How do we actually know that?If anal sex occurs, it is the same argument as the PIV- they are physically "one flesh"
And does it differ from oral? If so, how?
And leave off with the reasons for not doing it, that discussion doesn’t belong here.
How do we actually know that?If anal sex occurs, it is the same argument as the PIV- they are physically "one flesh"
Bill Klinton says, "No. Oral sex doesn't count. Because it all depends on what the meaning of 'sex' is."Let’s step this up a couple of notches.
Does oral sex create a one flesh union?
Anal?
Please provide Bible based answers.
Hence the reason that I asked for Bible based answersBill Klinton says, "No. Oral sex doesn't count. Because it all depends on what the meaning of 'sex' is."
What we DO know from Scripture is that a "man lying with a man as with a women" (English variants exist, but the gist is similar) is prohibited, and carries the death penalty.How do we actually know that?
And does it differ from oral? If so, how?
If 'zerah' (seed) is spilled, there are admonitions in that oft-forbidden Torah that have to do with subsequent cleanliness...I don’t believe that oral sex or anal sex actually count as sex because there is no seed that is being used to be fruitful and for multiplying.
Or it’s hundred of cases of adultery all requiring death.No. Because if there was, there would be dozens or even hundreds of men who would be obligated to marry that one woman. Which is polyandry, and forbidden. The law does not require sin.
We know every man who unites with a prostitute is one flesh with her. In this case, one flesh is not marriage, it's a diabolical mess we're told to run a mile from.
What is "one flesh"? Think about the words. They have a literal meaning.Intercourse is transfer of ownership that can be nullified by previous patriarch. It is not polyandry. Polyandry does not exist biblically.
If what you are saying is true about one flesh union act is not equate to marriage then how does 1 Corinthians 6:16 contribute to severity of what Paul warns us about. That verse does not have much meaning. It would be just easier to say that sex with a harlot is an abomination (different severity), like it was said about many other sexual sins. Yet in this case a motivation/reason was provided to avoid sex with a prostitute.
One flesh union act is marriage, sex with prohibited people and animals is abomination. A prostitute returning to her previous customer is abomination, a prostitute getting a new customer after you is an adultery. (I think, I am learning out loud)
A man can form one flesh union with a prostitute. He cannot form one union with what is prohibited. Intercourse with an animal does not obligate that man to continue to provide "congecial rights" to that animal, two do not become one here. That is abomination.
"What? Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.”. " - by adding this Paul wanted to emphasize severity of the act. With the understanding you hold to, this portion does not have much weight. Unless it would say that it is abomination. But in this case Paul may be saying, "you just created a bond that obligates you to that prostitute". With your understanding, a person may respond to Paul's reasoning, "so what, I say white lies sometimes".
A completely valid hypothesis in theory, but one which you would expect to be corroborated in scripture. It would mean prostitution should receive the death penalty, but I can think of no example in scripture of that punishment being either prescribed or given for prostitution, and as the use of prostitutes appears all through scripture one would expect this to be mentioned somewhere. It isn't, there might be death for false worship that involved temple prostitutes but never for prostitution alone. I don't want to add to scripture.Or it’s hundred of cases of adultery all requiring death.
I can’t remember one example of punishment being given for adultery other than King David.A completely valid hypothesis in theory, but one which you would expect to be corroborated in scripture. It would mean prostitution should receive the death penalty, but I can think of no example in scripture of that punishment being either prescribed or given for prostitution, and as the use of prostitutes appears all through scripture one would expect this to be mentioned somewhere. It isn't, there might be death for false worship that involved temple prostitutes but never for prostitution alone. I don't want to add to scripture.
I can think of no example in scripture of that punishment being either prescribed or given for prostitution...
Interesting, thankyou. The exception that proves the rule, since it's only applied to the daughters of priests. If all prostitutes were to be killed, it would just say so. The fact it is limited to only the daughters of priests shows everyone else was held to a lower standard. This confirms what I said, that adultery was punishable by death, but prostitution was generally not, so prostitution is different to adultery.Lev. 21:9 -- the daughter of a kohen who is a prostitute. (Judah got that one a bit wrong...on more than one level.)
Paleeeze... I just had lunch!If anal sex occurs, it is the same argument as the PIV- they are physically "one flesh". Gays do this all the time but we soundly reject that, but why? Here's why: anal sex is inherently filthy- Scripture calls it abomination. Fecal matter on a penis is dangerous to the next vagina that is in contact. The penis and vagina are naturally clean, and the anus is naturally filled with bacteria.