Sexual limitations

[Stan B]

Curious then if anything goes (2 Corinthians 3:1) in the marriage bed of Christ and His church? The only ‘honorable’ and ‘undefiled’ before God, union, consummation, incorruptible seed sown of God.

Christ is not married.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Christ is not married.

Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

the debated ‘anything goes’ ...sounds like Liberty, sounds like Freedom.
1 Peter 2:16-17 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. [17] Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

 

[Hidden In Him]

God places no limitations on what happens in the marriage bedroom.

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled" Hebrews 13:4

So, according to the Bible, anything goes!

Stan, I'm sorry, but you are taking this verse way out of context, and teaching a falsehood.

Starting from the previous Chapter:

1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, 2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God... 14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: 15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright... 28 we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved therefore, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: 29 For our God is a consuming fire. 1 Let brotherly love continue. 2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. 3 Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body. 4 Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. (Hebrews 12:1-2, 14-16, 28-29, 13:1-4)

The context is walking in the fear of God, who avenges sins, and brings punishment upon adulterers and whoremongers. Now, the translation "Marriage is honorable in all" needs to be changed in light of the way it is often being taken by many these days, because it gives rise to a complete misunderstanding of the passage. The word "in" can just as easily be translated as "among," and this would save things from being misinterpreted by some to their own hurt. The context tells you what is being said. "Brotherly love" in verse 1 refers specifically to showing Christian hospitality to the unfortunate, the widow, the orphan and the stranger, as confirmed by verse 2. Verse 3 is about likewise giving shelter and/or protection to those who suffer adversities for Christ's sake. Verse 4, then, is a warning about the dangers of adultery being committed when hospitality is shown, such as when someone stays too long, makes themselves too welcome, and a sin is eventually committed against one who showed hospitality in good faith. Thus, the words "Marriage is honorable amongst all and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge," is simply reinforcing the teaching that sexual relations are permitted to married couples but not anyone outside a marriage relationship, and especially not against someone showing hospitality. It is NOT therefore saying, "Any sexual act committed between two consenting married people is acceptable before God." That is entirely out of context. It did not matter under Old Testament law if the husband consented to his wife committing adultery. She would have been committing the sin regardless, and would have still been subject to judgment under OT law. Likewise, God was still executing judgments under most such circumstances during New Testament times (the woman caught in adultery being an exception to the rule). But as the above passage - among several in the NT - points out, it was being avenged during New Testament times. Thus, the command was to walk in holiness and the fear of God.

As for sexual acts that constitute sodomy, do these fall under "walking in holiness or the fear of God"? No. Scripture also declares, "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, passion, wicked lust, and covetousness, which is idolatry" (Colossians 3:5). The "covetousness" referred to here was sexual covetousness, just as in the OT, where they were commanded not to covet their neighbor's wife, and the term "idolatry" could be taken is referring to this covetousness or to the entire list. Even in our moral corruption today, what would most describe it as if there was a holy sister who walked continually in prayer and was clothed in the Holy Spirit and walked in great spiritual gifts, and the man who married her subjected her to anal sex? It would be an unclean thing. It would constitute what the above passage calls "wicked lust." The problem is, we don't walk in anything resembling holiness these days, so we don't even recognize what it would look like in the marriage bed. Moreover, we're often simply "having sex" rather than making love, and this leads to sin as well.

As for the ones who say missionary position only, that is just ridiculous. Love making can take many positions, and so long as the focus is on romanticism and not "performing," it is acceptable before God. But demons do and will tempt Christians to engage in all forms of uncleanness, and to promote actions which like adultery do indeed defile the marriage bed is to do others a great disservice before God.

 

[LC627]

Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

the debated ‘anything goes’ ...sounds like Liberty, sounds like Freedom.
1 Peter 2:16-17 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. [17] Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

It’s the whoremongers and adulterers that God will judge - not the married couple who has decided between them what they wish to do in their intimate life.

 

[Renniks]

Out of the sexual acts I listed I have no clue which one it refers to. To me if the translation is "acted upon" I would guess that it's normal Intercourse and nothing more

I didn't say that the translation says " acting upon." I'm just saying the verses I posted sure sounds like oral sex to me.

 

[Phoneman777]

I've seen a person get banned from a forum just for bringing up this topic but on another forum ive seen one of the most intriguing conversations. These are genuine questions that many theologians have spent time pondering along with the average person... So im hoping a civilized discussion can ensue here without anyone getting triggered...

We know that sex has to be performed in a traditional hetrosexual marriage but what is sex?
Does God place any limitations in the bedroom?
On one hand a person in another forum said that his priest told him that anything outside of missionary position was sinful.
On the other hand there is hand sex, oral sex, anal sex and toys...

So, what do u think? Where do u draw the line? Where do u think God draws the line?

We know what is and ain't acceptable. That's why we have a conscience. Anything that brings out the animal passions should be immediately dismissed.

 

[Mike Waters]

I Corinthians 11:14 "Doth not even nature itself teach you........"
I've seen every sexual deviation known to mankind being evidenced in the various realms of 'nature'.

 

[kcnalp]

you are only allowed to have sex for the porpouse of creating a child.

We can't enjoy sex?

 

[Mike Waters]

On a less frivolous note ..... two 5 year olds were chatting together:
Child A "last evening my parent threw an enormous party in the garden for all our neighbours, and this morning I found a condom on the patio.
Child B "What's a patio?"

 

[kcnalp]

correct

Sex is one of the most powerful forces in humanity! Even elderly folks LOVE it. Are we going to Hell for enjoying our loved one?

