Conference yukon::christian_v7

See topic 496.

    ha!  I missed that while I was out after my surgery.  That is good
    meat, but it doesn't address the entirety of my note.
    
    Thanks for the pointer.

>>What about sexual addiction?  Is there such an animal?  How does the 
>>Christian deal with sexual addiction?  Is there a 12 step-program ??

Well I know a man who was a childhood friend of my husband's - they've
kept in touch periodically.  This man called my husband after some time 
since they'd last communicated to tell my husband that he and his wife had 
split up, and that it was in part because he was a sex addict.  

This friend told my husband a little about what this addiction had led him 
do; some very sad and tragic stories, and told him about the 12-step program 
he was in to try and come out of the addiction.  Greg talked to him a couple 
of times after that about God and Jesus, and we had him over at the house one 
night, gave him a Bible and a book of introductry quiet time studies, but the 
last time we talked to him, he'd embraced more of deist idea from the 12 step 
program than the God of the Bible.

Just as an alcoholic will go to great lengths to both hide/deny their addiction,
and to obtain liquor of any sort to drink, so this man did the same thing, but
with sex, before he was able to admit that he had a problem and needed help.

Leslie

>1.  Sex is it good/bad or both?
>2.  Sexual *power* can it be overcome?  
>3.  Where does "sensuality or passion" end and sexuality begin?
>4.  Sprituality and Sexuality, are they connected?
    
    Read the book of Romans over and over and over and over and over and
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and 
    over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
    over until you have it all memorized ;-)  
    
    I claim that if you can firmly grasp Romans 6, 7, and 8 you can with
    90% of anything that comes up in the Christian life.
    
    Mike (a BIG Romans fan)

Do you have the Romans CD/Tape by Glad?  It's great.

Paul

    No, sounds interesting though.  Tell me more!

    To say that sexuality WILL find an outlet - either through intercourse
    or masturbation is gross error.(no pun intended)
    
    People have abstained all their lives.
    
    As a Naturopathic Doctor I can tell you that VERY strong sexual desire
    is the result of biochemical imbalance affecting the glandular system. 
    It is NOT natural.  When sexual desire precedes or excludes love it is
    neither natural or righteous.  
    
    There can be attraction to the opposite sex without sexual desire/lust.
    
    Other sexual perversions have also been proven to be correctable
    imbalances.
    
    We live in a society which also cause a imbalance in the mental aspect
    by over exposure to sexual images, thoughts, and ideas.
    
    Rich

    Bob,
    
    I agree with you in theory, but not reality.  We have an incredible
    promiscuous church today.  Adultery/Divorce are at record highs in
    congregations.  Priests are falling from their pedastals.
    
    Is this all the fault of the media?

    No all the fault of the media...but the constant barrage of sex on
    teevee, in magazines, billboards, etc. etc....raises the urge to
    unnatural levels.  It is near impossible to not be exposed to things
    that don't promote sex in one way or another.
    
    And America wonders why there is so much sexual dysfunction today.  It
    doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.
    
    I've found that each sensual scene on teevee, in magazines, etc. is a
    big welcome sign to Satan.  If you look for more than a glance, you
    open yourself up to spiritual attack by the enemy (temptation).
    
    
    -steve

    |Is this all the fault of the media?

    I'd say it's a result of Christians putting the cart in front of the
    horse, only these days people are allowed to realise that they aren't
    getting anywhere and take action, whether it's right or wrong.

    I've watched so many people, including myself, pursue righteousness in
    order to get closer to God. Should it not be the pursuit of Christ and
    then righteousness is a result? Anyway, a lot of Christians claim to
    have denied themselves to follow Christ, but they do neither. I believe
    these live "in" denial and that's where the failure comes from.

    Glenn

 re .9


 One cannot even go through the checkout in a grocery store without encountering
 one sexual image or another.  Even the tabloid's are more suggestive.  One
 day I looked at the cover of each magazine available at the checkout counter
 and every single one had some mention of sex on it, not to mention the 
 pictures on the cover.

 In fact, I believe I'm going to start writing letters to these stores.




Jim

    The media is used as an excuse. How did ancient societies become so
    perverse without a huge media mechanism? The fact is, it's all inside,
    it's our inheritance.

    Glenn

Sexuality has its context,like anything else.  Christian sexuality 
has its context.  Outside the context, it is a perversion (by definition).

Bob>    Other sexual perversions have also been proven to be correctable
Bob>    imbalances.

I know some who are engaged in helping people with such imablances
to overcome them and return sexuality to its proper context.

Nancy>    I agree with you in theory, but not reality. 

"Reality" must be yielded to the "theory" or Spirit.  This is the 
individual responsibilty.  If a person need help, as I have just stated,
there are support groups.  I don't think God put lots of people on
earth so that we'd go it alone.  In other words, it is perfectly permissible
to use the tools to accomplish your personal responsibility to keep 
sexuality within its proper context.

Mark

    I'd say that getting married for "sex within the biblical context" is
    why there is so much divorce among Christians today.
    
    Glenn

>    I'd say that getting married for "sex within the biblical context" is
>    why there is so much divorce among Christians today.

I'd go on to say that it certainly wasn't completely a biblical context
then.

Context accepts the whole with regards to a subject.  One might see,
"it is better to marry than to burn with lust" and claim biblical
context for marriage.  W R O N G !

The biblical context for marriage is not primarily sexual anyway!
It's wholeness, union, One flesh.  In that context, the husband is 
to love as Christ loved, and the wife is to submit to THIS KIND OF LOVE
as unto the Lord.  Sexual union is a small (albeit powerful) part of
the union between husband and wife.

Anybody getting married for sex is setting themselves up for failure.
Anyone getting married within the Biblical context will have a very
difficult time in finding divorce.

Mark

    But you've done nothing to address the other portions of .0.
    
    What about prostitution in Biblical days?  What about the fact that
    Tamar dressed as a Harlot, seduced her FIL and she was RIGHTEOUS???
    
    

    It seems to mean that there are extremes on both sides of this issue:
    
    o	One extreme is that if it feels good, do it.  God wouldn't have
        given me this urge, if He didn't mean for me to satisfy it (ie
        masturbation is OK).  Or, God is going to forgive me anyway, so
        I'll go ahead with it anyway.  Both of these are of the flesh.
    
    o	The other extreme is that sexual impurity is elevated to a different
        level of sinfulness within many of our churchs.  Anna Belle Gilham
        talks about how her "besetting" sin was depression.  It is
        considered an acceptable sin.  She said the thinking might be, "Oh, lets
        just give Anna Belle a Sunday School class, to get her involved." 
        The point being that many men, in particular, will try to deal with
        the problem with lust by themselves, rather than coming forward,
        because they are fearful that they would be looked down upon by
        other Christians.  Flesh is flesh.  It's all sin.  We can NOT
        please God in our flesh (Rom 8:8)
    
    Often times we tend to think that when we have a problem, that we are the 
    only ones going through it.  That is deception.  The truth is that most
    of us share similar problems.  Men, in particular, deal with lust.
    
    We CAN live in victory over the flesh by understanding our indentity in
    Christ, abiding in Him, and allowing Him to live through us.  Even if
    we blow it, we can come to Him in confidence in our time of need.  That
    is not meant as an excuse to sin, but FREEDOM to know Him and to BE
    righteous in Him.  
    
    Romans 6:12-13 "Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body that
    you should obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting the members of
    your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present
    yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as
    instruments of righteousness to God."
    
    God is the one who has given us LIFE.  HE is the one who has made our 
    members righteous.  We are vessels.  We only have to present ourselves
    back to Him, so He can live His life through us.  We don't have to live
    in bondage (Rom 6:16), but we have been freed and have the Freedom to be
    slaves of righteousness (Rom 6:18).  We can set our mind on Christ and 
    allow Him to live through us (Rom 8:5-6).
    
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing

>    o	One extreme is that if it feels good, do it.  God wouldn't have
>        given me this urge, if He didn't mean for me to satisfy it (ie
>        masturbation is OK).  Or, God is going to forgive me anyway, so
>        I'll go ahead with it anyway.  Both of these are of the flesh.
    
    Why is masturbation wrong?
    
>    o	The other extreme is that sexual impurity is elevated to a different
>        level of sinfulness within many of our churchs.  Anna Belle Gilham
>        talks about how her "besetting" sin was depression.  It is
>        considered an acceptable sin.  She said the thinking might be, "Oh, lets
>        just give Anna Belle a Sunday School class, to get her involved." 
>        The point being that many men, in particular, will try to deal with
>        the problem with lust by themselves, rather than coming forward,
>        because they are fearful that they would be looked down upon by
>        other Christians.  Flesh is flesh.  It's all sin.  We can NOT
>        please God in our flesh (Rom 8:8)
    
    This is part of why I started the "secret sin" topic.  You are correct.
    
    >The truth is that most
    >of us share similar problems.  
    
    This is true..
    
    >Men, in particular, deal with lust.
   
    Well, I hate to be the one to say this, but I'd say that most of the
    women I deal with also have this issue... it's not rare in women..
    perhaps the difference is the "intensity" level.
     
>    God is the one who has given us LIFE.  HE is the one who has made our 
>    members righteous.  We are vessels.  We only have to present ourselves
>    back to Him, so He can live His life through us.  We don't have to live
>    in bondage (Rom 6:16), but we have been freed and have the Freedom to be
>    slaves of righteousness (Rom 6:18).  We can set our mind on Christ and 
>    allow Him to live through us (Rom 8:5-6).
    
   You speak as though you are convinced that sex outside of marriage is
    sin... how do you know this?
    

