It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unmarried couple having sex is the same as a human having sex with an animal?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by PreTribGuy
 




Lev. 20:13-15 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.
15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.

Three different sins are mentioned in these 3 verses and all three have the "death penalty" attached to them. There are a few other sexual sins mentioned in Lev 20, but not all have the "death penalty" attached to them.



Three sins are mentioned. Where does it say anything about sex and marriage? Where does it say anything in what you quoted about not allowing sex without marriage? It doesn't....

And let's not change the subject of this thread to homosexuality. There is already a thread for that. This thread is about comparing sex with animals to sex between unmarried adults. Personally, I think this way of thinking is disgusting.

I am completely disgusted by it and nothing is going to change that. Bigwhammy....you can come in here with your usual ramblings about Hallmark cards and blah blah blah and as always, add nothing to the thread or topic or conversation.

And, back to PTG: since you brought up discussion from another thread, I will have to post this, which is from the same thread you brought into play here:



Miriam...what does sex without marriage have to do with sex with animals? Is it the same in your world? Because if it is, I feel sad for the life you must be living and wonder:
A. Who taught you this? or
B. How you managed to come to this way of thinking on your own?


Response from Miriam:
if you are having sex.... with an animal.... i think chances are your not married to it.



So, according to this woman, it is the same and I am rightly disgusted!

[edit on 16-8-2008 by Excitable_Boy]




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
He didnt mention any names in his original post so what is wrong with Excitable Boy starting this post? Personally the Bible is outdated, misquoted, and has been translated over and over, so how can we even trust the meaning? I think comparing fornication to bestiality is apples and oranges. To lump them in the same category harkens back to the Dark Ages. I hear the witch burners knocking at my door again.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Excitable_Boy
 



Three sins are mentioned.


I am thankful this is agreed upon!


Where does it say anything about sex and marriage?


It talks about sex, and not necessarily (in Lev. 20) ONLY, not ALWAYS, about marriage.


Where does it say anything in what you quoted about not allowing sex without marriage? It doesn't....


If I'm understanding your question correctly, you are asking if the Biblical text (presented) prohibits sex "outside" of marriage? If so, I state that the Bible prohibits certain kinds of sexual acts...PERIOD!

There is an English word, it is called "fornication". The definition is here:

en.wikipedia.org...

The only "sex" that is authorized and BLESSED BY GOD is between a man and a woman...who are (married and) husband and wife.

However,
The more I re-read your original post, I am not sure that you are mocking the Bible, but only (puzzled by) what one person has proclaimed in a previous thread...about her (current) understanding of the Bible.??

Anyone who would follow this "forum" on BTS, with resonable persistence, would have a pretty good "idea" of who is being talked about in your opening post.

Even in your opening post, you proclaim that your subject is a "SHE", and may I quote this from the opening post:


and she felt quite adamantly


AND


She says this is in the bible...


Did she REALLY say these things?

I offer up the original thread up for others to judge:

www.belowtopsecret.com...

....and I ASK, readers of this BTS forum:

Did Miriam really SAY what is ascribed to her in the OP's post?
Or has the OP misrepresented her views?

Remember that the OP quote said (emphasis mine):


She says this is in the bible...



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by raven bombshell
 



He didnt mention any names in his original post so what is wrong with Excitable Boy starting this post?


...sigh...

Of course there are no "names"!

Are we to imagine that "Excitable_Boy" was wholly and completely oblivious to the OTHER THREAD he participated in??

...just a few days ago???

www.belowtopsecret.com...

This subject is quite familiar to me...for I participated in it...



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by PreTribGuy
 


I would have to be included. I do not feel offended,(for myself) especially.
I do think miriam makes a legitamite point.

By miriam
once again, your ability to jump to a conclusion, and run with it amazes me. as does your ability to get offended.

I liked pikypiky's post, though.

By pikypiky
I guess if people just have sex for the sake of pure pleasure, then yeah they are pretty much animals.

I think I read somewhere that if you had sex with a sheep, it would be disgusting to eat it later.
I would take that a step further and say if you have "casual sex" you should pay due respect for the other person and not treat them like a whore, or worse.
If you do not have that ability, you should never have sex, with anyone.

By SilentShadow
so when a couple have sex they are married.

I would modify this to "do not have sex unless you want to be married to that person and go ahead behaving like you are, in every positive aspect."


[edit on 17-8-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:02 AM
link   
law says that on a highway you cant go faster than 120 km/h.

law also says on a back road, you shouldnt exceed 60 km/h.

both a separate circumstances with admittedly different consequences. a crash at 60 doesnt look the same as a crash at 120.

but they are based on the same principle. driving in excessive speeds can be dangerous and deadly.

fornication, bestiality, homosexuality are all different laws, but they stem from the same principle. no sex with someone other than your marriage mate.

the consequences are not the same. so sex laws are probably there for hygiene reasons. sodomy for example. today if you get a urinary track infection, its dangerous, but can usually be controlled. back then you were dead.

some laws bare more then hygiene and include disease. (i think there is a statistic that 1 in 4 american woman have some sort of STD)

some laws protect the emotions. bible prohibits adultery. it tears apart marriages and breaks hearts.

