-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
S
Sword, Knowing that the bible clearly instructs a husband and wife not to deprive one another, as previously posted, I am pretty settled on the fact that God, acknowledging the 'pleasure component', which He himself created, has given license to married couples to indulge in sexual activity at will.
I was wondering, however, if you've considered this. Menopause, which signifies the point at which a woman ceases to be fertile, can occur as early as 44 years of age, in some women. According to your theory, whether on a scientific basis or otherwise, once a couple knew that they could no longer produce children, they would have to abstain from sexual activity for the rest of their lives, because any future sexual involvement would be purely for pleasure.
In this case, how can this type of abstinence and the following scripture both apply?
I Corinthians 7:5
Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Please explain
I was wondering, however, if you've considered this. Menopause, which signifies the point at which a woman ceases to be fertile, can occur as early as 44 years of age, in some women. According to your theory, whether on a scientific basis or otherwise, once a couple knew that they could no longer produce children, they would have to abstain from sexual activity for the rest of their lives, because any future sexual involvement would be purely for pleasure.
In this case, how can this type of abstinence and the following scripture both apply?
I Corinthians 7:5
Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Please explain
C
I believe there are acts in the marraige bed to defile it, there are acts that are obvious to most people that shouldnt be done under the sight of God, and there are acts that you and God need to agree to do or not to do , even though it is a common practise in every bed, married, unmarried, saved or unsaved, this is not a common brought up subject in the church which is a pity because we all ned questions like these answered and not feel ashamed for having them,
C
I think i know what Sword is on aboutI believe there are acts in the marraige bed to defile it,anti-natural acts, there are acts that are obvious to most people that shouldnt be done under the sight of God, like anal sex or multiple partners at once, sick and twisted performances for the sake of fantasies and there are acts that you and God need to agree to do or not to do,for the sake of loving your partner or for not damaging your soul because you do it unto God, even though it is a common practise in every bed, married, unmarried, saved or unsaved, this is not a common brought up subject in the church which is a pity because we all ned questions like these answered and not feel ashamed for having them,
S
So that we do not venture too far off topic, I think it's necessary to re-post Sword's original post.
"Since sex is only used for reproduction in the animal kingdom. Some animals are even monogamous; females never let males have sex unless they are in their mating season, so why should we human beings use anticonceptives to have sex just for an egoistic pleasure? Isn´t reproduction the original and natural purpose of sex? Then what should be the purpose of sex for us Christians? "
Make no mistake, Sword is emphasizing a single observation, call it social commentary, the science of sexology, zoology, or the birds and the bees. What he is saying is sexual intercourse is to be used, solely, for the purpose of having children.
The implication is that Christians have deviated from 'natural law', as well as God's law, and he has used the animal kingdom and the findings of a particular sexologist, to support his claim. His post is dealing specifically with procreation, having nothing to do with other forms of sexual expression.
I am waiting for Sword to answer a previous post of mine, which will allow him to explain how a married couple can both obey this so-called 'natural law', while also submitting to scriptural instruction.
"Since sex is only used for reproduction in the animal kingdom. Some animals are even monogamous; females never let males have sex unless they are in their mating season, so why should we human beings use anticonceptives to have sex just for an egoistic pleasure? Isn´t reproduction the original and natural purpose of sex? Then what should be the purpose of sex for us Christians? "
Make no mistake, Sword is emphasizing a single observation, call it social commentary, the science of sexology, zoology, or the birds and the bees. What he is saying is sexual intercourse is to be used, solely, for the purpose of having children.
The implication is that Christians have deviated from 'natural law', as well as God's law, and he has used the animal kingdom and the findings of a particular sexologist, to support his claim. His post is dealing specifically with procreation, having nothing to do with other forms of sexual expression.
I am waiting for Sword to answer a previous post of mine, which will allow him to explain how a married couple can both obey this so-called 'natural law', while also submitting to scriptural instruction.
Last edited:
S
Even though Paul wrote this in 1 Corinthians 7:
5Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
He also added:
6But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.
So it is not a commandment we have to obey. However God did say "Be fruitful and multiply" (procreation).
S
Agreed, but this brings us to a different place in this discussion. You concede that Paul is neither issuing a commandment nor preventing non-procreative sex. Are you also willing to say that, while the command to be fruitful and multiply, was the command given to replenish the earth, it is 'not sinful' for a man and woman to enjoy non-procreative intercourse?