    Mark, I never said getting married for "marriage within the biblical
    context", I said "sex". If sex is the main force driving a union, it is
    doomed.

    Glenn

>    What about prostitution in Biblical days?  What about the fact that
>    Tamar dressed as a Harlot, seduced her FIL and she was RIGHTEOUS???

(a) was not righteous - the correct reading is "she has been more righteous
than I."

 26  And Judah acknowledged them, and said, she hath been more righteous than
I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no
more.

(b) She was not more righteous for her act of prositution.  A careful reading
of the Scripture shows that Judah was obligated to have his son carry on
the family line through his first son's widow (Tamar).  Tamar kept her
part of the bargain and Judah renegged.  The seduction was WRONG.
The prostitution was WRONG.  Judah acknowledges that it was HIS sin that 
brought about the wrongful event of Tamar's seduction.

(c) Prositution is NOT condoned.  Wives and concubines are NOT prostitution,
and should not be mistaken as such.  And when you want to understand the
days of wives and concubines, it takes a bit more than the reading the
King's english. 

Mark

    .20
    
    So it takes MORE than reading the King's english... that almost sounds
    condescending.  What exactly do you mean? :-) :-)
    
    She says in a very sweet voice, high pitched, but sweet!

>    Mark, I never said getting married for "marriage within the biblical
>    context", I said "sex". If sex is the main force driving a union, it is
>    doomed.

I didn't say you did, Glenn, but I wanted to make sure that we were clear
on the issue since you put "sex within the biblical context" in one phrase.
Sex, within the Biblical context of union, cannot be the main force and
would render the context null and void.  It's an oxymoron to say that
sex can be the main force within a Biblically contextual marriage.
And it was this point to which I referred.

MM

>    So it takes MORE than reading the King's english... that almost sounds
>    condescending.  What exactly do you mean? :-) :-)

It means that understanding the culture and the context of the time helps
to flesh out the meaning of the words.

MM

    But this then ties very closely into the "New Winds" topic, now doesn't
    it.  Is the Bible all we need?????
    
    

    >    Why is masturbation wrong?

re .25

See 496.3

/john

>Is the Bible all we need?????

All we need for what?

The Bible does not tell us all we need to know about God.
The Bible does tell us what God believes we should know about Him.

As far as not understanding some things, is that the fault of the
Bible or the reader?  When you implied that the Bible was making Tamar
righteous because she seduced Judah, where did this understanding come
from?  You read the scripture, yet you didn't understand it properly.
Don't be discouraged, the Ethiopian Eunuch places you in good company.

The answer is a qualified yes, the Bible is all we need, when it is
divided properly for Truth.  It contains no error.  When there is a
difficulty, it may take people more learned than you or I to help us
see how the difficulty is resolved in the Bible.  It doesn't make the
Bible less perfect of I misconstrue what has been read.

Mark

    I find it rather strange the word righteous was even used in the
    context of sin.  So was there an element of righteousness in Tamar's
    action.. why would we delineate sins?
    
    Isn't sin, sin, no matter who commits it or the nature of the sin
    itself?
    
    

    AND... Tamar was blessed of God for her actions.

    Nancy,
    
    Are you starting a new quiz show?  8^)8^)
    Just kidding!  You're asking very good questions.
    
    Bing

>    Nancy,
>    
>    Are you starting a new quiz show?  8^)8^)
>    Just kidding!  You're asking very good questions.
    
    ha!... I think that root to the problem in our country today is
    completely due to SEX!  How is that for a bold statement.  The SEXUAL
    revolution of the 60's, the if it feels good do it group, FREE LOVE and
    then the perversions that expanded from this "feel good" attitude.
    
    It is because of the rebellion towards churches regarding morality that
    this country is being weakened to its knees.
    
    Nancy
    

    Nancy, I would recommend Strong's Exhaustive Concordance with the
    Hebrew & Greek dictionaries in the back.  Then you can look up the
    original meaning for "righteousness" in this context and more
    accurately interpret its meaning.
    
    Mike

    .32
    
    Mike, I appreciate your recommendation, but the discussion is for here,
    it's not just for my edification.  I have received offline mail
    referring this topic as being very important to them personally.
    
    Thanks, but can we discuss here?  You got info you want to share?

    Nancy, I realize that.  I guess I should start bringing my Strong's to
    work or get LOGOS installed on my PC. ;-)
    
    On the subject of the Hollywood immorality blitz...  I have an LDS 
    co-worker who RON's in here.  While I upset her with my entry on the
    children's videos, I have to commend her for her diligence in refusing
    to watch R rated movies.  
    
    This is something all Christians should do - boycott Hollywood trash. 
    I love action movies, which are usually R, but they always slip in some
    nudity to ruin things for me.  If enough believers boycotted those
    types of movies, maybe they would get the message and clean them up.
    
    Many pastors teaching on habitual sins will state that to overcome the
    habit, avoid all temptations of the habit.  People who drink too much
    should avoid bars.  People who do drugs should avoid their contacts. 
    People who have problems with lust should stay out of the magazine
    aisles and avoid movies rated higher than PG-13.  
    
    And get your nose in God's Word!
    
    Mike

    Speaking of Hollywood movies and their influence on folks who watch
    them!
    
    I've been witnessing to a very dear person to me who is unsaved. 
    Recently she asked me to give her the plan of salvation and assurance
    of eternity... I felt the Spirit of God in our presence, I saw the
    conviction and tears in her eyes... and knew God was working in her
    heart.
    
    That very weekend after this incident she watch a movie entitled, "My
    Life with Michael Keaton"... she announced loud enough for me to hear
    that his movie CHANGED her LIFE, it really ANSWERED her questions about
    death.
    
    Imagine my heartfelt agony at hearing this all the while trying to not
    show my real feelings to her.  I just had to confess it to God and
    know that her peace was only superficial and would not last.  The only
    true peace and assurance lies in Christ.
    
    

RE:         <<< Note 573.34 by FRETZ::HEISER "Grace changes everything" >>>
                 -< in speaking to myself, as well as others >-


>    People who have problems with lust should stay out of the magazine
>    aisles and avoid movies rated higher than PG-13.  

    
      And where does one grocery shop in order to avoid the garbage in the
      magazine racks at the checkout counter.  I've about reached the point
      where my TV stays off, I'm about to cancel my Sunday newspaper, I'll have
      to stay out of grocery stores altogether, because if they don't use
      sex to grab you in the checkouts, they use it to try to sell you practi-
      ally everything from soft drinks to ear wax remover.




     >   And get your nose in God's Word!
    
   

 AMEN

 re .35



 Wonderful :-(

>    I find it rather strange the word righteous was even used in the
>    context of sin.  

The context was not one of sin but of responsibilities to the covenant.
The seed of Judah was to be maintained through Tamar.  What Tamar did
was wrong, but what Judah did was MORE wrong.  Why?  See the emphasis
for the reason!

 26  And Judah acknowledged them, and said, she hath been more righteous than
I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There was a duty of next of kin to be performed.  Judah was the cause of
her sin.  Therefore, she was more righteous than he was because not only
did he cause her sin, but he participated in it.  The sin was not considered
righteous by any measure.  In fact, in verse 24, she was going to be burnt
at the stake for her harlotry!  So how is it that Judah is saying that
she is more righteous?  Ask instead how it is that Judah, being found with
more guilt shouldn't be punished as well.

>So was there an element of righteousness in Tamar's
>    action.. why would we delineate sins?

You mean make one worse than another?  The code of Hammurabi was in force
in the land of Canaan.  Women did not have the same rights that men did.
Better ask, does God delineate sins?  

>    Isn't sin, sin, no matter who commits it or the nature of the sin
>    itself?
    
The answer is yes and no.  Some sins are more greivous to God and are 
abominable, yet all sin separates us from God.  (Which sin is beyond 
redemption?)

---------------------------

Lastly, Strong's render the word righteous as we might: "to be right,
to make right (in a moral or forensic sense): cleanse, clear self,
be or do just(ice).

But I emphasize that saying that Tamar is more righteous only means that
the reason for the whole mess was because the RIGHT thing to do (by duty
and by the context of the culture) was to have the next of kin procreate 
for the family.  (I am certainly not bound, if any of my brother's become
widowed, to create more offspring for them.)

Mark

>      And where does one grocery shop in order to avoid the garbage in the
>      magazine racks at the checkout counter.  I've about reached the point
>      where my TV stays off, I'm about to cancel my Sunday newspaper, I'll have
>      to stay out of grocery stores altogether, because if they don't use
>      sex to grab you in the checkouts, they use it to try to sell you practi-
>      ally everything from soft drinks to ear wax remover.
    
    Jim, you can always strap on those things that racehorses have on their
    heads ;-)  The day is soon coming when even the Orkin Man will become
    some blonde bimbo ;-)
    
    Mike

    I am going to be unusaully open and share something personal in the
    hope that it may help someone.
    
    When I was in my teens, and did not have my life right with Christ, I
    had a bad problem with lust(sexual).  It was getting to the point I
    could hardly look at anyone of the opposite sex without having
    unChristian thoughts/desires.  Upon dedicating my life to Christ I
    found that this problem no matter how hard I tried still seemed to be a
    problem.  Here is what I did.
    
    For one month I stopped watching ALL TV, and stopped listening to ALL
    unChristian music (rock country etc.).  I prayed and made and tried
    again.  By the end of ONE MONTH the problem had virtually vanished. 
    Upon improving my health and growing in Christ ALL the problem
    vanished.
    
    GARBAGE IN - - GARBAGE OUT
    
    Stop wathcing TV(and sexual images is only one reason on a long list)
    
    Stop listening to junky music.
    
