Sunday Public talk that talked about oral sex (page 10)

mrsjones5

In other word the wts is not being clear which is really dishonest and shows a real lack of caring for the rank and file jws.

mrsjones5

see...when you make up stories....you have to look back at your lies

Yep, some folks have long memories and are really good at looking up old posts. It's always best to be honest then you don't have to remember what the lies were.

reniaa

I have made my points on this and if the wt are wrong in letting things gradually go out of practise without bringing thme to the fore well that is another subject.

all anyone has provided is one elders talk as proof in this century certainly not an article

ninja I cannot stop you bringing up personal info on me when I have mistakenly mentioned it in the past but for the record I will not use the same unchrisitian/unloving tactics on you!

reniaa

mrsjones what lies? my having a child or not is nothing to do with this discussion?

mrsjones5

I was agreeing with Ninja. Whatever lies have been told are your business.

what lies? ninja ask if I had a child nothing to do with the subJect of the wt's stand on sex between married couples? so again if this is just some sort of personal attack by him it brings more shame on him than myself.

mrsjones5

He's poking you and you're falling for it.

quietlyleaving

passwordproteected

The articles in 2007 that talked about pornea had a footnote that posed the question as to whether oral sex etc was permitted within marriage. The reader was encourage to course the 1983 articles. That means the teachings from 1983 (wow, wasn't that a long time ago?) still stand.

this point is worth emphasizing

and the 1983 article does indeed define oral and anal sex as perverted practice.

How about sexual activity between married couples within the marriage bond? It is not for the elders to pry into the intimate lives of married Christians. However, the Bible certainly enters into their lives. Those who would “keep walking by spirit” should not ignore the Scriptural indications of God’s thinking. And they will do well to cultivate a hatred for everything that is unclean before Jehovah, including what are clearly perverted sexual practices. Married couples should act in a way that will leave them with a clean conscience, as they give unimpeded attention to developing “the fruitage of the spirit.”—Galatians 5:16, 22, 23; Ephesians 5:3-5.

What, though, if one mate wants or even demands to share with his or her partner in what is clearly a perverted sex practice? The above-presented facts show that porneia involves unlawful sexual conduct outside the marital arrangement. Thus, a mate’s enforcing perverted acts, such as oral or anal sex, within the marriage would not constitute a Scriptural basis for a divorce that would free either for remarriage. Even though a believing mate is distressed by the situation, yet that one’s endeavor to hold to Scriptural principles will result in a blessing from Jehovah. In such cases it may be helpful for the couple to discuss the problem frankly, bearing in mind especially that sexual relations should be honorable, wholesome, an expression of tenderlove. This certainly should exclude anything that might distress or harm one’s mate.—Ephesians 5:28-30; 1 Peter 3:1, 7.

As already stated, it is not for elders to “police” the private marital matters of couples in the congregation. However, if it becomes known that a member of the congregation is practicing or openly advocating perverted sex relations within the marriage bond, that one certainly would not be irreprehensible, and so would not be acceptable for special privileges, such as serving as an elder, a ministerial servant or a pioneer. Such practice and advocacy could even lead to expulsion from the congregation. Why?

Galatians 5:19-21 lists many vices that are not classed as porneia, and which could lead to one’s being disqualified from God’s Kingdom. Among them are “uncleanness” (Greek, akatharsia, signifying filthiness, depravity, lewdness) and “loose conduct” (Greek, aselgeia, signifying licentiousness, wantonness, shameless conduct). Like porneia, these vices, when they become gross, can be grounds for disfellowshipping from the Christian congregation, but not for obtaining a Scriptural divorce. A person who brazenly advocates shocking and repulsive sexual activities would be guilty of loose conduct. Of course, a person with that attitude might even sink to committing porneia; then there would be a basis for a Scriptural divorce. How concerned all devoted Christians should be to avoid and war against all such “works of the flesh”!—Galatians 5:24, 25.

Reniaa how are members in the congregation to be made aware that there has been a 21st century shift in the WTS' postion re anal and oral sex within marriage (as you seem to suggest) if the WTS says "if it becomes known that a member of the congregation is practicing or openly advocating perverted sex relations within the marriage bond, that one certainly would not be irreprehensible, and so would not be acceptable for special privileges, such as serving as an elder, a ministerial servant or a pioneer. Such practice and advocacy could even lead to expulsion from the congregation."

mrsjones5

I'm beginning to believe that Reniaa really doesn't know what it's like to be on the inside of the org.

reniaa

actually you surprised me by the article it is not quite what I was expecting after others quotes on here.

"What, though, if one mate wants or even demands to share with his or her partner in what is clearly a perverted sex practice? The above-presented facts show that porneia involves unlawful sexual conduct outside the marital arrangement".
"In such cases it may be helpful for the couple to discuss the problem frankly, bearing in mind especially that sexual relations should be honorable, wholesome, an expression of tenderlove. This certainly should exclude anything that might distress or harm one’s mate.—Ephesians 5:28-30; 1 Peter 3:1, 7."

not quite the stinging indictment against oral sex I was expecting it is a small part of the article and now a footnote in 2007 article.

I'm still waiting for the 2009 article to be quoted.

Sunday Public talk that talked about oral sex

Share this