Not the only sexual immorality...

[GundamZero]

GundamZero wrote:
1. Deuteronomy 23 deals with this mostly. Now you need to understand that verses 28-29 only applies if verses 23-27 don't apply.

I think you mean Deuteronomy 22.

I agree. The previous cases were for married or engaged women. Verses 28-29 were for virgin unmarried women.

Quote:
2. If you read Deutoronomy 23, you'll find in the later verses about rape that there is no distinction between slave or free, just virgin, betroved or not.

Not here, but elsewhere there is. Leviticus 19:20-21 - 'If a man sleeps with a woman who is a slave girl promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting for a guilt offering to the LORD. It doesn't say here that it's rape. So it could be consensual.

Quote:
3. Again, only applies if one cannot verify a case for forced rape. If a slave girl is in a bind, she could say any guy raped her, but no one would know if it is true. Now read over verse 27 again. If the girl, slave or not, cries out, than it's solid proof for rape, which is handled like murder, and the guy doesn't have a defense.

Deut 22 is dealing with sex/rape with free women. Lev 19 is dealing with the slaves. Deut 22 doesn't specify slave or free. Read through some of Exodus and you'll will find situations where slave are under marriage laws.

Quote:
4. Keep in mind there is only a few ways to know it a girl has commited pre-marital sex. But can you think of a way to tell if a guy has? And in that situation, if somehow it was found out, the guy would be put to death because, as it says in verse 22-23, since those verses can be applied.

There are a lot of things wrong with this:
1. God uses the bleeding of the hymen as a virginity test. Yet we know that test is not very good. Many girls break their hymen before they have sex through accidents or luck. For God to use this as a test shows that God has a poor understanding of anatomy. It wasn't anatomy that was the problem. A sheet is one proof of virginity, but it isn't a proof against it. You'll see that in verse 20 it says "if no proof can be found." It's a legal system, and it implies that there may be other proofs can save her. If it can be proven that there was never an opportunity, that could do it, too..

2. If God designed the body, why did he try to make a test for women built in, but not for men. It wasn't a test designed in the body, it just was. We were't built to sin, we chose it. So there just wasn't. Like I said, if the bed sheet wasn't bloodied, it's not absolute proof against virginity.

3. Verse 22-23 just says to follow the laws. But there are no laws forbidding men from having pre-maritial sex. Sadly, it's very difficult to explain this, but I encourage you to read through divorce laws. Also, skip back to Genisis, then jump foward to Malichi. You need to understand, marriage in God's eyes is different from marriage in ours, and techinically, there is no such thing as pre-marital sex. Whenever a man and a woman lie together, there are emotional connections made. God considers this marriage. That's why God had men pay a brides price. They were, by all standards, married, and the man still had to take care of his wife.

Quote:
That's why even Israel had lawyers. Be careful. I remember thinking the same things when I read through those verses. But if you really examine it, it's not as bad as you think. It's just like our own legal system, things aren't always as thay seem and you need the whole picture to understand it.

What really happened is that mothers or servants would give brides animal blood to shed on the sheets to keep them from being killed based on the holy word of God. Let's not get rude, or cocky. The fact of the matter is that while it may be difficult for me to prove otherwise, that is only speculation. And the other fact of the matter is that you don't understand an important factor without which I can't explain it any further.

Quote:
God wanted them to be able to judge these situations for themselves. Sadly, they never quite figured it out. And we haven't today either. Isn't it strange how a drug dealer can get life, but a rapist can be out in a few months? It's a fallen world, my friend.

If God wanted people to figure it out, he should have let humans make the laws. Once God makes the laws, people have a hard time breaking away from them. Imagine how horrible it would be if we had to follow the laws that God set up today. No, when God makes laws, people have far to easy a time breaking away from them. And it wouldn't matter how perfect a law we'd have been given, it would have been broken anyway. The truth is that sin leads to death, always, if not sooner then later. God wouldn't have had to say, "Thou shalt not murder" if we had obeyed "Don't eat that fruit."

Well, good questions.

 

[Relic]

.

Where did I tell people they were going to "hell" in any of my posts? :o "I" don't do that. And I don't condemn anyone.

