|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/8/2008 9:15:27 PM
|
|
|
HisCovenant
Posts: 4278
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Don't be embarassed!!! It's hard to understand each other on a forum sometimes, between spelling mistakes, no tone of voice coloring the posts, and unfinished thoughts, I'm surprised anyone understand me!!
I think most of us are in agreement with you and, if I'm understanding Solo, the OP is about a woman who physically can't have intercourse. I don't think she's speaking of a woman who chooses to not have intercourse. I certainly didn't think you were in any way commenting on on the choice to not have intercourse (either for the choice or against it.)
_____________________________
-HisCovenant/ Zipporah
My friends call me Zippy!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/9/2008 10:31:39 AM
|
|
|
scottishmomma46
Posts: 178
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
|
sometimes it's hard to explain things and i know at times i can get confused sorry.
_____________________________
faith is just not something you talk about......faith is something you do.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/18/2008 2:51:49 AM
|
|
|
miasma
Posts: 4487
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I don't really understand the need to wonder this; there is a gamut of sexuality out there. "Can" you marry without having sex? Sure. Will it be easy/likely for that to happen? Probably not.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/18/2008 8:31:52 PM
|
|
|
phosadaud
Posts: 10648
Joined: 9/19/2005
From: Washington State
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: W.O.F.
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
While I do believe one should absolutely be completely and unabashadly upfront with a future spouse about this as it is a big deal, there is nothing in Scripture that prohibits someone from marrying because of an inability to have intercourse. Look at the woman who had the bleeding problem. Because of Mosaic law, her husband would not have been allowed to even touch her. 
Actually...we have no knowledge as to whether the woman was married or not...and under Mosaic law...her husband COULD touch her (have intercourse with her)...he would just have to follow the course for purification afterwards. (Lev. 15)
1. True, we don't know if she was married, however the likelihood of her being single is just about zero or she would have been begging on the streets. In addition, with all the laws on marriage and uncleanness, if it was wrong for a woman to marry who had chronic bleeding issues, why do we not see this in Scripture? I think we need to be super careful whenever we add to God's law. SUPER careful.
2. Sorry, but you are incorrect about being allowed to lie with her during her period. Leviticus 15:24-33 shows us that doing so would make him unclean. The Israelites were specifically commanded to not touch anything that was unclean.
Leviticus 5:3 "Or if he touches human uncleanness - anything that would make him unclean - even though he is unaware of it, when he learns of it he will be guilty"
In addition, this verse spells it out in no uncertain terms:
Leviticus 18:19 "Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period"
_____________________________
~Kristin~
Resume Quotations: "I worked as a Corporate Lesion."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/22/2008 9:23:10 AM
|
|
|
wareaglekd
Posts: 679
Joined: 8/9/2006
From: War Eagle Country
Status: offline
|
Although it is rare, I have heard of people who have the gift of celibacy. But, it is not just sexual in nature. The mind & feelings are also geared that way too. They are committed to being single & have no thoughts otherwise.
If God has given someone the desire to love & to marry, I believe at some point in life it is fulfilled, regardless of someone's ability to have sex. Yes, it is completely two different things if it is for physical reasons or if it is someone's choice. I believe in physical situations, God may not always remove the desire for intimacy or a relationship w/ someone. It's something to commit to prayer & trust that God has a great plan in the situation. I don't think you deliberately go out & look for someone who is the same way. God already knows who the future partner is & when in life he will be there.
Yes, it's frustrating, but we trust God w/ everything else, we can trust Him w/ this too. kd
_____________________________
Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. Romans 12:12
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/25/2008 11:09:36 AM
|
|
|
W.O.F.
Posts: 1467
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: an ignoble beginning
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
quote:
ORIGINAL: W.O.F.
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
While I do believe one should absolutely be completely and unabashadly upfront with a future spouse about this as it is a big deal, there is nothing in Scripture that prohibits someone from marrying because of an inability to have intercourse. Look at the woman who had the bleeding problem. Because of Mosaic law, her husband would not have been allowed to even touch her.