    Rich

    I applaud your openness and risk taking, Bob!  Thank you.
    
    I second the notion.
    
    Love in Him,
    Nancy

 Thank you, Rich...that is wonderful advice, something I've been considering
 for quite some time..maybe its time to do just that.




Jim

    ...and not only avoiding the garbage, but setting our mind on the
    Spirit and understanding our identity in Christ.
    
    Good note Rich!  Thanks for sharing.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing

| <<< Note 573.7 by JUPITR::MESSENGER "The discerning heart seeks knowledge PR 15:14" >>>



| Other sexual perversions have also been proven to be correctable imbalances.


	Rich, what perversions are these?


Glen

RE: .12


	Glenn, good note. I think you hit the nail on the head.


Glen

| <<< Note 573.36 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "I'm the traveller, He's the Way" >>>




| And where does one grocery shop in order to avoid the garbage in the magazine 
| racks at the checkout counter.  


	Hey Jim, have them DELIVER your groceries..... :-)

>| Other sexual perversions have also been proven to be correctable imbalances.
>	Rich, what perversions are these?

Any sexual activity outside the Biblical context for sexual expression.
MM

| <<< Note 573.47 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>


| Any sexual activity outside the Biblical context for sexual expression.

	Again, what are these?

Protecting sexual morality is the responsibility of society.  Trouble is
(as is pointed out in topic 496), society has decided to listen to the
psychologists and other scientists who study our fallen nature and then
proclaim that this is the way we are supposed to be, rather than to sit
down and think about how we should and could be, with just a little
encouragement and a positive and chaste attitude, and without any
draconian laws.

A new ad which I saw on the T yesterday evening makes a very valid point:

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT:			TEACHER:
    I want to start smoking.
					    No! Abstain.
    I want to start drinking.
					    No! Abstain.
    I want to try drugs.
					    No! Abstain.
    I want to have sex.
					    Here's a condom.

  This may make sense to Condomaniacs and the surgeon general, but
  to us it's nonsense.

 Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

    Thanks for bearing that, Rich!  It is amazing how common such problems
    are, but is even more amazing that there is a cure!

Sexuality is the nature of being male and the nature of being female.
A discussion about Christian sexuality is about what that nature is 
under the Lordship of Christ.

Got created both male and female - why?  Did God create sexuality or
was Satan putting a little nasty ingredient into God's creation?

When we realize that God created sexuality, as he did the other things
of the earth, we need to then discover God's right use of sexuality
(our being male and female) as well as we need to know the right use 
of the things of this earth.  The following comes from a Christian
sex manual:



         Excerpts from "Intended for Pleasure" by Ed and Gaye Wheat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have God's permission to enjoy sex within your marriage.  He invented sex;
he thought it up to begin with.  You can learn to enjoy it, and husbands, you
can develop a thrilling, happy marriage with "the wife of your youth."

The ancient counsel given by father to son, based upon the wisdom of God in
Proverbs 5:18; 19, comes across just as clearly to the reader today: "Let your
fountain [your body parts which produce life] be blessed, and rejoice [or
ecstatically delight] with the wife of your youth... Let her breasts satisfy
you at all times, and be ravished [or filled] always with her love."

It may surprise some of you to learn that the Bible speaks so openly, so
joyously, of sex in marriage.
.
.
.
But not until He had created man and woman did God call for our attention with
"Behold, it was *very* good."

With so many "good" things in the Garden and on earth, only one thing was *not
good*: "And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will
make a helpmate for him" (Genesis 2:18).  In those few words God taught us that
for man there is no substitute, no alternative plan, no better companion than
his wife.  The void which originally was caused by taking "bone of my bone,
flesh of my flesh" can be filled only by the presence of woman.  Since part of
Adam went to make Eve, a man remains incomplete without his Eve.

..."Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave
unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh. (Genesis 2:24).  God had first
divided the woman fromthe man when He made Eve.  But now He commands them to
be joined together again as one flesh.  In this brief counseling session, even
before any sin and its resulting selfishness had entered the human race, we
find three basic commands:

    First, when we marry, we should stop being dependent on our parents
    or our in-laws.  We are to become completely dependent on our mates
    to satisfy *all* our needs.

    Second, the man is the one responsible for holding the marriage
    together by "cleaving" to his wife.  Cleaving in this sense means
    to be welded inseperably, so that each becomes a part of the other.
    Therefore, the man is to be totally committed to his one wife.

Third, we are commanded to be joined together in sexual union, to be one flesh.
.
.
.
As a matter of fact, the sex relationship in marriage receives such emphasis in
the Scriptures that we begin to see it was meant not only to be a wonderful,
continuing experience for the husband and wife, but it was also intended to
show us something even more wonderful about God and His relationship with us.
Ephesians 5:31, 32 spells it out:  "For this cause shall a man leave his father
and mother, shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church."  *Thus
the properly and lovingly executed and mutually satisfying sexual union is
God's way of demonstrating to us a great spiritual truth.*  It speaks to us of
the greatest love story ever told - of how Jesus Christ gave Himself for us and
is intimately involved with and loves the Church (those who believe in Him).
In this framework of understanding between two growing Christians, the sexual
relationship can become a time of intimate fellowship as well as delight.
-------------------------------------------------------------

And this is only a few snippets from Chapter 1!

Also this from a past conference:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>           Stop depriving one another, EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT FOR A TIME
>           that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together
>           again lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-
>           control. [I Cor 7:5]
>
>       Marrieds may even choose to fast from one another (sexually) for an
>   agreed upon amount of time in order to focus on the Lord. :-)  So you can
>   see that fasting does not always have to be from food.

Ed Wheat in his book uses this verse to show that married couples should
not deprive each other of sex (except by agreement that you may devote
yourselves to prayer).

Now before you go using this text with your spouse, remember to adhere to
all the other aspects of a ONE-FLESH marriage.

The following note is over 300 lines long but is kept together for continuity
of the note.  It is a lesson I gave to teeangers about sex over 3 years ago.
It isn't the best or most polished lesson, but I offer it if it may be of 
help to someone dealing with the issue of teen sexuality and the Christian
responsibility towards sexuality.

Mark

                             Sweethearts and Sex

          Abstract: This was a talk to a group of church teenagers on
                    Valentine's Day.  It deals with human sexuality
                    within the context of Christianity.

          Source:    A Christian Magazine (I've lost the name)

          Lesson provider:   Mark Metcalfe


          Because this is Valentine's Day, I want to talk to you about
          relationship between the opposite sexes. I understand that you
          have had this kind of talk before. However, I want to specifi-
          cally address the following topics:

          o  How to be friends without having an intimate relationship.

          o  How to be friends when your friend wants a more intimate
             relationship.

          o  How to stay friends despite an intimate relationship.

          o  How to stay cool when it's really hot.

          o  How to stop if you are in an intimate relationship.

          First let me define the word intimate to mean close, not neces-
          sarily sexual, although sex is certainly intimate. However, you
          can be intimate with someone without sex in the equation.

  1  How to be Friends Without Having an Intimate Relationship

          This is one of the more important things two people can learn
          during their teen years and one of the things that most teens do
          not learn. Let's look at why this happens:

          When you reach your teen years, the body changes. And you know,
          it isn't just the curves on the girl you knew to be as straight
          as a beanpole last year, or the muscles on the weakling you used
          to know that attracts you.

          People's bodies go through a chemical change in addition to
          the physical change. It is this change that makes the curves or
          muscles attractive and clouds the mind.

          Now the sex hormones, we are told from science class, are close
          to the base of the brain, in or near the hypothalamus, not as
          some of you suppose a couple of feet lower. The reason this is
          important to know is because the fundamental emotions come from
          this area of the brain.

          Emotions and passion are powerful forces that make us do things
          that we would never do if we were cool-headed. This is why
          someone can be kissing you one minute and because you are not as
          "into it" as he is, he can become angry so quickly.

          I tell you this so that you recognize that the emotions are very
          closely interrelated; love, hate, anger, joy, jealousy.

          Think a minute. What is the opposite of love? The opposite of
          love is not hate; the opposite of love is apathy (you don't
          care). Love is caring; hate is caring; anger is caring; jealousy
          is caring.

          Now to the point: How does all this relate to how you can be
          friends without getting into trouble with your emotions?

          Start out as friends. What is a friend? Someone you can talk to
          comfortably; that's a start. Boys and girls can be friends and
          talk fairly comfortably with each other. If one or the other
          shows passion too soon, you may scare off the one to whom you
          are attracted.

          Joy and I wrote letters to each other for three years before
          she came to college. Joy and I knew each other emotionally,
          intellectually, and as good friends long before we began a
          dating, or physical, relationship. I think that is part of the
          reason why our marriage is so good. We took the time to know
          each other before our passions took over.


  2  How to Be Friends When Your Friend Wants a More Intimate Relationship

          Let's say you're having fun being friends but you would like to
          be a little more than friends but your friend doesn't want to
          change the relationship.

          You get something like this: "I like you as a friend...."

          If you are like me, this sounds like a rejection; and in fact it
          is, but there are levels of rejection. One usually reacts to the
          rejection with anger, or feigned indifference.

          What do you do? First, you need to realize that you were try-
          ing to introduce a new dimension into a relationship. You are
          putting the other person on the spot. Relationships are a coop-
          erative venture and has to be accepted by both parties. There-
          fore, since you introduced the idea, you give the other person
          the option of accepting or rejecting your proposal.

