| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 345.1 | | CVG::THOMPSON | Radical Centralist | Sat Nov 16 1991 00:36 | 5 |
| >But, what if such a relationship commitment hasn't been entered into?
Wouldn't that be fornication?
Alfred
|
| 345.2 | | DPDMAI::DAWSON | Looking for reality | Sat Nov 16 1991 10:09 | 17 |
| RE: .0 & .1
What an interesting question. In the Old Testament, we
read that David had 10 concubines. God allowed this and did not count
it "sin" against David. Why not? When Absalom (Davids son) chased
his father, David, out of Jerusalem, he ,as part of his "take over"
went "in unto" the concubines to solidify and represent that he had
taken "all" that was Davids....and God didn't count this sin. Why?
*BTW...this story is in II Samuel 15,16 & 17, if you want to read about it.
Is it possible that God does not have a problem with sex but
that it is *OUR* attitude toward sex that causes us problems?
Dave
|
| 345.3 | It's a matter of being carnal minded that is sinful. | SWAM1::DOTHARD_ST | PLAYTOE | Sat Nov 16 1991 19:42 | 16 |
| Re: 3
Prostitution, "playing the harlot", Rehab the whore....Rehab was saved
because she "believed in God" and hid the two men of God.
However, the sin of immoral sex practices (ie immoral as defined by the
Word of God), is the "fulfilling of the lust of the flesh", seeking
after the flesh, and living in the flesh, being carnal minded...as
opposed to being in the spirit of God.
The account of Rehab's story, clearly indicates to us that if we
"believe" in God, the deeds of the body are mortified...this is what
Paul is speaking of in Romans 4, regarding what "Abraham our father, as
pertaining to the flesh, hath found".
Playtoe, In the Spirit of Truth
|
| 345.4 | Someone said, "We're *all* prostitutes!" | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | Passionate Peace | Mon Nov 18 1991 17:14 | 6 |
| I overheard an armchair philosopher the other day say, "We're *all*
prostitutes." This person was doubtlessly speaking metaphorically.
We don't all sell sexual favors, of course.
Peace,
Richard
|
| 345.5 | Why a greater sin? | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | Passionate Peace | Mon Nov 18 1991 17:44 | 11 |
| What makes prostitution (or fornication, if you prefer) a greater sin to
Christians than, say, eating pork or walking farther than a prescribed
distance on the Sabbath?
Let's consider this question from the point of view that the prostitute
and the customer are both adults and neither are not involved in a
relationship that might violate a commitment of sexual fidelity with
other partners.
Peace,
Richard
|
| 345.6 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | if u want to heal u have to *feel* | Mon Nov 18 1991 18:30 | 7 |
|
RE: Dave
How were the 'concubines' viewed? Were women allowed to have
many men?
Carole
|
| 345.7 | Booty | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | Passionate Peace | Tue Nov 19 1991 23:35 | 14 |
| Re: .6
Carole,
Well, I'm not Dave, but allow me to share the following.
A concubine is generally a woman who lives with a man while not officially
married to him and (this part is verbatim from the dictionary) "has a
recognized position within his household." Feel free speculate all you
like on what position that might be. The way I understand it, a concubine
was accepted as sort of a live-in mistress and a possession of the man.
Peace,
Richard
|
| 345.8 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | if u want to heal u have to *feel* | Wed Nov 20 1991 11:07 | 12 |
|
RE: .7
Hi Richard,
When I read the bible reference Dave entered some warning flags
went up. If it were to be used by literalists, it would make it
ok for the man but the woman would still be viewed as 'less than'.
It is things like this that I get so uncomfortable about when the
bible is taken literally.
Carole
|
| 345.9 | Is it any wonder you're uncomfortable? | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | Passionate Peace | Wed Nov 20 1991 21:50 | 23 |
| Re: .8
Hi Carole!
Our culture is largely influenced by the patriarchal thinking you're
referring to. Note that even today the terms applied to men carry
connotations usually less severe and more complimentary than comparable
terms applied to women.
Women: Men:
Whore Gigilo
Slut Stud
Madam Sir
Mistress Master
Lady Lord
Consider the connotation even when an identical term is applied to
women and men:
She's a professional. He's a professional.
Richard
|
| 345.10 | Daring suggestion | LJOHUB::NSMITH | rises up with eagle wings | Tue Dec 10 1991 17:06 | 12 |
| I've often wondered if it's because the woman is "in charge"
and getting paid while the man is the "supplicant" trying to
get his needs met. I think it's more degrading to the man than
to the woman so, naturally, we have to turn that on its head
and despise the woman while protecting the anonynity of her
clientele...
(I know it doesn't really work that way and that many women are
not truly self-employed, but the demands of pimps and protectors
are another way of men owning the business.)
Boy, am I cyncial today, or what?
|
| 345.11 | | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | On loan from God | Tue Dec 21 1993 16:53 | 10
|