[dancingqueen]

understood,
here is my question again:
In the Bible are examples of fornication made by couples that are man and woman, or are there examples of fornication through same sex couples?
the reason I would like to know is because we had finished discussing the fact that we know marriage to be intended only for a man and a woman through the examples set forth in the Bible, and as defined in the Bible, but whenever a clear definition is not present we must use the examples as set forth in the Bible ie. in the Bible there are no examples of same sex marriage, so we assume by definition set forth by example that marriage to same sex is not possible. I am then wondering if there are any examples of same sex fornication in the Bible for the same reason.

[Soundbear]

I don't think so, simply because it wasn't even considered at the time.
Marriage between a man and woman is understood and blessed in scripture. Sex between unmarried people is forbidden. Sex between same sex people is forbidden. So I think the sins of same sex fornication and adultery don't even come up. They are already covered.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think so, simply because it wasn't even considered at the time.</div></div>

The fact that it wasn't considered at the time could also explain why the Bible specified marriage as only between a man and a woman, if it was something considered in those times, I honestly think it would have been included.

[GenX]

There are examples of same-sex fornication in the Bible.


Gen 19:5-8 "and they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.'



Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

The city of Sodom was taken as the root word for "sodomy".

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think so, simply because it wasn't even considered at the time.</div></div>

The fact that it wasn't considered at the time could also explain why the Bible specified marriage as only between a man and a woman, if it was something considered in those times, I honestly think it would have been included. </div></div>

The fact the Bible talks of marriage as between a man and a woman means the Bible clearly teaches marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

If there was no need to define what marriage is ("between man and woman") then it wouldn't have been mentioned at all. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman is the same as saying it is not marriage if it is between anything but man and woman.

[KWB]

ur all nuts

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KWB</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ur all nuts </div></div>

What's the point of that KWB??

Look around you. Are you blind to what out of marriage sex does in this world?? If you think it's harmless, then I suggest you reconsider who is nuts!

[B.David]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Intimacy in sexual relations has a profound effect on every human being. Sex outside of a loving, committed relationship has NO positive results. </div></div>

False. The guy gets off, and sometimes the woman does too.

[Soundbear]

Whoopie. If you think that's all there is to sex, I feel sorry for you AND your (unlikely) future wife.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W G R</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think so, simply because it wasn't even considered at the time.</div></div>

The fact that it wasn't considered at the time could also explain why the Bible specified marriage as only between a man and a woman, if it was something considered in those times, I honestly think it would have been included. </div></div>

The fact the Bible talks of marriage as between a man and a woman means the Bible clearly teaches marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

If there was no need to define what marriage is ("between man and woman") then it wouldn't have been mentioned at all. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman is the same as saying it is not marriage if it is between anything but man and woman. </div></div>

I belive back in those times men on men sex was commonplace, but it was not for long-term, it was just for people to get their... needs met. but society has advanced since those days, perhaps when God said these apparent many other things that express God's dislike for homosexualaty (I don't buy that "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." is in relation to homosexualaty) he is refering to the love-less relations that men where having with other men. That would make more sence to me, besides... what does the Bible say about lesbians? I see alot of talk about man and man, but what about woman and woman?

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whoopie. If you think that's all there is to sex, I feel sorry for you AND your (unlikely) future wife. </div></div>

of course that's pretty much what there is to sex, but there is far more than that to the relationship itself

[Soundbear]

We can discuss sex some other time. It would be interesting.

I DO NOT think that's all there is to sex, not by any stretch.