Christianity and oral sex...

[Songbird]

What I don't get is how religions like Islam and Christianity can actually blame women on men's sex addictions, porn addictions, and cheating. It's ridiculous. If a man can't control himself, that's his problem, not anyone else's.

Edit: and by the way, Songbird, me and my ex had the same issue. She wanted it more than I did.

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty skeptical that the sex message needs to be preached.

 

[WanderLust]

I'm not sure why sex and religion need to connect in the first place. Obviously, there's the issue of purity and things like that which are understandable, but aside from preaching no sex until marriage, I'm pretty sure God doesn't need to be getting between me and my girlfriend bumping uglies and he defiinitely doesn't need to instruct us on how and when to do it. That's just me though....

 

[Madhuri]

I'm not sure why sex and religion need to connect in the first place. Obviously, there's the issue of purity and things like that which are understandable, but aside from preaching no sex until marriage, I'm pretty sure God doesn't need to be getting between me and my girlfriend bumping uglies and he defiinitely doesn't need to instruct us on how and when to do it. That's just me though....

I totally agree :yes:

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I agree too.

 

[Pegg]

Biblical reference:

"As an apple tree among the trees of the wood,
so is my beloved among young men.
With great delight I sat in his shadow,
and his fruit was sweet to my taste."

-- Songs 2:3


No... just. NO. Inasmuch as I love the Bible, it's twisted to think that a pastor would even promote this. :/

how can the same man who just preached that sermon of anger against the way men treat their wives/'girlfriends', come out with the quote you posted???

you sure it came from the same man??

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Televangelists and popular preachers are funny. Most don't have any idea what they're talking about, but there are a few decent ones, like Billy Graham and Charles Stanly. But most, like this one, are completely out of their minds. Pat Robertson, the TBN family, etc., and the list goes on.

 

[Pegg]

When I first discovered him, I thought, Omgosh, I can't believe that there are Christians out there who are soaking this up. It just seems that although yes, it could be construed in the Bible that there is some oral sex going on there, it's not an absolute; the verse is vague, and it just seems like another attempt and excuse for men to make their woman 'scripturally' service him.

Am I the only one who finds this somewhat appalling or is it really just me?

i find it appalling too

if Mark Driscoll was being led by the spirit, he would see the spiritual application of the song of solomon and realise its not about physical relationships at all.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

For over a thousand years, Christians believed that the Song of Solomon was spiritual and mystical, and had no real meaning interpreted literally. Now we have this garbage.

 

[WanderLust]

Don't watch television for your daily dose of God. That's always a bad idea. Guys like this are out there using religion as the medium to convey their own personal opinions and they twist religion to make it happen. Falwell, Robertson, they all do it. If you get your sermons from guy who bought himself television airtime to preach his random, often radical, views, there's a problem.

 

[Renji]

that verse could mean anything though - his fruit might just be his love for example.

What he said.:yes:

This thread had made me smile though:angel2:

 

[blackout]

Catholic christianity is totally invasive in a whole other way.

Catholic married couples MAY engage in oral sex,
as LONG AS, it is foreplay,
and is concluded by intercourse without contraceptives.

*sigh*

 

[blackout]

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty skeptical that the sex message needs to be preached.

Everyone would be SO MUCH better off if it weren't.

 

[Gaura Priya]

I just think it's bad enough that there is a preacher about this... at least the Bible also has cunnilingus!

"Awake, O north wind,
and come, O south wind!
Blow upon my garden
that its fragrance may be wafted abroad.
Let my beloved come to his garden,
and eat its choicest fruits."

-- Songs 4:16

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty skeptical that the sex message needs to be preached.

Speaking as someone who's genuinely considered Christianity in the past (hey - don't laugh. It's true ), when I see a Christian church or denomination that preaches rules for sexuality at the expense of preaching charity and forgiveness, I take this as a big red flag warning me to stay away.

I think this is one of those issues where while you can cherry pick verses to support any particular view, it's just not compatible with the message of the Gospels, approached honestly. IIRC, Jesus called those who were more worried about others' "purity" than the contents of their own hearts and the well-being of those around them "whitewashed tombs" and "broods of vipers".

It sometimes boggles my mind how so many Christian groups could have, IMO, lost their way so badly from the straightforward message of the Gospels. Not all, of course - I have a number of Christian friends who take it very seriously indeed, including people here on RF, but there's just some stuff that comes out of mainstream Christianity where I want to pull the person preaching it aside and ask, "dude - have you even *read* the Bible for yourself?"

 

[Songbird]

Speaking as someone who's genuinely considered Christianity in the past (hey - don't laugh. It's true ), when I see a Christian church or denomination that preaches rules for sexuality at the expense of preaching charity and forgiveness, I take this as a big red flag warning me to stay away.

I think this is one of those issues where while you can cherry pick verses to support any particular view, it's just not compatible with the message of the Gospels, approached honestly. IIRC, Jesus called those who were more worried about others' "purity" than the contents of their own hearts and the well-being of those around them "whitewashed tombs" and "broods of vipers".

It sometimes boggles my mind how so many Christian groups could have, IMO, lost their way so badly from the straightforward message of the Gospels. Not all, of course - I have a number of Christian friends who take it very seriously indeed, including people here on RF, but there's just some stuff that comes out of mainstream Christianity where I want to pull the person preaching it aside and ask, "dude - have you even *read* the Bible for yourself?"

