Sunday Public talk that talked about oral sex (page 7)

maryacclaim

I have no idea MrsJones, where can they get that idea of being greedy from, it sounds like one of those rules they come up with to help someone understand the situation that is non-understandable. Understand? Cuz I don't.

Also, I forgot to point out. I like how they mention pornography and then list the worst kind ever. I bet they did that so in the case of a DF'n of someone for this, they can point to this article and show it to those questioning the decision that was made. People would then think the very worst of anyone. Its called projected thinking. They're good at this.

reniaa

i'm not a wt devourer to the level ex-Jws become going back years, I'm pretty sure I read in a recent artrcle what was between a married couple is between them, personal choice fodder. I would still like a quote from the complete recent article please.

hi mary

sorry i'm getting tired my point was some of these must be more about consequences, that fornication as a norm is leading to family units being fractured.

passwordprotected

@ maryaclaim - "However PASSWORD, it would seem that you and many others, take special interest in attacking any and all things that RENIAA has to say. Not many attack your form of reasoning, which is truly one sided, though many disagree with it."

I'm attacking Reniaa as much as she's attacking me. I'm not sure I completely understand what you're trying to say in your second sentence. Are you saying that my reasoning is one-sided and that many disagree with it? If so, who are the many who disagree with my reasoning and what makes my reasoning one-sided? I try and quote from the two sources relevant to most discussions on this forum; the Bible and the publications of the Watch Tower Society.

reniaa

actually I think I prove my point to a fair degree since no one has been able to show a recent article on it with regards to married couples which it would if it was still a major teaching, it has already been reduced to footnotes (if that is true I haven't been able to confirm it) I think on this one time will tell in my favour.

I'm still waiting a quote from the most recent wt study that started all this discussion and if it actually said anything about married couples with regards to oral sex? if it didn't I have again proved my point.

maryacclaim

Password

Oh...by onesided I mean, you push the trinity as fact. Many disagree with that. I've read it on many posts, I disagree, as I am sure others do as well, but I feel that at least you made your point and we move on. When it comes to RENIAA, she makes a point to what she believes and you jump all over it. I get it. Its fun. Its fun to see who will win, but sometimes it feels a bit cruel and mean spirited is all.

mrsjones5

"Reniaa, you said -

you will have to show me a wt article from at least this century that mentions oral sex and married couples not just unmarried couples.

The Watch Tower Society doesn't work that way. If they haven't recently updated a certain teaching, thought or ruling, then that teaching, thought or ruling still stands.

Hence, if a Watchtower article from 1974 calls oral sex between married persons a perversion, and if the WTS hasn't commented on this since, then that's still what they want Jehovah's Witnesses to think."

Reniaa, above is what Password said on the matter and he's right. Once the WTS says something on a matter it doesn't change unless they decided to change it and post the change in another article. You should know that.

maryacclaim

reniaa,

The first poster on this topic said it was in a Public talk. I have heard many a CO's give out of date talks. So it would stand to reason that an elder could be doing research for his talk on the CD-ROM and come up with articles for his outline that are out of date. The problem, which I believe is the point of all the others in a way, is the WT has never published a retraction or an apology for those that have been DF'd in the past for these practices. It's none of the WT's business, EVER! Is the point. It's not in the bible and they should never have had a stand on this point. If the light has got brighter on this issue, they should go ahead and write an article that spells it out. Since they had no problem spelling out what you couldn't do in the past.

Mary

passwordprotected

actually I think I prove my point to a fair degree since no one has been able to show a recent article on it with regards to married couples which it would if it was still a major teaching, it has already been reduced to footnotes (if that is true I haven't been able to confirm it) I think on this one time will tell in my favour.
I'm still waiting a quote from the most recent wt study that started all this discussion and if it actually said anything about married couples with regards to oral sex? if it didn't I have again proved my point.

We've got the Governing Body doing the following;

saying oral sex between married couples is a disfellowshipping offense
saying oral sex between married couples is grounds for divorce
saying oral sex between married couples isn't a disfellowshipping offense
saying oral sex between married couples could be a grounds for divorce, the elders will turn a blind eye
saying oral sex between married couples, if known in to be going one, would disqualify a brother from being used in the congregation

Doesn't this illustrate the problem of unquestioningly following humans? Do not put your trust in nobles nor in the son of earthling man to whom no salvation belongs.

How many lives have been shattered by this one area of Governing Body meddling in peoples' lives?

ninja

mary acclaim sounds like reniaa

reniaa

Lol you have just made me goto the actual Jw site, I struggled to find anything related to sex and married couples this is one example. I could find nothing recent relating to the subject, accept this which again backs up my thought that they now are keeping what happens between a couple between them..

Less readily accepted is what the Bible says on sexual matters. Contrary to what many have been led to believe, the Bible does not prudishly condemn as sinful all sexual desire. But it does provide sound advice on how human sexuality should be expressed. The Bible teaches that sexual relations are reserved for a man and a woman who are married to each other. (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6; Hebrews 13:4) Sex provides a way for marriage mates to express and receive love and tender affection. (1 Corinthians 7:1-5) Any children born of such a union benefit from having two parents who care for each other.—Colossians 3:18-21.

Sunday Public talk that talked about oral sex

Share this