Actually...we have no knowledge as to whether the woman was married or not...and under Mosaic law...her husband COULD touch her (have intercourse with her)...he would just have to follow the course for purification afterwards. (Lev. 15)
1. True, we don't know if she was married, however the likelihood of her being single is just about zero or she would have been begging on the streets. In addition, with all the laws on marriage and uncleanness, if it was wrong for a woman to marry who had chronic bleeding issues, why do we not see this in Scripture? I think we need to be super careful whenever we add to God's law. SUPER careful.
2. Sorry, but you are incorrect about being allowed to lie with her during her period. Leviticus 15:24-33 shows us that doing so would make him unclean. The Israelites were specifically commanded to not touch anything that was unclean.
Leviticus 5:3 "Or if he touches human uncleanness - anything that would make him unclean - even though he is unaware of it, when he learns of it he will be guilty"
In addition, this verse spells it out in no uncertain terms:
Leviticus 18:19 "Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period"
Yes..and the verses also point out HOW he is to purify himself if he should do so....
it was not punishable by death...merely having to go through purification process.
It was NOT to be done...but it had an "escape route"
It is important to understand also that even if she were not married, she would not necessarily have been begging in the streets. It talks about her using HER resources...a married woman did not have her OWN resources usually, unless she was widowed. A single woman might have resources if she were an only child, and/or her brothers/uncles provided for her.
My point was that there are assumptions people make concerning her marital status which are not supported either way...simply because God didn't feel that was important.
And yes, the Israelites were commanded not to touch any unclean thing...which included the dead...yet they somehow managed to bury their dead...there were purification rites for those things.
_____________________________
Live your life in such a way that when your feet hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders and says, "Oh no, she's awake."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 10/25/2008 10:51:10 PM
|
|
|
myka
Posts: 820
Status: offline
|
Usually when a woman was having her period, she would leave the house because anything she touched, sat on, etc. would be unclean.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 11/8/2008 10:40:40 PM
|
|
|
W.O.F.
Posts: 1467
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: an ignoble beginning
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
Um, just because there is a way to "get clean", does not make it ok to do. There were sacrifices that were made to cover the Israelites sin to when they walked away from God. That doesn't make it ok to sin though. The Bible is very clear - men were not to lie with their wives during their periods. Yes, there was a way to purify himself after, but that doesn't change the fact that Mosaic law said it was a sin to do so in the first place. Could a man do it? In the technical sense yes - just like a man can go out and murder his neighbor in the technical sense. It's still sin though and against the Law.
so...was it a sin for them to bury their dead as well? Because the rights of purification were the same for both incidents?"
Was it a sin to have a menstrual period? Because the rights of purification were the same....
was it a sin to have a "wet dream?" because the rites were the same.....
_____________________________
Live your life in such a way that when your feet hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders and says, "Oh no, she's awake."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 11/9/2008 2:04:26 PM
|
|
|
phosadaud
Posts: 10648
Joined: 9/19/2005
From: Washington State
Status: offline
|
It was not a sin for a woman to menstruate, but yes it was a sin for a man to lie with her during that time:
Leviticus 18:19 "Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period"
And read the surrounding verses to get a list of all the sins this is part of including what the Lord follows up this list (which includes homosexual relations to adultery to incest) and says:
quote:
24 "'Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled. 25 Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26 But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the aliens living among you must not do any of these detestable things, 27 for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled. 28 And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you. 29 "'Everyone who does any of these detestable things--such persons must be cut off from their people. 30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am the Lord your God.'"
What part of "do not" is not understood here? It doesn't say "do not have a period". It doesn't say "do not bury your dead". It doesn't say "do not have a wet dream". It SAYS do not lie with a woman during her period. Period. End of story.
_____________________________
~Kristin~
Resume Quotations: "I worked as a Corporate Lesion."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you think? - 11/10/2008 11:52:06 AM
|
|
|
reach
Posts: 1371
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I saw a medical story yesterday where the lady had such bad endometriosis, that she could not have sex. They even said on the show that she and her husband did not have sex. She had gone undiagnoised for like 20 years. Then the right doc finally saw something and thought it was cancer and when he got in, he had to remove everything, or it would spread.
Very crazy, but it can happen if everyone is honest and open with each other.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
). I know of couples who are very happy and yes, even "satisfied" even though one or both are unable to have intercourse. They have simply found other ways to unite as a married couple. And I think that is a beautiful thing - not something to look down on or view as "less valid". 
) 