To paraphrase a pastor from an Australian church, Christianity has turned into behavior modification instead of spiritual transformation.

 

[Quiddity]

Catholic christianity is totally invasive in a whole other way.

Catholic married couples MAY engage in oral sex,
as LONG AS, it is foreplay,
and is concluded by intercourse without contraceptives.

*sigh*

You preach it sister!

 

[bain-druie]

I am honestly confused by this whole thread. There are so many levels of confusion, I am not sure where to start.

First: do Christians have rules about oral sex? Seriously? If so, why?

2. The gigantic presumption of the preacher does not surprise me. I agree that he is offensive, but I don't see that he is any more offensive than most other preachers I have heard. While I grant that he is taking a very sketchy possible sexual allusion for granted as if it were plain for anyone to see in the text, why do some of the posters seem to be so offended by it? It IS a possibly valid metaphor. And does it matter so much? Metaphor is supposed to be layered with meaning; that makes it rich. If it doesn't work for you, shrug it off and appreciate the meanings that DO work for you. Right?

3. Why is it that it seems to be assumed that fellatio is only pleasurable for men? Most straight women I've talked about sex with enjoy giving it, though not necessarily every day.

4. And as has been pointed out, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you grant the fellatio metaphor, you can find at least 2 more in Song of Solomon for cunnilingus. I really don't see how that's a problem; is it?

*bafflement* :areyoucra

 

[Pegg]

I am honestly confused by this whole thread. There are so many levels of confusion, I am not sure where to start.

First: do Christians have rules about oral sex? Seriously? If so, why?

we take the view that oral sex is not the same as the 'sexual intercourse' which is permitted between married couples.

While the scriptures dont specifically mention oral sex, it is clearly a form of 'pornia' or 'fornication' which is not permitted for either married or unmarried persons. “fornication” is broad in its application involving unlawful or illicit sex relations outside marriage. While porneia involves the immoral use of the genital organs in any perverted way. For example, taking lured pictures of yourself and sending them to someone on a mobile would be a form of pornia even though you are not physically engaged in sexual intercourse, because its a perverted use of the genital organs.

The term porneia refers to the sexual activity that took place in a house of prostitution, where sexual favors were bought and sold... no doubt oral sex would have been one of those favors just as it still is today.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

we take the view that oral sex is not the same as the 'sexual intercourse' which is permitted between married couples.

While the scriptures dont specifically mention oral sex, it is clearly a form of 'pornia' or 'fornication' which is not permitted for either married or unmarried persons.

If they don't mention it, how is this "clear"?

“fornication” is broad in its application involving unlawful or illicit sex relations outside marriage. While porneia involves the immoral use of the genital organs in any perverted way. For example, taking lured pictures of yourself and sending them to someone on a mobile would be a form of pornia even though you are not physically engaged in sexual intercourse, because its a perverted use of the genital organs.

Ohhhh... I think I understand: you've decided that oral sex is "perverted", and since you don't think God would allow perverted things, you feel safe interpreting the Bible to say that God disapproves of oral sex even though the Bible doesn't really mention it. Hmm.

The term porneia refers to the sexual activity that took place in a house of prostitution, where sexual favors were bought and sold... no doubt oral sex would have been one of those favors just as it still is today.

As would have been sexual intercourse, which you say is A-OK within a marriage.

 

[Songbird]

I am honestly confused by this whole thread. There are so many levels of confusion, I am not sure where to start.

First: do Christians have rules about oral sex? Seriously? If so, why?

2. The gigantic presumption of the preacher does not surprise me. I agree that he is offensive, but I don't see that he is any more offensive than most other preachers I have heard. While I grant that he is taking a very sketchy possible sexual allusion for granted as if it were plain for anyone to see in the text, why do some of the posters seem to be so offended by it? It IS a possibly valid metaphor. And does it matter so much? Metaphor is supposed to be layered with meaning; that makes it rich. If it doesn't work for you, shrug it off and appreciate the meanings that DO work for you. Right?

3. Why is it that it seems to be assumed that fellatio is only pleasurable for men? Most straight women I've talked about sex with enjoy giving it, though not necessarily every day.

4. And as has been pointed out, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you grant the fellatio metaphor, you can find at least 2 more in Song of Solomon for cunnilingus. I really don't see how that's a problem; is it?

*bafflement* :areyoucra

Haha, it's not the interpretation of the verses that annoys me, which very well could be an allusion to oral sex. It's:

A. Mark Driscoll speaks as if his interpretation is the infallible word of God and implies that not obeying his sermons is sinning - aka, spiritual manipulation. He uses shock tactics in his sermons, which is fine, but he always comes across as though he's absolutely right. He'd totally be banned on RF. He has some good stuff too, but the bad has been so annoying I end up not being able to take the good and leave the rest.
B. I think church should leave sexuality alone, for the most part. Condemning a lifestyle from the pulpit with the implied authority of God and the associations that come with it is very serious business.
C. Like you, whenever it's come up in convo (which hasn't been often), the women I know seem to really enjoy giving oral sex. AND, there are lots of studies which disprove the myth that women want less sex than men. I can't figure out why churches rail about it. That's actually my biggest issue - everyone I talk to, and most studies I find don't match what's being preached. It just stumps me. I've never once heard a message that said men should reciprocate sexual service with their wives.