Originally posted by galveston75
"Those who live only to satisfy their own sinful nature will harvest decay and death from that sinful nature. But those who live to please the Spirit will harvest everlasting life from the Spirit."

I wasn't talking about people who "harvest decay and death". I was talking about people who live good, fulfilling and honest lives without paying attention to many of the things you claim are "God designed".

Originally posted by FMF
I wasn't talking about people who "harvest decay and death". I was talking about people who live good, fulfilling and honest lives without paying attention to many of the things you claim are "God designed".

As usual I answered the thought you had on that and you still missed it. Oh well...

Originally posted by galveston75
As usual I answered the thought you had on that and you still missed it. Oh well...

The Bible quote you offered completely missed the point of what I'd said to you.

Originally posted by galveston75
So if they have never heard of him or have never seen a Bible, he knows that. But he created us all and the same results will happen to any of us.

If you truly believe that "the same results will happen to" everyone once God "knows their heart and mental condition" and has judged them [even if, as you say, "they have never heard of him or have never seen a Bible"], then I reckon you need to reject and distance yourself from this kind of stuff because it contradicts what you are saying:

"There are billions of people who do not know Jehovah. Many of them in ignorance practice things that God's Word shows to be wicked. If they persist in this course, they will be among those who perish during the great tribulation." [Watchtower 1993]

"Only Jehovah's Witnesses, those of the anointed remnant and the "great crowd," as a united organization under the protection of the Supreme Organizer, have any Scriptural hope of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil." [Watchtower 1989]

Originally posted by galveston75
Yes it does....

But in cases where the husband and wife agree to be promiscuous, and tell all their partners they are, so it is not deceitful, does the Bible still condemn it? IOW is it being deceitful that makes promiscuity Biblically wrong? Isn't extra marital sex Biblically wrong even if there is no deceit? I think people say it would be, but I would like to know where the Bible says this.

Edit: PS I'd hoped people would back up their claims on what the Bible says about what is permissible sexually, with references to chapter and verse.

Originally posted by JS357
Does a strict interpretation of the Song of Solomon speak approvingly of polygamy, concubinage and oral sex? Is there any Biblical ban on these practices?

I am pursuing the theme I laid out, trying to stick to what the Bible allows, while trying to avoid being indelicate.

Did anyone want to take this question on, and I missed your reply?

Does a strict interpretation of the Song of Solomon speak approvingly of polygamy, concubinage and oral sex? Is there any Biblical ban on these practices?

I am pursuing the theme I laid out, trying to stick to what the Bible allows, while trying to avoid being indelicate.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Not really. Some people are slutty and they know it (as does everyone else).

😞

Originally posted by wolfgang59
😞

Not that there's anything wrong with that. 😛

Originally posted by galveston75
According to God there is a big problem with being promiscuous. It's called fornication.
He created us much higher then animals on many levels and one of those is with having morals and respecting others.

1. Who gave you or your god the right to redefine fornication?

2. Being promiscuous (or not) is only immoral to some (not me) since morality is subjective.

3. Being promiscuous did not affect my respect for others.

4. I am not calling you immoral or disrespectful for having the views you do, please do the same for me.

Originally posted by JS357

I pose these wonderings with all due respect and without any intent to make people uncomfortable.

Some of the consensual adult practices we have recently discussed on this forum are called "unnatural" sexual practices, with moral implications.

First, I wonder why an an act being "unnatural' carries with it negative moral connotations. It seems to me that degree that it accomplishes this for them. But this leaves open, most of the above questions.

God created sex.

He gave the first man and woman two wedding gifts: Perfect Environment and Perfect Sex.

He gave sex with no strings attached.

Its purpose was recreation (procreation came after their diobedience and expulsion).

God placed no limitation on the boundaries or constraint on the expression of sex.

It's an individual matter left up to each consenting husband and wife.

Distortions of sex (incest, rape, peodphilia, pederasky, homosexuality, adultery, fornication, bestiality, etc) are prohibited.

The proper function of sexual intercourse is essential to the perpetuation of civilized life on earth.

In His Omniscience, God knew human beings would appreciate (and need) frequent vacations without leaving home.

Last, in His Grace, God impartially gave sex to both Believers an Unbelievers in Christ.
.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
1. Who gave you or your god the right to redefine fornication?

2. Being promiscuous (or not) is only immoral to some (not me) since morality is subjective.

3. Being promiscuous did not affect my respect for others.

4. I am not calling you immoral or disrespectful for having the views you do, please do the same for me.

.... morality is subjective.

Um... No it isn't.

If you are up for it I would like to debate this point.

Originally posted by googlefudge

.... morality is subjective.

Um... No it isn't.

If you are up for it I would like to debate this point.

oooh!!! some atheist on atheist action, do you mind if i imagine you guys are debating in a mud bath?

Originally posted by JS357
I pose these wonderings with all due respect and without any intent to make people uncomfortable.

Some of the consensual adult practices we have recently discussed on this forum are called "unnatural" sexual practices, with moral implications.

First, I wonder why an an act being "unnatural' carries with it negative moral connotations. It seems to me tha ...[text shortened]... ree that it accomplishes this for them. But this leaves open, most of the above questions.

My wife and i are reading the Book to geather in a married couples group. We are to start reading Chapter 3 this coming week end. And we are doing the work book and video too:

Real Marriage: The Truth About Sex, Friendship, and Life Together.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
oooh!!! some atheist on atheist action, do you mind if i imagine you guys are debating in a mud bath?

You know, I really didn't need that image in my head...

Originally posted by RBHILL
My wife and i are reading the Book to geather in a married couples group. We are to start reading Chapter 3 this coming week end. And we are doing the work book and video too:

Real Marriage: The Truth About Sex, Friendship, and Life Together.

Reportedly Chapter 10 is relevant to this thread.