Surely you would agree that Paul was well versed in the law and would never have authorized God's people to sin. Therefore, I ask this question, in the hope, that you would not casually suggest that Paul, one of the most educated and devoted Christians in the bible, trusted with writing 13 books of the New Testament, would in this case, give special permission to sin against God in this way. All disobedience is transgression, and sin is defined by the law.
Surely you would agree that Paul was well versed in the law and would never have authorized God's people to sin. Therefore, I ask this question, in the hope, that you would not casually suggest that Paul, one of the most educated and devoted Christians in the bible, trusted with writing 13 books of the New Testament, would in this case, give special permission to sin against God in this way. All disobedience is transgression, and sin is defined by the law.
Last edited:
S
Like I said before, the original purpose for sex was not playing with it but procreation, just like the original food for man was vegetables, not meats. So I would repeat Paul`s words:
1 Corinthians 10
23"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive.
1 Corinthians 10
23"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive.
S
Sword, I want you to know that I do understand what you are saying, and I agree that the primary purpose for sex was to have children, but, as with divorce, there are certain laws which were changed. In the OT, some foods were not to be consumed. Now, all food can be consumed without fear of sinning. Divorce was, at one time, completely unacceptable, until it was allowed under specified circumstances. As with these, it was necessary for God to make the frequency of sexual intercourse subject to the will of a man, and his wife, hence, Paul's letter to the Corinthians.
I am also inclined to believe that this change occured because of man's inability toward self discipline, and not because the primary purpose of sex was for pleasure. Some would say that sexual desire is from God. This is only partly true. The ability to procreate is certainly accompanied by a needed ability for arousal. That said, sexual desire is necessary before and during the sexual act, however, during the course of a day, there are many factors which increase and decrease sexual desire, which simply produce, and store, lustful thoughts, this aspect of desire is not from God, and yet has the propensity to enhance a man's desire to be sexual with his wife.
I believe that for this reason, Paul addressed this by necessity as a way for both partners to relieve themselves of stored sexual tension, which, if left unattended, could result in adulterous activity resulting from temptation.
For this reason, I'm inclined to agree with you. I do believe that the original purpose for sex was procreation, but because of man's nature and his inability to consistently abstain, permission was given to married couples to have sexual intercourse at will, while others must rely on God's grace to help them to abstain from all types of sexual activity, but those who are married and are engaging in sexual intercourse at will, are not sinning.
Would you agree with this?
I am also inclined to believe that this change occured because of man's inability toward self discipline, and not because the primary purpose of sex was for pleasure. Some would say that sexual desire is from God. This is only partly true. The ability to procreate is certainly accompanied by a needed ability for arousal. That said, sexual desire is necessary before and during the sexual act, however, during the course of a day, there are many factors which increase and decrease sexual desire, which simply produce, and store, lustful thoughts, this aspect of desire is not from God, and yet has the propensity to enhance a man's desire to be sexual with his wife.
I believe that for this reason, Paul addressed this by necessity as a way for both partners to relieve themselves of stored sexual tension, which, if left unattended, could result in adulterous activity resulting from temptation.
For this reason, I'm inclined to agree with you. I do believe that the original purpose for sex was procreation, but because of man's nature and his inability to consistently abstain, permission was given to married couples to have sexual intercourse at will, while others must rely on God's grace to help them to abstain from all types of sexual activity, but those who are married and are engaging in sexual intercourse at will, are not sinning.
Would you agree with this?
S
i agree with songster and i think this thread should close 
since everything has been said that can be said about the subject... lol.
since everything has been said that can be said about the subject... lol.
I also believe it is important not to demonize sexual discussion, as it is a very real part of our lives. When tempered with a little tact, we can develop correct perspectives on these and other areas of daily Christian life. Individuals are struggling with pornography, promiscuity, masturbatory habits and homosexuality, who sometimes need to open themselves up to sound advice.
The word encourages us to confess our faults to one another, so that we may be healed.
It is a given, however, that for some, the mere mention of sex, will send them running for the nearest shower and a bottle of holy water. These are the ones who should perhaps bypass these threads as they search the forums. But, I agree there isn't much more to be said beyond a reply from sword, unless others have more information, a fresh perspective, or other biblical references, which we should not hinder by prematurely announcing a conclusion to the discussion.
- Status