Since when are facts and truth not allowed here? Sorry if they are not to your liking. But the truth is not always pretty. I present facts about the dangers and the destruction of that sin and I present scriptures which reveal sin for what it is, and the words of Jesus which say to "Go and Sin No More.
And truth is that, many of my posting are written to Christians alerting them to be aware, I am writing to Christians to beware, to protect their children. I announce what happens with this sin, how it is nothing but destruction of life. If I am not allowed to do that, then I would have to pose question as to why not. Truth is not always so pretty. All too many people think that it as some sort of a crime to announce the devastation of what sin does. :-?

If these few guys, I don't have to mention their names, we all know who they are, if they are going to come in defense of and advocate for the right of every homosexual to stay in the sin of homosexuality, and if anyone doesn't like the fact that I, at many times, present the horrible facts of what some of those who live in this abomination are doing, along with the consequences of how it will destroy their lives... Well, I am am not going to tell them it is okay to advocate for the cause of the homosexual, and neither will I ignore their outright comments which advocate for the sin. I will not take sides with the devil's advocate! And if you don't like the fact that they come on board and bash any thread pertaining to the abomination of same sex relations, and start arguments, then I sorry. Tell them to stop advocating for the abomination of homosexuality. In fact, one of the "other sins" they do is to work very hard at getting threads locked and thrown out so that the issue is off the boards and out of sight. They don't want anyone to see the truth about it and so they rally together to try and destroy the thread, the announcement and all the facts within.
They deliberately come to destroy. That's the work of the devil, ya know? :roll: To steal kill and destroy any truth it sees, to confuse the issue and distract from off of it as much as they can.
These guys know exactly what they are doing here. They only come to create havoc and confusion, to make a mess out of the threads, and to make it appear as if the "Christians" don't know what they are talking about, to make it appear as if the "Christians" are the bad guys. Yeah right. :-?
And it really irks me to see young Christians who are not so well seasoned in the word to come and defend these devil's advocates or to come out and say, hey, you need to tone it down because people won't be wanting conversion if you are too hard on them. Well, Strike Paul blind once again, and cut off the head of the messenger, aye? :-? God uses people in more ways than just sweet smiles and purty pictures all the time. There is a time and season for everything and it's not all fun and games people. When dealing with the devil's advocate who comes purposely to kill steal and destroy all that reveals truth, you don't give the devil a hand shake.

I come here to speak out to Christians and give them notice as to what's happening not just in the individual life of the person who thinks they are homosexual, but I come to speak out about and give notice to what is happening with specific groups also, and in how we need to to protect our children and stop these types from infiltrating our government and our schools, then I'm sorry. Sometimes the truth is ugly. If you don't want to face the ugly truth and think it should not be brought up because it's all too much truth for newbies, then, I'm sorry. I'm not speaking to newbies. I'm speaking to warriors who are out to stop the enemy with the truth in the Word.

If I am not welcome to post bulletin and warnings, but you allow those who allow advocates for the sin of homosexuality cause friction in about what I post, then something is very wrong here. Because I am not the one who advocates for the sin of homosexuality, they who advocate and are opposed to my showing truth of what is going on what is happening. they who hate the harsh truth about this abomination are causing the ruckus about the truth. They don't want anyone to speak out against a sin that is so destructive. Devil's advocates come to fight against my posting the truth and facts. What a shame.... Christians have to constantly fight off these advocators of sin in almost every visit here.

.

... The truth of the matter is that we all sin! We all need to repent! ...

Shhhhh. Don't scream. You used some exclamation marks, you are screaming. You might get scolded and be considered too harsh for using those exclamation marks and telling people they are sinners in need of a repentance. Shhhhh. 8-)


And believe me, I agree there are plenty of other sins. so why didn't people read in my postings where I write things on that order, that in order to work through a particular issue that it must not be inclusive of other sins in order to get to the root of it? Why don't they make note of the positives I write about the truth of what it takes to come out of a sin, to overcome a sin?
When one goes to a therapist, they do not discuss all of their issues in every session, but the person focuses in on one layer at a time. Read the whole paragraph of what I wrote earlier. There is no doubt about "other sins", but the focus in not on the "other sins" in every instance for good reason. It's the homosexual advocates who hate that it is even brought up to discuss at all.

