tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post5163323857773002624..comments2024-02-13T08:45:20.455-05:00Comments on The Schooley Files: Christian Married Sexuality (part 2)Keith Edwin Schooleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-69793398965468859372016-12-01T10:40:59.610-05:002016-12-01T10:40:59.610-05:00If even porneia is to be strictly avoided, so much...If even porneia is to be strictly avoided, so much more sin against nature. Cfr sins of Onan, Sodom, confer also a list in 1 Cor 6:10 which begins with a word meaning wankers.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-31607069012838974532016-12-01T07:13:48.672-05:002016-12-01T07:13:48.672-05:00Hi Hans. Welcome!
I understand that the teachings...Hi Hans. Welcome!<br /><br />I understand that the teachings of certain churches would affirm these three points, but I don't see how one can get all that from an exegesis of the particular passage under discussion. The second half of the verse states, "for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral." The word "for" indicates a ground statement--it gives reason to support what came before. So adultery and sexual immorality are contrasted with keeping the marriage bed pure; they are, therefore what would make it impure. Adultery has a clear and precise meaning. Sexual immorality (Greek <i>porneia</i>) is a broader term meaning any kind of sexual sin--primarily extramarital sex of any type. This is what I meant by "keeping other people out of it."<br /><br />So we are quite agreed on your third point, "and therefore not to others." Your second point, "open to each other asking" is, I think, not well supported by this verse but certainly well supported by other passages, primarily 1 Corinthians 7:1-5.<br /><br />Your first point, "open to life (no contraception)" is more problematic. I don't think the verse in Hebrews under discussion supports it, and there is no clear scriptural prohibition. What I would say is that the <i>relationship</i> that fosters sexuality should be the same relationship that includes childbearing and raising a family (i.e., marriage). I write more about that <a href="http://www.schooleyfiles.com/2006/10/marriage-rip.html" rel="nofollow">in my post entitled, "Marriage, RIP."</a> But I don't think that every <i>instance</i> of sex within marriage must contain the possibility of conception, otherwise continuing sexual relations after the wife undergoes a hysterectomy, for example, would be sinful. So I don't agree with a blanket prohibition of contraception, and I don't think scripture supports it.<br /><br />Thank you for contributing to the discussion.Keith Edwin Schooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-42286132800838624592016-11-29T08:39:47.934-05:002016-11-29T08:39:47.934-05:00"When the author of Hebrews says that the “ma...<i>"When the author of Hebrews says that the “marriage bed [should be] kept pure,” he essentially means to keep other people out of it. (tweet this)"</i><br /><br />No, I am not.<br /><br />He essentially means three things:<br /><br />* open to life (no contraception)<br />* open to each other asking<br />* and therefore not to others.<br /><br />The two later things are called fidelity, the first fertility or offspring, as goods of marraige.Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.com