          So, the level of rejection between friends is sincere when the
          other person says, "I like you as a friend, and I am not ready
          to change that relationship between us." If he or she spits on
          your shoes and calls you all kinds of names, chances are your
          friendship relationship wasn't very deep. One is a rejection of
          the proposal; the other is a rejection of the person. Learn to
          distinguish the two.

          It will still hurt a little because you don't get what you want.
          But don't trash a friendship because of it.

          You need to recognize that some of the people to whom you are
          attracted do not feel the same way about you, as you do about
          them. This is tough, especially when you want to date someone.
          "Going out" is different than being friends and it can be more
          than the other person wants to handle, for whatever reasons.

          That was part of the reason I had you take those temperament
          profile tests a while back; to show you that each of you is
          different and respond differently to different situations.

          Can friends date? Sure they can. Can friends kiss? I'd say
          that more than a peck on the cheek and you've added the next
          dimension to the relationship.

          The nature of going out on a date raises the expectation level
          of one side or the other. It's an added pressure or complica-
          tion.

          When expectations are different, things can go wrong.

  3  How to Stay Friends Despite an Intimate Relationship

          This can be taken two ways:

          o  Being friends while going steady; Joy and I are very good
             friends and we have an intimate marriage relationship. Some
             married couples are not so lucky.

          o  Being friends after breaking up from an intimate relationship

          I want to address the second point. "Don't you know that break-
          ing up is hard to do?"

          As a relationship becomes more intimate, a couple becomes more
          vulnerable and open to the other. When you break up, you both
          have an arsenal of secrets and vulnerabilities.

          Sometimes the hurt that is caused by a break up is vented by
          disclosing these secrets or vulnerabilities to others, which
          should never be done. Again, emotions get the better of you. Is
          it any wonder the Bible says that the tongue is a double-edged
          sword that can lift up and turn around and destroy.

          Words are powerful weapons! They are also powerful motivaters.
          Use them wisely.

          What do I do? Even if you break up with your boyfriend or girl-
          friend in a fight, get alone first to cool off. If you want to
          be friends, think of the nice times you had together and mourn
          over the break up. If you want revenge, you got troubles.

          Never divulge secrets or vulnerabilities because you destroy two
          lives with it.

  4  How to Stay Cool When It's Really Hot

          This section is for those of you who are in or will sometime be
          in an intimate relationship.

          Sex is a powerful drug and an even more powerful temptation.
          Touching someone you enjoy being with sends all kinds of signals
          to your brain.

          You also know what the Bible says about sex outside of marriage.
          I won't spend too much time on repeating it but I do want to
          voice some of the consequences and discuss ways to avoid the
          temptation.

          Joy and I joke that we took the Biblical view of marriage:
          "Better to get married than to burn with lust."

          Let's look at sex before marriage in a Pro and Con situation:

          ------------------      -------------------------------------
          PRO                     CON
          ------------------      -------------------------------------

          It's fun; it feels      You can get pregnant and the problems
          good                    that go with it

          It may be status        It is sin according to the Bible
          (mainly male)
                                  You have to buy birth control

                                  It causes crushing guilt

                                  It causes worry about getting pregnant

                                  It causes you to lie and be deceitful to
                                  your parents (more sin)

                                  You have to sneak around

                                  It could "ruin" your reputation

                                  It could transmit a sexual disease

          The sexual revolution is the worst joke ever played on women by
          men. Some prominent feminists agree with this statement.

          It is far easier for a man to repent and change a promiscuous
          lifestyle than it is for a woman. And this is not just because a
          woman can get pregnant.


          Women become much more emotionally involved in sex than men do.
          Men's sexual drive shoot way up quickly and evaporates just as
          quickly. Women warm up slowly and heat up.

          When the fire is out and your brain returns to normal, reality
          sinks in. Once a girl (more so than a boy) has tarnished her
          reputation, her self-esteem takes a nose dive. When self-esteem
          is so low that you have to reach to scratch a snake's belly,
          you've destroyed a person. A girl practically has to move to an-
          other state to change her reputation. It is extremely difficult
          to live down gossip in the peer grapevine.

          This is that part that's not fair or equal for women. And this
          is the reason women do have a greater responsibility (or maybe
          "tougher" is the word) to guide the relationship.

          So what are the practical things you can do to avoid this temp-
          tation?

          o  Set limitations on yourselves. That means planning a date
             together that does not allow for "empty time" or "time alone"
             with no escape hatch.

          o  Travel in groups. It's awful difficult to toss the laundry in
             public.

          o  Go out with other friends. You don't have to be joined at the
             hip to someone you're dating.

          Let me say a few things about birth control.

          Birth control gives you a false sense of security. The birth
          control devices are not fool-proof. Their success statistics are
          not a true representative of their performance.

          Note that all pregnancies occur during a woman's fertile time
          which is for about 3 days in her cycle.  If condoms have a 98%
          success rate, on what statistic of days is this based: 3 days
          or 30 days?  Especially since you cannot tell if a condom
          succeeds or fails on an infertile day.  They do not know how
          often the birth control fails during infertile times in the
          cycle unless they have measured the accuracy of their data based
          on only the times the woman is fertile.

          What it means is that if you are unlucky enough to have sex dur-
          ing the woman's fertile time, you are subjected to the unknown
          failure rate!

          Knowing the fertile time is a tricky venture. It doesn't happen
          the same with every woman. It doesn't happen the same time all
          the time for some women.

          And the man is always fertile!

          Now, getting pregnant is not the only reason to stay celibate.
          Just don't be fooled into thinking birth control is fool-proof.
          I know of cases of failed birth control efforts.

          Other reasons to stay celibate (that means being a virgin, and
          yes, men can be virgins) is to save the beauty of the ultimate
          expression of oneness for the one you know beyond all question
          is your mate for life, which is made irreversible by the act of
          the wedding vows. (Vows are more serious and carry more weight
          than a promise.)

          To have sex before then risks much, including having sex with
          someone whom you only think you want to spend the rest of your
          life. If you are going to spend the rest of your life with
          someone, then it is a decision that bears the test of celibacy
          until your vows are made before the Lord and your assembled
          guests.

  5  How to Stop if You are in an Intimate Relationship

          If some of you are already participating, or have participated
          in having sex with another, then you know what I mean by sex
          is a drug. And the road to recovery is not an easy one, by any
          means.

          But if you want to get right with God, having sex outside of
          marriage is not the "unpardonable sin."  But it is sin; and it
          is a sin of a different classification. Other sins hurt others.
          Sexual sins are against your own body, which is God's temple.

          The good news is that God forgives the penitent. Forgiveness is
          your primary concern if you need it.

          Secondarily, some practical helps to stop.

          o  Get married (rather than burn with lust). This is not an
             option for some of you at your age.  However, this is not
             the only reason for marriage!  One flesh means far MORE
             than sexual attraction!

          o  Resist the temptation one day at a time (one minute at a
             time) to put yourself into a situation where sex can happen.
             I remind you that temptation itself is not sinful; what you
             do with it can be sinful.

          o  Involve yourself in other activities to occupy your time.
             Take lessons in a musical instrument or craft, or join an
             athletic team. Anything to get your mind off sex and onto
             things that will broaden yourself and not denigrate yourself.

          o  Get someone to babysit you; someone you trust implicitly with
             your life. Don't allow yourself to get into a situation where
             sex can happen. Attach yourself to a girl-friend if you are a
             girl; a guy-friend if you are a guy.

          o  Suggestions?

  6  Questions and Answers

          I'll be happy to answer any general questions you have about
          our subject tonight. Personal questions are not appropriate here
          and I'll simply respond that I have no comment about a personal
          question.

    What is the Messianic Jews' perspective on this topic?  Steve?  Others? 
    I've seen some books in their catalogs that touch on this and am
    wondering what is different.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    re: grocery line
    
    Something you might want to try where you are distracted or have long
    waits is reading your Bible.  The American Bible Society has these
    little pocket sized books of the Bible that you can carry with you.  I
    have one of John and Luke and they fit in your shirt pocket.  
    
    In fact, they are about the size of those little horoscope books.  If
    someone asks you what you are reading, you can even tell them, "I'm reading
    about my future!"  ;-)
    
    Mike

 Good idea...I usually carry a pocket NT with me.



 

 Jim

Note 65.1 is an article on "Meaningful Touch."  It deals less with
sexuality than with the importance of physical contact, which includes
sexual contact within the context of Biblical morality.

    What other perversions?
    
    It's taboo ya know.  We can't offend the immoral.  It is policy.  :-X
    
    Rich

    .58
    
    Feel free to take it offline.
    
    Nancy

    	re .48
    
    	And why are you asking?  Surely you already know the answer...

re .-1

Desire to hear their names?

	John, me thinks with immoral and taboo in the same note one can get the
picture quite clear. Interesting....

    Josh McDowell wrote a book about five years ago called, "Why Wait".
    I didn't read it but I heard Josh interviewed on Songtime USA.  
    
    What he said was the following.  The most powerful sex organ in our
    body is the mind and it is something Satan battles for everyday.  As
    Mike H said, Romans 7 and 8 are very good sources of information
    regarding this.  Paul also tells us that we are to hold our mates in
    high esteem or high honor.  We are not to let the marriage bed become
    defiled.  This applies to anybody married, male or female.
    
    This means that whenever we get involved extramaritally, we as a
    married individual are allowing a foreign element into our bedroom.  
    An extramarital relationship is present with the both parties.  The 
    one who is married has defiled his current relationship and the one who
    isn't married has defiled any future relationship.  They were not able
    to give wholly of themselves to their mate.  
    
    In conclusion, I believe that both parties are in sin when this
    happens.  
    