I've said plenty enough times the truth about how we all need to repent because we all need a savior. but does anyone pay attention to that in my postings? :-?

Notice, it's mainly those few here that come to attack me.


======================================

.

Psalm 33:4
For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Psalm 28:5
Because they regard not the works of the LORD, nor the operation of his hands, he shall destroy them, and not build them up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"As long as I have breath and as long as there are people who care about children, I don't believe this issue will ever die down. With 1.8 million children missing, it's damn time somebody did something about it besides me." ~John Walsh~

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAMBLA must be stopped!
GLSEN must be stopped!

 

[Lewis]

Relic' I don't see nothing that you did wrong. We are supposed to speak out against the homosexual life styles' and or sin. You would not be in Christ' if you did not.

 

[christian_soldier]

The message has been given many times.

Mankind has a sin nature.

Jesus died so none need perish.

I sincerely doubt that anyone visiting this forum has never heard a clear presentation of what salvation means and how to obtain it.

(For anyone who does not yet know ----> http://christiansoldiers.neodemesne.com ... -saved.php )

Not all will heed this. MANY will spend an eternity regretting being separated from God. All we can do is try to get the message to as many as possible. We can sow and water, but God gives the increase.

No one can be forced to repent from any sin. God, Himself, leaves some to a reprobate mind.

The choice is clear to all, even those who choose to deny it.

 

[christian_soldier]

*Off Topic*

FYI - I found the Are You Saved message on a forum and made a web page from it. I googled the author and found he was the subject of Spam discussions, with some 45,000 postings of that message around the 'net. Now, that is dedication! Normally I hate spam, but I emailed him a 'Well done.'

The forum where I found the post is a pro-life forum. I was amazed at the reaction there to the message. I no longer post there, as it is too angry a board for my taste, but if you want to take a peek (or give the thread a bump :angel: ) you can find it at http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/ ... erthread=y

*Back to Topic*

 

[christian_soldier]

Relic' I don't see nothing that you did wrong. We are supposed to speak out against the homosexual life styles' and or sin. You would not be in Christ' if you did not.

:smt023

 

[Relic]

Thank you Lewis and christian_soldier.
I know I'm not doing anything wrong. If sending out a message of fact and truth in the Word is wrong then just goes to show.... the birth pangs have increased. And yes, we need to give resource to how to be Saved from sin through the Salvation of our Lord Jesus.

christian_soldier]
No one can be forced to repent from any sin. God, Himself, leaves some to a reprobate mind.

The choice is clear to all, even those who choose to deny it.

Yes, and we must also know that even though the Lord leaves some to a reprobate mind, that we need not stop sending out the messages and warnings.

Thanks for all the resourceful links guys.

.

 

[peace4all]

umm, I definately strongly disagree with multiple parts of those quotes.

Killing people?
Paying someone for raping someone?

what?!

 

[Atonement]

Relic' I don't see nothing that you did wrong. We are supposed to speak out against the homosexual life styles' and or sin. You would not be in Christ' if you did not.

Well Lewis as you, Christian-Solider and Relic have agreed on.

Well I disagree, I disagree immensely. I speak to the sinner themself, show love to them, offer to give them a Bible and give them my number if they ever need any help. This proves I'm in Christ because of the love I show them. But hey each man has their own tattics. Mine work better for me.. I guess that is why this year at youth functions I have seen over 300 kids come to know the Lord through my 'tattics' and my testimony. And I surley did not raise havoc on any one sin.. But sin in a general sense

Look at Jesus' attitude towards Mary when she was caught in adultery. He stated to those who have no sin cast the first stone, then He plainy told her to go and sin no more.. Did Mary ever commit adultery again? No record, but became close to the Lord.. I perfer this tattic.. But go ahead Speak out against homosexuality, why your at it, speak out against kids bringing guns to school, about honoring parents, about putting God first, speak out against underage drinking. Sin is sin, if you broke one portion of the law you broke the whole law, and that is how I teach..

 

[Quath]

It doesn't say here that it's rape. So it could be consensual.

