Sex Before Dinner, Does God Approve?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Not reading anywhere in hear any prohibition about any kind of husband/wife sex:

"'The sin of your sister Sodom was this: She lived with her daughters in the lap of luxury—proud, gluttonous, and lazy. They ignored the oppressed and the poor. They put on airs and lived obscene lives. And you know what happened: I did away with them

Even KJV, ESV and NIV don't render any specific kind of sex act.

'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. 51 Samaria did not commit half the sins you did. You have done more detestable things than they, and have made your sisters seem righteous by all these things you have done. 52 Bear your disgrace, for you have furnished some justification for your sisters. Because your sins were more vile than theirs, they appear more righteous than you. So then, be ashamed and bear your disgrace, for you have made your sisters appear righteous.

(Amazingly, God says Israel's sin here was far worse!)

It doesn't mention the specific crimes but we know they were abominations
Eze 16:50 They were haughty and committed abominable crimes before me. So, when I saw it, I removed them.

Abominations include homosexual behavior under the law

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

That's a bold assumption that KJV interpreters would have "covered" for God in areas they disagreed with morally. I wonder if they included David and Bathsheba's indiscretion?

Yes, they did include David and Bathsheba's indiscretion.
And they did include the Song of Solomon.

All I'm saying is that they were influenced by the time in which they lived and also they had to keep that new translation acceptable for public reading in the Anglican Church. So they included the English phrase "God save the King" because that is what was spoken at the coronation of English kings, they used the word "church" instead of assembly because the Bible was to be read in Anglican Churches, and they used the words "baptize" and "baptism" instead of immerse or dip or plunge into or plunge under because "baptism" was a liturgical word for a specific religious act.

Several times the term "uncover nakedness" is used for sexual activity.

What I was trying to say is that the Hebrew may have said that Ruth crept onto the threshing floor and lay at Boaz's feet and he actually did spread his cloak over her to cover her up just for warmth. I don't know if she crawled up on him and began to hug around on him or not and he spread his blanket/cloak over her for privacy. They may or may not have had sexual activity. I don't honestly know. The Hebrew may have been referring to a custom from 1000 BC that the scholars of 1600 AD did not understand.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

...
Abominations include homosexual behavior under the law

Abominations under the law also included idolatrous practices, certain foods, blemished animals offered as sacrifices, remarrying an ex-wife, incorrect weights and measures, etc

[Socialite]

I wasn't defending homosexual relations. I was questioning the possible homophobic assumptions that a specific act between a man and his wife are "abominable" or even "the sin of Sodom."

Boy, this post may convince the Admin to start a Rating on each post! Ha! Definitely more PG here.

[Michael]

Originally Posted by Socialite

I wasn't defending homosexual relations. I was questioning the possible homophobic assumptions that a specific act between a man and his wife are "abominable" or even "the sin of Sodom."

Boy, this post may convince the Admin to start a Rating on each post! Ha! Definitely more PG here.

Homophobic???? Who fears them????

Just like Islamophobia....Who fears islam???

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Michael

Homophobic???? Who fears them????

Just like Islamophobia....Who fears islam???

Yes, Homophobic.

Look it up. Maybe the definition will help you understand.

DEFINITION
....a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuality and people who are identified as or perceived as being homosexual. Generally refer to antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear. Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior...

[Michael]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Yes, Homophobic.

Look it up. Maybe the definition will help you understand.

DEFINITION
....a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuality and people who are identified as or perceived as being homosexual. Generally refer to antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear. Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior...

You're sooooooo smart!

Homo=The word homo is Latin, in the original sense of "human being", or "man" (in the gender-neutral sense). The word "human" itself is from Latin humanus, an adjective cognate to homo, both thought to derive from a Proto-Indo-European word for "earth" reconstructed as *dhǵhem-.[3]



Phobic, phobic :fear =A phobia (from the Greek: φόβος,phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear") is an irrational, intense and persistent fear of certain situations, activities, things, animals, or people.

See I can copy and paste too....

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Michael

You're sooooooo smart!

Homo=The word homo is Latin, in the original sense of "human being", or "man" (in the gender-neutral sense). The word "human" itself is from Latin humanus, an adjective cognate to homo, both thought to derive from a Proto-Indo-European word for "earth" reconstructed as *dhǵhem-.[3]



Phobic, phobic :fear =A phobia (from the Greek: φόβος,phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear") is an irrational, intense and persistent fear of certain situations, activities, things, animals, or people.

See I can copy and paste too....

I'm not too smart, but you sure have a way of sounding ignorant.

Way to break down a word until it's a word that isn't the same as the one we started with.

Do you do this with your exegesis as well? It was quite obvious I copy/pasted that definition, btw. No big guess there.

[Michael]

Originally Posted by Socialite

I'm not too smart, but you sure have a way of sounding ignorant.

Way to break down a word until it's a word that isn't the same as the one we started with.

Do you do this with your exegesis as well? It was quite obvious I copy/pasted that definition, btw. No big guess there.

WOW! And you say I have a way of sounding ignorant?????

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Michael

WOW! And you say I have a way of sounding ignorant?????

You've only proved your skill at clicking on emoticons. Good job, smart guy!