    In Christ,
    
    -Jack

Romans 7:1  Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,)
how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
  2  For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband
so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law
of her husband.
  3  So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she
shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from
that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
  4  Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body
of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised
from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
  5  For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the
law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
  6  But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were
held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the
letter.
  7  What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known
sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou
shalt not covet.
  8  But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of
concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
  9  For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin
revived, and I died.
 10  And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto
death.
 11  For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew
me.
 12  Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
 13  Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin,
that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin
by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
 14  For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
 15  For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but
what I hate, that do I.
 16  If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is
good.
 17  Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
 18  For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing:
for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find
not.
 19  For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that
I do.
 20  Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that
dwelleth in me.
 21  I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
 22  For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
 23  But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind,
and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
 24  O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this
death?
 25  I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I
myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Romans 8:1  There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in
Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
  2  For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from
the law of sin and death.
  3  For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,
God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin,
condemned sin in the flesh:
  4  That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not
after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
  5  For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but
they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
  6  For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life
and peace.
  7  Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to
the law of God, neither indeed can be.
  8  So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
  9  But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit
of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none
of his.
 10  And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit
is life because of righteousness.
 11  But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in
you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal
bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
 12  Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the
flesh.
 13  For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the
Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
 14  For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
 15  For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye
have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
 16  The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
children of God:
 17  And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ;
if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
 18  For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to
be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
 19  For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the
manifestation of the sons of God.
 20  For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by
reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
 21  Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of
corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
 22  For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain
together until now.
 23  And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the
Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to
wit, the redemption of our body.
 24  For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a
man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
 25  But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for
it.
 26  Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what
we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for
us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
 27  And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit,
because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
 28  And we know that all things work together for good to them that love
God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
 29  For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to
the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
 30  Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he
called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
 31  What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be
against us?
 32  He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how
shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
 33  Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that
justifieth.
 34  Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is
risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh
intercession for us.
 35  Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or
distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
 36  As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are
accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
 37  Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that
loved us.
 38  For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
 39  Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate
us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

    On "Good Morning America" this morning they announced that '20/20'
    (the weekly news magazine) will be doing a segment on sexuality on
    tonight's show.  Basically, they did a survey and their findings are
    that married people "or people with partners" have sex more often than
    single people (which makes sense, right?)  They are trying to dispell
    the notion that people (the general population, regardless of being
    married/single) are not having sex as much as the media would have us
    believe.  Like that makes it o.k., because it's happening less than
    what people think.....FWIW
    
    Karen

 I believe a similar study is in today's Boston Globe, though I haven't 
 read it yet (may not read it in fact).





Jim

    Great article in Atlantic Monthly regarding the failure of the public
    schools in providing sex education.  Starting 30 years ago in
    California when Planned Parenthood brought their agenda to the
    classroom, the number of STDs, abortions, teen-age pregnancies, unwed
    parents has continued to rise.  It contains a lot about NJ schools that
    have been going strong for 10 years.  The lady, a Barbara ? lives in
    Amherst, MA and also wrote the article for them about Dan Quayle Was
    Right.  Heard her on Cal Thomas" show.  One of her solutions was to
    home school.

    >    schools in providing sex education.  Starting 30 years ago in
>    California when Planned Parenthood brought their agenda to the
>    classroom, the number of STDs, abortions, teen-age pregnancies, unwed
>    parents has continued to rise.  It contains a lot about NJ schools that

    talk about guaranteeing your own job security!

    Hi, I'm new to this notes file.  The topic drawn my attention for have
    a look at the sexuality issues from the Bible.  I wonder if anyone has
    read the Song of Songs.  It's apparently in the Book of Genesis but I
    couldn't find it in my King James Version.  It could be on the Revised
    Standard Version.  It recorded:
    
    your name is oil poured out;
      therefore, the maidens love you.
    Draw me after you, let us make haste.
      The King has brought me into his chambers.
    We will exult and rejoice in you;
      we will extol your love more than wine;
      rightly do they love you.  (1:2b-4)
    
    The pronouns here appeared in plural form.  The woman herself exults
    that other women, as well as men, adore her mate.  In their attraction
    for him, she finds joy, not jealousy.  Could this has any lead to have
    multiple sex partners?
    
    

    .69
    
    Song of Songs = Song of Solomon after Proverbs.
    
    

    Song of Solomons was referring to Jesus as I recall.
    
    I dare say if we look at the context of WHO Jesus is to the human race,
    that it's not "lovers" as in the physical, but spiritual sense.

re .70
    
>    Song of Songs = Song of Solomon after Proverbs.
    
Well, the order is actually Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (Koheleth), then
The Song of Solomon then Isaiah.

It's called Song of Songs in the New English Bible.    

But it's called Song of Solomon in most bibles, including the KJV,
RSV, NRSV, and others.

/john

BTW, both Church and Synagogue agree on a religious interpretation of
Canticle of Canticles (yet another name for this book) -- that it refers
to the love of the Lord for his people (or, for Christians, to the love
of Christ for the church and the individual soul).

This is supported by the theme of the marriage between the Lord and Israel
(Hosea 1-3; Isaiah 62:5; etc.).  It has been treated as an allegory of the
history of Israel, from the Exodus on.

One has to be careful with such interpretation, though.  Taken literally,
it clearly refers to love between humans.  If the details are transposed
to another level, its the foot in the door for fanciful interpretations.

Thus pagans jump on the bandwagon and claim that it came from love songs of
the Tammuz-Ishtar ritual, later passed into Israel's tradition.  There isn't
enough evidence to support this, but that never stopped anyone.

/john

KJV text of Song of Solomon, 1:3b-4 --

	thy name is as ointment poured forth,
	therefore do the virgins love thee.
	Draw me, we will run after thee:
	the king hath brought me into his chambers:
	we will be glad and rejoice in thee,
	we will remember thy love more than wine:
	the upright love thee.

NRSV text of Song of Solomon, 1:3b-4 -- (not surprisingly, much like the RSV)

	your name is perfume poured out;
	therefore the maidens love you.
	Draw me after you, let us make haste.
	The king has brought me into his chambers.
	We will exult and rejoice in you;
	we will extol your love more than wine;
	rightly do they love you.

Das Hohelied, E� text of 1:3b-4 -- 

	dein Name [ist] hingegossenes Salb�l;
	darum lieben dich die M�dchen.
	Zieh mich her hinter dir!  La� uns eilen!
	Der K�nig f�hrt mich in seine Gem�cher.
	Jauchzen la�t uns, deiner uns freuen,
	deine Liebe h�her r�hmen als Wein.
	Dich liebt man zu Recht.

Das Hohelied Salamos, Martin Luther's text of 1:3b-4 -- 

	Dein Name ist eine ausgesch�ttete Salbe,
	darum lieben dich die M�gde.
	Zeuch mich dir nach, so laufen wir.
	Der K�nig f�hret mich in seine Kammer.
	Wir freuen uns und sind fr�hlich �ber dir;
	wir gedenken an deine Liebe mehr denn an den Wein.
	Die Frommen lieben dich.

The Song of Songs, New English Bible text of 1:3b-4 -- 

Bride:
	your name [is] like perfume poured out;
	for this the maidens love you.
	Take me with you, and we will run together;
	bring me into your chamber, O king.

Companions:
	Let us rejoice and be glad for you;
	let us praise your love more than wine,
	  and your caresses more than any song.

The NEB notes "The Hebrew text implies, by its pronouns, different speakers,
but does not indicate them; they are given, however, in two manuscripts of
the Septuagint."

Hello,

In my reading of the Song of Solomon I have understood the bridegroom to be
refering to Solomon, as well as being a picture of the LORD Jesus.  In the
Solomon context, the plurality of admirers is the adoration of subjects, 
rather than the multiplicity of lovers (though Solomon had such an immense 
harem).

�    your name is oil poured out;
�      therefore, the maidens love you.
�    Draw me after you, let us make haste.
�      The King has brought me into his chambers.
===================================================
�    We will exult and rejoice in you;
�      we will extol your love more than wine;
�      rightly do they love you.  (1:2b-4)

According to my footnotes, the above passage is divided by a different use
of pronouns where I divide it.  The preceding section is spoken by the
beloved to the bridegroom.  The second section is spoken by the friends or
attendents, admiring the relationship which exists between the two.  ie "we
will extol your love..." refers to the couple, not to others' experience of
the same man's embrace. 

Checking back, I see that John has put the same from the NEB... My
commentary was from the NIV.

Even if you took this passage to describe multiple partners (of which there
are many painful instances in scripture), it would conflict with the law of
God, which unites one man with one woman (Genesis 2:24), and forbids
adultery (Exodus 20:14). 


							God bless
								Andrew

    OK, Let's not take this literally?
    
    Let's spiritualize it?
    
    After all, It is difficult to think of the Bible talking about SEX in a
    positive light.
    
    
    Another great one is the Wisdom of Solomon.  Divine Wisdom is
    personified as a woman who was with God at the beginning of the world
    and God created all of earth.  The Notion of Divine Wisdom evolved into
    the notion of LOGOS by the time of John's Gospel.
    
    The Wisdom literature except for the Psalms is perhaps the most
    neglected books of the Bible.  The Wisdom literature is also literature
    of great attractiveness to feminist theologians.
    
                                   Patricia

Though I believe that the Song of Songs is a picture of Jesus' love for us, I
also believe that it has much to say to us taken at face value.

God created two sexes, made for each other.  He created marriage to bind them
together.  And He created sex between them, both to produce children and as
bond of love, intimacy, and - yes - pleasure between them.  If it's difficult
for us to think of the Bible talking about sex in a positive light, that's
because we've brought that difficulty with us, not because it was there.