I believe this is to be followed if it is consentual or forced since it does not specifically say.

Deut 22 doesn't specify slave or free. Read through some of Exodus and you'll will find situations where slave are under marriage laws.

Deut 22 does not apply to slaves or else it would have to contradict Lev 19. For example, if Deut 22 applied to slaves, then consentual sex with an enegaged slave would mean that the slave and the man were to be killed. However, Lev 19 says that (un)consentual sex with an engaged slave results in the slave being whipped and the man sacrificing an animal.

It wasn't anatomy that was the problem. A sheet is one proof of virginity, but it isn't a proof against it. You'll see that in verse 20 it says "if no proof can be found." It's a legal system, and it implies that there may be other proofs can save her. If it can be proven that there was never an opportunity, that could do it, too..

The proof the wanted was mentioned in the same chapter. Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.' Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town. One source says this was the bed sheet, but another says that before a woman was married, her father would get a soft, woolen cloth that was less than 3 fingers-breadths and stick it up his daughter's vagina to get blood from the breaking of her hymen.

It wasn't a test designed in the body, it just was. We were't built to sin, we chose it. So there just wasn't. Like I said, if the bed sheet wasn't bloodied, it's not absolute proof against virginity.

Are you saying that when God designed us, he had no idea we would sin? And he had no idea he would use the breaking of the hymen as a test for virginity? And he had no idea that it would be a lousy test?

Sadly, it's very difficult to explain this, but I encourage you to read through divorce laws. Also, skip back to Genisis, then jump foward to Malichi. You need to understand, marriage in God's eyes is different from marriage in ours, and techinically, there is no such thing as pre-marital sex. Whenever a man and a woman lie together, there are emotional connections made. God considers this marriage. That's why God had men pay a brides price. They were, by all standards, married, and the man still had to take care of his wife.

I have to disagree with this. Women who had pre-maritial sex were killed before their parents. So I think this does define pre-mairital sex.

It also sounds like you are referring to "one flesh." That is just another way to say "sex" in the Bible. It is used to refer to the sex between a man and a prostitute later on in the Bible.

Let's not get rude, or cocky. The fact of the matter is that while it may be difficult for me to prove otherwise, that is only speculation. And the other fact of the matter is that you don't understand an important factor without which I can't explain it any further.

What is that factor? Do you think these are good and moral rules that should be followed today? Or do you feel that killing women for pre-maritial sex and forcing women to marry their rapist is a bad thing? Or if a woman has trouble crying out while being raped, she should be killed?

No, when God makes laws, people have far to easy a time breaking away from them. And it wouldn't matter how perfect a law we'd have been given, it would have been broken anyway. The truth is that sin leads to death, always, if not sooner then later. God wouldn't have had to say, "Thou shalt not murder" if we had obeyed "Don't eat that fruit."

But why would God make such horrible laws? We reject them outright today because we can see how bad they are. Yet a perfect God thought these were the best rules.

 

[GundamZero]

We're both working from different sides of the argument. That said, I wouldn't have a problem continuing, but I don't see anything coming of it, and it seems this thread has roused another quarrel anyway. All I can say is that I'm sure we'll find out one day.

Fair thee well, friend.

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Considering this thread is about sexual sin I thought I would throw this out into the mix:

It would be interesting to get a topic going about whether adultery is grounds for divorce. For those of you not aware there are quite a lot of views within the evangelical community about divorce and remarriage. The most popular and well know today is the Erasmus view (Known by this name because Erasmus is the man responsible for the creation of this view).

The Erasmus view simply allows for two individuals to divorce if one commits adultery. Now I would love to give a nice detailed explanation of this view but I lost the notes I took in my Marriage and Family Class I got a B in.

At any rate it would be interesting to discuss marriage, divorce, and remarriage. So if someone would like to discuss this by all means create the topic. I would suggest terms are defined before any arguments are put up. For those who care to know I do not believe in divorce under any circumstances. Perhaps that may shock some of you, perhaps not.

I leave with this:

Lets try to make the arguments for or against divorce and remarriage based on biblical reasons and not experience and emotions. Alright, hopefully someone will make the topicâ€â€other then me.