sometimes there is mixed consequences. in my support group for HIV is a woman who now has HIV because her husband cheated on her and didnt know he picked it up. try explaining to her that adultery is ¨harmless¨

its the all the same sin. porn´ia (fornication in old greek) includes all sexual deviation. the word essentially means sex outside of marriage. (even includes sexual deviation inside the marriage like rape)

the bible says porn´ia is wrong. you offended? then whatever that up to you. i dont understand why this means i have to be attacked for it.

its really nice to check the forum and see jokes about me having ¨find the peanut butter¨ sessions with a dog.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
i heard people are just animals with deformities



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 


Everything you are saying is all well and good.....but, the issue was your comments about beastiality and fornication being the same thing. You stated an awful lot that didn't even touch on this. Why do you keep changing the subject? For example, you are talking about a woman being cheated on. What does this have to do with beastiality?

You put fornication and beastiality in the same bucket. Please explain how that makes sense. Thank you.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
EB,

This is ridiculous- Maybe she's attached or [he] to their lap dog in more ways than one and are covering up their sins...bah!
I call mental case. We all know bestiality from the normal stuff, i mean the difference........

Anyway, i'm coming to your home town next weekend- on a side note, it is HOT here in Phoenix now
:bnghd:
:shk:
I'd forgotten just how HOT



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Are you telling me, to a certain degree, I just had sex with an animal?



See, this is why I'm an atheist.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Excitable_Boy
 



You put fornication and beastiality in the same bucket.


Here is pretty big "bucket":

1 Cor. 6:9-10 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by PreTribGuy
 


Okay.....where does it say anything about beastiality in that fiction you quoted?

*waiting*

Oh, and....what about that effeminate stuff? Can women be effeminate or are men AND women not allowed to be? That passage isn't very clear.



[edit on 17-8-2008 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by PreTribGuy
1 Cor. 6:9-10 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves shall inherit the kingdom of God.





uh oh.................



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by PreTribGuy


1 Cor. 6:9-10 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Well that rules out just about every person I know.

If this is true I suspect the Kingdom Of Heaven is going to be a very empty and boring place with very little enjoyment.

Can someone please point out exactly what the attraction is for wanting to go to such a place?

Deal me out of it if it's full of all the hang up's and insecurities which seem to be evident in the "righteousness".



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Well there are two ways to look at this.

From the human perspective beastiality must be worse than fornication than with another humans.

But to God all major sins that lead to death are equal.

Yet we get some perspective on God's thinking on this matter from the Mosiac law, 2 people(man and woman) that were single but had sex, just had to marry each other. If any party was married it was a death sentence for them both if they were both willing participants.

So if God had different punishments back then it does give you some idea.
Since having sex with a beast got both the beast(poor thing) and the person killed, well it can't be exactly the same can it?

[edit on 17-8-2008 by Blue_Jay33]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Excitable_Boy
 



Okay.....where does it say anything about beastiality in that fiction you quoted?


It doesn't, specifically, but it is implied in the opening part of the first verse.

It says that the "unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God".

"beastiality" is not mentioned, but implied.

"MURDERERS" is not mentioned, but implied.

"The UNRIGHTEOUS shall NOT inherit the kingdom of God."

As for fornication? (all sexual sin is included here...)

It is said to be worse than any of the (non-sexual) sins listed above in 1 Cor. 6:9-10, for the Bible says (a little later...in the same chapter),

1 Cor 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

Thank you for the opportunity to present this to our audience!



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 



Well that rules out just about every person I know.


Did you happen to look at the next verse?

1 Cor. 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
Deal me out of it if it's full of all the hang up's and insecurities which seem to be evident in the "righteousness".


thats exactly the point. its your decision. there are consequences to your decision, but its still your decision.

no-one in this thread or the other is telling you what to do. (even though alot interpret the discussion so)

this whole thing started because someone was repulsed by the idea that all sin is equal (according to the bible, mentioned in a theological discussion.) and decided that he needed to take it out on me.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
So if God had different punishments back then it does give you some idea.
Since having sex with a beast got both the beast(poor thing) and the person killed, well it can't be exactly the same can it?


this bares the question, is adam and eve´s sin of eating the fruit the same as bestiality?

both shared the same consequence.

rom 6:[23] For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

all sin shares the same consequence (EB must be popping reading this.)

why?

its simple really, all sin shares 2 things in common.

1 - sin is a rebellion against god. god gives you a standard and you decide not to follow it. you are in effect telling him you want to do things your way. (in this case, the fruit adam and eve ate falls in this category because literally eating the fruit bore no consequence, it was direct disobediance.)

2 - sin is doing something unloving. in the case of murder this is obvious, but even with the apple, adam and eve were unloving to god by rebelling.

when 2 consenting adults have sex and refuse to marry, they are rebelling against god. if they dont believe in the bible and dont care thats fine, but they still have to bare the consequences of their actions. again this may include pregnancy and sickness.

but from a biblical point of view, its sin. sin is all disobedience AND unloving.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Can someone please explain to me, in rational terms not quoting dogma, why sex between two consenting, single adults is a sin if they are not married?
Just who are they hurting?
Why would it be as punishable as beastiality?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join