Sex was God's idea in the first place.  We can too often see only the mess
that Satan has made of sex and lose sight of the glorious gift from God that
it is.

The Song of Songs is a delightful celebration of marriage, and it celebrates
ALL aspects of marriage, including sex.

Paul

    >It is difficult to think of the Bible talking about SEX in a
    >positive light.
    
    Why is that?  The bible is full of positive commentary on sex within
    marriage.  Maybe this is a sarcastic statement.  I would agree that the
    church (we as christians ARE the church) has failed in large part to
    convey the positive aspects of love making within marriage--and to help
    couples with the practical aspects of meeting each other needs in this
    way.
    
    
    Proverbs speaks of wisdom more than any other book that I know of.  It
    often speaks of wisdom as she/her etc. (seek after her as silver).  I
    never took wisdom to be a separate entity or person, but as an
    attribute of God (ie we are to seek after the wisdom that comes from
    God the Father).  I do know that when my wife speaks to me, I
    listen--because many times the Lord uses her to impart His wisdom to
    me.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing

    Paul,
    
    We've got to quit having these note collisions!
    
    Bing

My thought exactly.  :-)

Paul

    Bing,
    
    Is there any Biblical reason why you could not define Divine Wisdom
    and Christ as the same preexistent Child of God.
    
    Does the wisdom literature really speak any differently of Divine
    Wisdom than John speaks about the Preexistent 'Son' of God.  If gender
    in God is a matter of our human misunderstanding about the nature of
    Divine Gender then might this not fit?
    
                                    Patricia

    re .81
    
    I too agree with your description of the Song of Solomon although there
    are many places in the Bible where sex in not potrayed so positively. 
    
    I wish more people were conversant in these positive passages..
    
                                      Patricia  

>    I too agree with your description of the Song of Solomon although there
>    are many places in the Bible where sex in not potrayed so positively. 

Misuse of sex is condemned throughout the Bible.  But where is sex itself
portrayed as not being a good thing?  The only thing I can think of that even
hints at this is Paul's encouragement to embrace the gift of celibacy if God
extends it, in 1Cor 7.  Yet even in that context Paul affirms that the
husband and wife should embrace their sexuality, even going so far as to say
that the wife's body does not belong to her alone, but also to her husband,
AND that the husband's body does not belong to him alone, but also to his
wife.

Paul

    >Is there any Biblical reason why you could not define Divine Wisdom
    >and Christ as the same preexistent Child of God.
    
    The bible also says that God is love.  He defines love, just as He
    defines wisdom.  The wisdom that comes from God is the only true
    wisdom.  I do not see where proverbs is talking about Christ, when it is 
    talking about wisdom.  I see it as talking about the wisdom of God.
     
    I believe that wisdom is one of the attributes of God, that we are to
    seek to have.  The NT shows that the only way for us to have those
    attributes is by abiding in Christ.  As a child of God we have the
    priviledge to depend upon Jesus Christ who lives in us who are born
    again.

>Another great one is the Wisdom of Solomon.  Divine Wisdom is personified
>as a woman who was with God at the beginning of the world and God created
>all of earth.  The Notion of Divine Wisdom evolved into the notion of LOGOS
>by the time of John's Gospel.

It is a literary and grammatical personification; a "person" of the female
human gender cannot be inferred.  Here are some extracts from the King James
Bible version of the Wisdom of Solomon which show clearly that the idea that
Wisdom was a "woman" is as wrong as the idea that God the Father is a "man".

Wisdom 6:9-25 (KJV)

Unto you therefore, O kings, do I speak, that ye may learn wisdom, and not
fall away. For they that keep holiness holily shall be judged holy: and
they that have learned such things shall find what to answer. Wherefore set
your affection upon my words; desire them, and ye shall be instructed.

Wisdom is glorious, and never fadeth away: yea, she is easily seen of them
that love her, and found of such as seek her. She preventeth them that
desire her, in making herself first known unto them. Whoso seeketh her
early shall have no great travail: for he shall find her sitting at his
doors. To think therefore upon her is perfection of wisdom: and whoso
watcheth for her shall quickly be without care. For she goeth about seeking
such as are worthy of her, sheweth herself favourably unto them in the
ways, and meeteth them in every thought. For the very true beginning of her
is the desire of discipline; and the care of discipline is love; And love
is the keeping of her laws; and the giving heed unto her laws is the
assurance of incorruption; And incorruption maketh us near unto God:
Therefore the desire of wisdom bringeth to a kingdom. If your delight be
then in thrones and sceptres, O ye kings of the people, honour wisdom, that
ye may reign for evermore.

As for wisdom, what she is, and how she came up, I will tell you, and will
not hide mysteries from you: but will seek her out from the beginning of
her nativity, and bring the knowledge of her into light, and will not pass
over the truth. Neither will I go with consuming envy; for such a man shall
have no fellowship with wisdom. But the multitude of the wise is the
welfare of the world: and a wise king is the upholding of the people.
Receive therefore instruction through my words, and it shall do you good.


Wisdom 9:9-13 (KJV)

And wisdom was with thee: which knoweth thy works, and was present when
thou madest the world, and knew what was acceptable in thy sight, and right
in thy commandments. O send her out of thy holy heavens, and from the
throne of thy glory, that being present she may labour with me, that I may
know what is pleasing unto thee. For she knoweth and understandeth all
things, and she shall lead me soberly in my doings, and preserve me in her
power. So shall my works be acceptable, and then shall I judge thy people
righteously, and be worthy to sit in my father's seat. For what man is he
that can know the counsel of God? or who can think what the will of the
Lord is?

Wisdom 10:1-7 (KJV)  [note that "father of the world" is Adam]

She preserved the first formed father of the world, that was created alone,
and brought him out of his fall, And gave him power to rule all things. But
when the unrighteous went away from her in his anger, he perished also in
the fury wherewith he murdered his brother. For whose cause the earth being
drowned with the flood, wisdom again preserved it, and directed the course
of the righteous in a piece of wood of small value. Moreover, the nations
in their wicked conspiracy being confounded, she found out the righteous,
and preserved him blameless unto God, and kept him strong against his
tender compassion toward his son.

When the ungodly perished, she delivered the righteous man, who fled from
the fire which fell down upon the five cities. Of whose wickedness even to
this day the waste land that smoketh is a testimony, and plants bearing
fruit that never come to ripeness: and a standing pillar of salt is a
monument of an unbelieving soul.

�    After all, It is difficult to think of the Bible talking about SEX in a
�    positive light.

I know that several have already leapt to the defence of sex-in-the-Bible, 
but I really had to add my penny-worth here!!!

From the Bible alone, sex is something created by God.  Is was His idea, 
and He gave it to mankind.  He made it to be a joy and a delight, given the 
choice of Genesis 2:24.  He not only gave it; He commanded to use it - go 
and multiply - Genesis 1:28, 9:1,7. (hey, we were on this elsewhere...;-)

It was God's idea in the first place!

He also said exactly how to use it.  Not your average sex ed lessons, which 
tend to be pretty intuitive stuff anyway, but the relationship commitment 
when it really works.  The stuff this generation has lost track of.

It's as down-to-earth and literal as you could imagine.  God made the very 
earth we walk on, and told us how to use it.  Including how to get chidren 
to do the same...

The Bible is real, physical, and literal, as well as spiritual....

In your continuation, you seem to imply that the 'wisdom' highlighted in, 
for instance, Proverbs 8, by which creation was formed, was the idea which 
became the LORD Jesus :

� The Notion of Divine Wisdom evolved into the notion of LOGOS by the time
� of John's Gospel. 

Is this your meaning?  If this were so, the Messiah would have been a
woman, as 'wisdom' is consistently referred to as 'she'.  Meanwhile, the
physical involvement of the LORD Jesus in creation is evident from passages
like Colossians 1:16 ("by Him all things were created") and Hebrews 1:2
("through Whom He made the universe").

Christians see the LORD Jesus in the Old Testament in physical form, in 
Christophanies or Theophanies, where He meets various people - Adam, in the 
garden, Abraham on various occasions etc.  No crystalisation or development 
of an idea.

'Wisdom' is an idea or concept; not a person, though it is sometimes 
represented as a personality (especially in Proverbs).

							Andrew

>Misuse of sex is condemned throughout the Bible.

Paul (Weiss) touches on one my key themes: context.

Wisdom is the PROPER application of knowledge.
Good is the PROPER use of something.

Foolishness is the IMPROPER application of knowledge.
Bad is the IMPROPER use of something.

Sex, among many, many other things, is something to be properly or improperly
used.  Proper use is good and moral, and to be enjoyed.  Improper use, while
enjoyed by some, is bad and immoral.

Too often people like to lump it all together in one or the other:
sex is good or sex is bad.  Neither statement is correct without CONTEXT.

Mark

NOTES> DIR 286.*

Selected verses by subject from Proverbs.

 One cannot, in my opinion, question the wisdom of God's plan for sex.  If
 society were to simply follow God's plan, rather than their own desires,
 this society would be a markedly different one in which to live.  




Jim

    Paul's potrayal of sex throughout 1 Corinthians is what immediately
    comes to my mind.  Without a Bible in front of me 1 cor 7 is most
    likely the chapter.  Paul's statement
    
    "It is better to Marry than to be aflame in passion" is an example.
    
    The gist of 1 Cor 7 is that if a man has control of his sexual passions
    then it is better for him to remain celibate.  If he cannot control his
    passion he should marry.  Husbands and Wifes should not deny each other
    sex because that could cause one/or the other of the partners to be
    Aflame in passion.
    