 

[Mike Waters]

We can't enjoy sex?

Sex was created pleasurable to a degree of irresistibility in order to ensure the survival of the species.
That's why rapist's cite the creator in mitigation.
Oh dear, maybe I ought to stop posting.

 

[Mike Waters]

Isn't sex between consenting partners for the purpose of sensual satisfaction just a form of second party masturbation.

 

[kcnalp]

So then, lol, all of us seniors who enjoy sex are going to Hell?

 

[Taken]

I've seen a person get banned from a forum just for bringing up this topic but on another forum ive seen one of the most intriguing conversations. These are genuine questions that many theologians have spent time pondering along with the average person... So im hoping a civilized discussion can ensue here without anyone getting triggered...

We know that sex has to be performed in a traditional hetrosexual marriage but what is sex?
Does God place any limitations in the bedroom?
On one hand a person in another forum said that his priest told him that anything outside of missionary position was sinful.
On the other hand there is hand sex, oral sex, anal sex and toys...

So, what do u think? Where do u draw the line? Where do u think God draws the line?

I draw the line between a man and a woman, married to each other to "Privately" engage in sex for purposes of reproduction and pleasure.

Prov 5:
[17] Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.
[18] Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
[19] Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.

The restriction in Scripture is:
Between A married man and woman (his wife only).
The fountain of A man and a woman is their nakedness, reserved only for A man and his wife.
The form (bodily shape) of a woman without clothing (roe)...is reserved for the "eyes" and "pleasure" only of her husband...
Clearly for the purpose of the husband and wife to "PRIVATELY" and "INTIMATELY" express their LOVE to one another.

LOL...A Priest would be the Last person I would Consider regarding his Opinion on "Acceptable" intimacy between a man and his wife.

Scripture IMO is clear. A man and his wife's Personal Intimate showing of their Love toward one another...clearly is Exclusive and Private About Them and For Them only.

Thus I would say: I don't care what others Do, Talk About, Suggest, Promote, Ask, Wonder...it is in no way About Them.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Hidden In Him]

Okay so it's very poetic, but since you asked for it and since it is scripture:

Song 2:3 (The wife is acting upon her husband) “Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest, so is my beloved among the young men. In his shade I took great delight and sat down, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.”

Song 4:16 (The husband is acting upon the wife) “Awake, O north wind, and come, wind of the south; make my garden breathe out fragrance. Let its spices be wafted abroad. May my beloved come into his garden and eat its choice fruits!”

Song of Songs 5:1 “I have come into my garden, my sister, my bride; I have gathered my myrrh along with my balsam. I have eaten my honeycomb and my honey; I have drunk my wine and my milk. Eat, friends; Drink and imbibe deeply, O lovers.”

Greetings, Renniks.

I used to believe these were references to sexuality as well, but I no longer do. So as to not pull any punches but simply tell it to you straight, I think such interpretations are actually just our dirty minds reading into scripture rather than what the verses are actually saying.

Having interpreted both scripture as well as visions and dreams for years now, I can tell you that sweets (such as fruit, honey, pies, etc.) all relate to the delights of the soul. Often you will see it used of romantic love, but you will also see it used of children, who are delights to our hearts as well. Certainly sexuality is an outgrowth of romantic love, but the symbolism used in the above verses is not a direct reference to sexuality but rather romantic love. Likewise, fragrance and spices refer to the allure of beauty, in that it entices and draws a lover in. There is nothing dirty in the above symbolism, nor anything overtly sexual. The symbolism is all in reference to the delights and enticements of the soul.

God bless,
Hidden

 

[Stan B]

I draw the line between a man and a woman, married to each other to "Privately" engage in sex for purposes of reproduction and pleasure.

Prov 5:
[17] Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.
[18] Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
[19] Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.

The restriction in Scripture is:
Between A married man and woman (his wife only).
Taken

I got a bit of a giggle out of you quoting a Proverb of Solomon as Biblical authority on this, a guy who had 600 wives!!

I wonder how he worked all of that out at bedtime?? :-)

 

[amadeus]

It’s the whoremongers and adulterers that God will judge - not the married couple who has decided between them what they wish to do in their intimate life.

"And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Gen 1:31

And then men disobeyed God and began to twist things away from His very good Way.
We may have a written Book which does not cover all the details, but we also have the Holy Spirit to lead us all the way back to His Way. Should we write up a set of black and white rules for sexual practices along the lines of the black and white rules given to Moses for the children of Israel or should we follow the lead of the Holy Spirit?

Remember what Peter said here:

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" Acts 15:10

He was speaking to those who would put people under all of the laws given to Moses, but should we now take it upon ourselves to develop another yoke here to place on the necks of husband and wife rather than allowing them to hear and confirm and obey what they are hearing from the Holy Spirit?

 

[Nancy]

Would oral sex be just talking about it?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Should write up a set of black and white rules for sexual practices along the lines of the black and white rules given to Moses for the children of Israel or should we follow the lead of the Holy Spirit?

Good morning, John!

The counter argument here is that we can suppose ourselves to be following the Holy Spirit when in reality we are just following our conscience, and the New Testament shows examples of Christians who had been baptized in the Holy Spirit committing serious sins that their consciences had no problems with because the society they were raised in did not find such behavior reprehensible, such as using prostitutes for example. And this is what I see happening in this case as well. We are bringing our worldly morality into the church with us, rather than leaving it at the door where it belongs.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Would oral sex be just talking about it?

I think you would have to talk about it a whole LOT before it would truly qualify...

kinda like one of those sordid romantic novels that sometimes get women all steamed up.