    The situation in Corinth was that women were taking positions of
    leadership in the Corinth church, Choosing to remain unmarried, and
    abstaining from sex from their husbands.  This was creating quite a
    turmoil.  Their style of leadership was more estactic than prophet,
    they were rejecting traditional customs such as wearing head covering.
    They were speaking in tongues in church.
    
    Paul was not pleased with the situation and was quite angry in his
    response to the women.  Interestingly in Corinthians the confession
    that we are all one in Christ does not include there is neither Male
    and Female in Christ as the Confession is recorded in Galatians.
    
    Paul was also combatting Gnosticism where some Gnostics believing the
    fleshly was evil were abstaining from sex and other Gnostics believing
    that the physical didn't make any difference anyways were engaging in 
    immoral sex such as the man sleeping with his father's wife.
    
    Paul himself professed to be Celibate, and recommended it as the
    highest ideal although he accepted that not all men had the discipline
    for it and that women should not force celibacy on their husbands by
    denying them.
    
    Patricia

    Andrew,
    
    Would it not be Bibically correct to think of the Divine aspect of
    Christ to be neither Male or Female  but the human aspect to be of a
    particular Gender.
    
    There is much evidence to support that Divine Wisdom and Christ are
    one.
    
                                    Patricia

>    "It is better to Marry than to be aflame in passion" is an example.
>    
>    The gist of 1 Cor 7 is that if a man has control of his sexual passions
>    then it is better for him to remain celibate.  If he cannot control his
>    passion he should marry.  Husbands and Wifes should not deny each other
>    sex because that could cause one/or the other of the partners to be
>    Aflame in passion.

Is this really how you have understood this?  I know you're a relative newcomer
to this conference, Pat, but this verse has been explained a number of times,
although I'll be happy to provide a thumbnail sketch of how this view is
at best incomplete.

I used to joke that this is why my wife and I got married, because I am (still)
attracted to her.

One view of this was that people were going through persecution at this time
and because of the present distress for Christians, they were at the mercy
of their enemies without state protection.  On this account, it would be better
for unmarried people to remain single.  

>    Paul was not pleased with the situation and was quite angry in his
>    response to the women.

I find this a highly subjective viewpoint, and one I do not share.

As for husbands and wives not denying each other, I heartily concur.  Sex
should never be a weapon, but an expression of unity between husband and 
wife.  People who withhold sex from their spouse, steal from the oneness that
they should be.  On the same token, people who demand sex from their spouse
treat them with disrespect unbecoming the love that Christ had for the church
and unbecoming the submission to the Lord as one to another.  Balance and
context are key components to understanding.

Pat, you seem to see so much anti-female texts in the Bible.  Why?
Is it because of what the text has actually said, or because of what someone
has told you it said?  Your understanding of Scripture is often colored
with a bias that is different than my bias, or biases that many have.
Why do we have the biases we do?  It might help to understand whether
we have filtered the Bible according to our biases, or allowed the Bible
to filter our biases.

Mark

>    There is much evidence to support that Divine Wisdom and Christ are
>    one.

Someone enlighten me: why is Divine Wisdom captialized?  Is it something
special and specific?

I believe Christ *has* divine wisdom; that is, it is an attribute of his
divinity. 

MM

Hi Patricia,

1 Corinthians 7 *is* the one on men / women relationships.  I'm not sure
what your point is in .94.  Are you seeing it as anti-marriage?  Those with
the gift of celibacy are a tiny minority, and Paul makes it very clear that
marriage is in no way sinful (as also does the writer in in Hebrews 13:4). 

�    Would it not be Bibically correct to think of the Divine aspect of
�    Christ to be neither Male or Female  but the human aspect to be of a
�    particular Gender.

Not at all.  The whole work of salvation is an exciting love story, where 
the Hero wins His bride.  The church is the bride of Christ, as represented 
in many places in the New Testament.  The Hero, the LORD Jesus, rescues His 
bride, the church, from an awful judgement and doom.

� There is much evidence to support that Divine Wisdom and Christ are one.
The LORD Jesus Christ has all wisdom, but wisdom is an attribute; Christ is 
a personality.  I haven't seen any suggestion that the passages 
personifying wisdom (any other than Proverbs?) are intended to represent 
divinity, or any other source for this.

							Andrew

>Is this really how you have understood this?
    
    Yes, I believe that the text speaks for itself.
    
    >  I know you're a relative newcomer to this conference, Pat, but this verse
    > has been explained a number of times,although I'll be happy to provide a
    > thumbnail sketch of how this view is at best incomplete.
    
    I guess I'm not looking for an authority to explain what the verses
    mean.  I seeking to read, learn about and understand what the Bible
    really does say and what meaning it has for me based on what it really
    does say.

>One view of this was that people were going through persecution at this time
>and because of the present distress for Christians, they were at the mercy
>of their enemies without state protection.  On this account, it would be better
>for unmarried people to remain single.  
    
    Actually the reason Paul gives is that since the end time is so
    imminent, People not distracted with pleasing spouses and children can
    devote all their time to pleasing  God.

*    Paul was not pleased with the situation and was quite angry in his
*    response to the women.

>I find this a highly subjective viewpoint, and one I do not share.
    
    There are other Biblical expert who agree with this interpretation.  
    I am influence by Antoinette Wares book title the "The Corinthian Women
    Prophets". 

>As for husbands and wives not denying each other, I heartily concur.  Sex
>should never be a weapon, but an expression of unity between husband and 
>wife.  People who withhold sex from their spouse, steal from the oneness that
>they should be.  On the same token, people who demand sex from their spouse
>treat them with disrespect unbecoming the love that Christ had for the church
>and unbecoming the submission to the Lord as one to another.  Balance and
>context are key components to understanding.

    I agree with you statement above.  Unfortunately violence and sexual
    abuse against women is a tremendous problem in our society.  
    
>Pat, you seem to see so much anti-female texts in the Bible.  Why?
>Is it because of what the text has actually said, or because of what someone
>has told you it said?  Your understanding of Scripture is often colored
>with a bias that is different than my bias, or biases that many have.
>Why do we have the biases we do?  It might help to understand whether
>we have filtered the Bible according to our biases, or allowed the Bible
>to filter our biases.
    
    That is true.  I am a woman. 
    
     I read the Bible first and foremost with my own eyes, ears, and mind. 
    I read what it says. I listen to various interpretations of the
    meanings but ultimately decide for myself what it means.
    
    There is a strong correlation between my interpretations and the
    interpretations of Feminist Theologians.
    
     I cannot help but be offended when women are offered to gangs of men,
    slaughter, mutilated and disseminated to the twelve tribes, told to
    shut up in church and go ask men if they need any help in understanding
    anything.
    
    I ache when I read pages and pages of geneologies and woman are
    excluded from them.
    
    Unfortunately the Bible does reflect the androcentric culture of the
    period in which it was written.  We cannot honestly read the Bible and
    ignore how that culture permeates the text.
    
    Patricia
    
    

    How is Logos/reason any different than Wisdom as an attribute?
    
    How would you descibe the preexistent Christ that was with God from the
    beginning of time? 
    
     I fail to see how the characterization would be any
    different if inferred from the Masculine word Logos of the Feminine
    Word Wisdom.  
    
    Why is it uncomfortable to think of the Preexistent Christ as a woman?
    
                                 Patricia

RE:        <<< Note 573.100 by POWDML::FLANAGAN "I feel therefore I am" >>>

       
   > Why is it uncomfortable to think of the Preexistent Christ as a woman?
    
     
   For one..
  

 Colossians 1:16 refers to Him as a male "For by Him were all things created,
 that are in Heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether
 they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers: all things were
 created by Him and for Him..

Hello Patricia,

Hmmmm.... I always thought of Logos as rather more than reason.  And 
certainly more than an attribute.  A Personality which is more than human, 
rather than less...  And an aspect or perspective of Him which brought out 
what John was trying to represent.

�    How would you descibe the preexistent Christ that was with God from the
�    beginning of time? 

			- time only started with creation....

The LORD Jesus was with the Father eternally.  Does He need a description
other than that in the Bible?

� I fail to see how the characterization would be any
� different if inferred from the Masculine word Logos of the Feminine
� Word Wisdom.  

It's more a matter of whether it's what is meant by the passage, and 
whether it's relevant in the context.  I don't find that the representation
of wisdom matches with the fullness of personality of the LORD Jesus; I 
find that these passages contribute to other perspectives of the divine 
omnipotence.
    
�    Why is it uncomfortable to think of the Preexistent Christ as a woman?

Because a change of state seems unnecessary and inconsistent with what we
know of our LORD.  Or are you meaning, 'pictured by the feminine, wisdom',
rather than 'as a woman'?  The two sexes are generally not used to
characterise each other, but are kept distinct. 

								Andrew

    There is a note to discuss gender and as a matter of fact I believe
    Patricia that you and others have already gone over this topic.  Can we
    please put this discussion back on track.
    
    The Gender of God not is open still if you wish to continue there.  
    
    Thanks,
    Nancy
    co-mod CHRISTIAN

Patricia,

>  I guess I'm not looking for an authority to explain what the verses mean.

Why not?  Only an authority can make definition.

>    That is true.  I am a woman. 

And so is my wife.  This is not a catch-all filter, since you both
see things regarding the Bible differently.

>     I cannot help but be offended when women are offered to gangs of men,
>    slaughter, mutilated and disseminated to the twelve tribes, told to
>    shut up in church and go ask men if they need any help in understanding
>    anything.
    
Many people are offended, too.  As for some of the other interpretations
you put forth, it is certainly not what others understand to be the
case, historically, or textually.  Going to ask men has a specific 
context and reading a anti-female slant into this is beyond the page.

>    I ache when I read pages and pages of geneologies and woman are
>    excluded from them.
>    
>    Unfortunately the Bible does reflect the androcentric culture of the
>    period in which it was written.  We cannot honestly read the Bible and
>    ignore how that culture permeates the text.

True.  Culture has its place in understanding some of the reasons.
But there are reasons beyond and above this for these things.  If you
think that women have been treated poorly by the Bible, singled out
as a subclass, then I would submit that there has been more misunderstanding
than understanding regarding this issue.  I do not dispute that some
individuals have misused the Bible texts to misuse women.  I dispute
that the Bible mistreats women and treats them as inferior to men.

Now, as someone else put it, some people consider some roles to be 
inferior to other roles, and this attitude should be examined more
closely.  Jesus was emphatic about the attitude of great people in the
kingdom should be, especially when his disciples were arguing who
should be the greatest, and who should sit in the seats of power, etc.
It is a matter of re-evaluating what the world has defined against 
what God defines, and why.  If God is loving, then we know that He does
not value a male over a female.  So we then ask how this applies to what
we have read.  What is the context of the event?  What is the purpose of
this text being in the Bible?  How does this apply to my life?

>    Actually the reason Paul gives is that since the end time is so
>    imminent, People not distracted with pleasing spouses and children can
>    devote all their time to pleasing  God.

I think this is a skewed view of Paul.  

Mark

    I had the chance to learn some interesting things this weekend, one of
    which I'll share here.  If you really are interested in the literal
    Biblical roles get a copy of "Biblical Lovemaking - a study of the Song
    of Solomon" by Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum.  It's basically a commentary on
    the Song of Solomon, but you'll be really surprised at what it
    contains.  I was pleasantly surprised at what this book is saying once
    you understand the symbolism and the metaphors.  Some of it even made
    me blush.
    
    Mike

    Should a person marry for sexual reasons?  The Bible indicates it is
    better to marry than to burn... is this a valid reason for marriage.

It is at least a contributory reason, but no reason to violate any other 
Biblical injunction (eg not being unequally yoked together, etc).

1 Corinthians 7:28 says, initially of divorced persons:

   "but if you do marry, you have not sinned, and if a virgin marries, she 
    has not sinned"

then in verse 39, more generally of a widow:
   "she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the LORD."

								Andrew

    re .107
    
    That is a real stretch of an interpretation of 1 Cor:7:28.
    
    Bound means being under a marriage agreement but not married.  As was
    the custom of the day, marriages were arranged and the bride was
    contracted for between future husband and father.  I Cor 7:28 does not
    speak to divorce.
    
    Jesus says in one Gospel that divorce is not allowed,
    in another Gospel that divorce is not allowed except for cases of
    infidelity, and Paul says that if you are married to an unbeliever and
    the unbeliever decides to leave you, then you are free.
    
    Other than those two exceptions, all of us who are divorced are out of
    alignment with biblical teaching.  Of course you also need to align the
    three statements one with another.

Patricia is correct, for once.

/john

    Nancy, I can't imagine such a union lasting very long.

>    Should a person marry for sexual reasons?  The Bible indicates it is
>    better to marry than to burn... is this a valid reason for marriage.
    
    It's biblical therefore it has to be valid!  
    
    Doesn't it!

    .112
    
    Context Patricia... the problem with verse isolation is verse
    isolation.

    Nancy,
    
    I have read that passage in context and in context it means exactly
    what it says.
    
    Paul's recommendation to his compatriots is, it is better for them not to
    marry.   However, if they cannot control their sexual passon , it is
    better for them to marry than to burn..
    

    You have to go back to the purpose of marriage.
    
    Malachi 2:15
    Has not [the LORD] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his.
    And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring.
    
    To unite two believers together under Christ and to produce godly
    offspring.
    
    
    Jill2

>    Should a person marry for sexual reasons?  The Bible indicates it is
>    better to marry than to burn... is this a valid reason for marriage.

There are two possible things that could be meant by this question:

  Should the possibility of marriage be given more weight and pursued more 
  intentionally because a person is having difficulty controlling their 
  sexual urges?

OR

  Should a particular marriage be entered into simply to provide a 'valid'
  sexual outlet when there are not other healthy Biblical grounds for the
  marriage?

The answer to the first is:  Absolutely, that's what the Bible recommends.
The answer to the second is:  Absolutely not, there are many other
requirements for a healthy marriage.

Paul

    Patricia guilty of verse isolation?!  Surely you jest!

| <<< Note 573.110 by COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" >>>

| Patricia is correct, for once.

	Gee, that was called for....NOT!

    Mike,
    
    (and others) re: .111
    
    >    Nancy, I can't imagine such a union lasting very long.
    
    I'll add a great big "AMEN" to that! From bitter and painful personal
    experience. My first wife and I had this verse pointed out to as a
    'justification' ("injunction") for us to get married. Rather than (in
    20/20 hind-sight) a stronger injunction to "stop having sex".
    
    To anyone in this 'situation'. From my heart, I adjure you to exercise
    self-control. Do not do this sin. And it is. Whether you 'feel that it
    is, or not, it is sin.
    
    Harry

Hi Patricia, welcome back - quickly this time!

I guess you've missed historic discussions on divorce, and the significance
of 1 Corinthians 7:28-29 in particular, which is being addressed to people
used to the customs of Corinth. 

The NIV gives these verses as:

7:27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce.  Are you unmarried?  Do not look 
     for a wife.
7:28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned, and if a virgin marries, she 
     has not sinned.  But those who marry will face many troubles in this life.

The words for 'divorce' and 'unmarried' in verse 27 are the same, as 
usually used for divorce.  So the 'unmarried' doesn't just mean someone who 
is single, but rather someone whose marriage has been undone - un-married, 
or divorced.  Otherwise the first two statements of verse 28 would just be 
repetition.  That particular ambiguity is poor translation in the NIV.  
The KJV has:

7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from 
     a wife? seek not a wife.
7:28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she
     hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh...

'loosed' is rather an ambigous use of English, but at least it uses the
same word for both cases of the same original.

573.109 � Jesus says in one Gospel that divorce is not allowed, in another 
573.109 � Gospel that divorce is not allowed except for cases of infidelity, 
573.109 � and Paul says that if you are married to an unbeliever and the 
573.109 � unbeliever decides to leave you, then you are free. 

If you have problems aligning scripture, and cite the situation here, you
should really give the references so that we can look them up for
ourselves, and see where you are coming from on these issues. 

573.109 � Other than those two exceptions, all of us who are divorced 
573.109 � are out of alignment with biblical teaching.

This is a dangerous assumption, with implications on individuals 
which need to be carefully examined before a blanket section of the 
community is classified as unBiblical.  I'm sure that's not what you 
meant, but it could easily be taken as condemnatory by sensitive 
individuals.  Note that while it may likely denote a spiritual need to be 
resolved before the LORD, it does not reflect on the salvation of the 
individual.

The principle gospel passages on divorce and remarriage are in Matthew 
5:31-32, 19:3-12, Mark 10:9-12, Luke 16:18.

You refer to these passages as if you found them in conflict.  However, in
historical context, they are quite clear.  The original optimum design is
for marriage, with no divorce.  I think anyone would agree with that
principle - and certainly the [religious or civil] marriage commitment
expresses the intent that it be for life.  Granted, there are many 
marriages which do not achieve that objective, but I would hope that is not 
because they are entered into as temporary arrangements, in contrast to the 
words of the oath!

So - divorce is always the result of sin; the breakdown of a covenant 
relationship.  

There are cases where the actions of one partner amount to a denial of the 
covenant with their spouse.  This is the sexual uncleanness mentioned in 
Matthew 19:9.

There is a greater commitment, even than that of temporal marriage, and
that is the  eternal relationship of the saved, with the LORD.  1 
Corinthians 7:15 clarifies this.  Note that this is a case which the LORD 
Jesus could not have taught about so explicitly, because the situation 
could only arise after His death and resurrection - it results from the 
Hoily Spirit indwelling the believer, and their spouse finding this 
untennable.

Now, I am unsure how you find the passages about this incompatible, so if 
you'd like to expand on them, we could consider what the problem is.

						God bless
								Andrew

    Andrew,
    
    I never said the verses were contradictory.  I said they needed to be
    reconciled.
    
    I have great faith in the ability of those so pursuaded to reconcile
    any apparent contradiction found in holy scripture.
    
    I totally disagree with your analysis of 1 Corinthian 7:28-29.  But
    it's a friendly disagreement.
    
    
                                   

>    You have to go back to the purpose of marriage.
>    
>    Malachi 2:15
>    Has not [the LORD] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his.
>    And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring.
>    
>    To unite two believers together under Christ and to produce godly
>    offspring.
 
    
    What was the defination of marriage in Old Testament times.
    
    Was it different in New Testament times?
    
    How were marriage partners chosen?
    
    What was the covenant between the marriage partners?
    
    Was love of each other a valid motivation for marriage?
    
    
    I do accept that Paul's recommendations were based on his feeling that
    the end of the world would come within his own lifetime and therefore
    he did not believe it wise to bring more children into the world.  That
    is the context upon which I understand the Corinthian letters.
    
    
                                      Patricia

    Patricia, "The New Manners & Customs of Bible Times" by Gower on Moody
    Press answers all your questions.
    
    Mike

    http://www.best.com/~dolphin/asstbib.shtml#anchor288283