Видео

Homosexuals are condemned NOT for the ACT, but for SAME SEX people going it!!! Are you ignorant!!! Same sex people KISS so are we NOT to Kiss???

Yes I agree with you, well said :) Another reason why oral and anal sex are sinful has to do with God's design for sex God made sex for two purposes namely for procreative purposes and unitive purposes (meaning to deepen the love and bond between the spouses) However one must never separate the procreative purposes of sex from it's unitive purposes because God never intended for the two to be separate. For every act in marriage to be chaste it must meet both the procreative and unitive purposes of sex. Let's take IVF for example: it's procreative but it's not unitive because there is no sexual union which takes place between the spouses which bonds them together. Therefore it's not within God's will because it separates the procreative purposes of sex from it's unitive purposes. Birth control does the opposite of IVF. The sexual union takes place but it's closed off to procreation thereby rendering the act sterile. So birth control separates the sexual union from it's procreative purposes. Let's take BDSM as another example. It is possible for BDSM to be procreative but hitting, choking, tying up your spouse during sex does not bond you together so it's non unitive and therefore BDSM should also not be practiced in a Christian marriage because it also separates the procreative from the unitive. Unnatural sexual acts are all non procreative and non unitive so it's not within God's design. Not saying God wants us to conceive every time we have sex but we should at least be open to life resulting from that act so if it is impossible that a baby could result from the act you are doing or it's contraceptive then it's wrong. People can look up natural family and use that (prayerfully and with good reason) instead of condoms, birth control and artificial contraceptives if they wish to space out having children. God bless! Also another reason orsk sex is sinful has to do with God's design for sex God made sex for two purposes namely for procreative purposes and unitive purposes (meaning to deepen the love and bond between the spouses) However one must never separate the procreative purposes of sex from it's unitive purposes because God never intended for the two to be separate. For every act in marriage to be chaste it must meet both the procreative and unitive purposes of sex. Let's take IVF for example: it's procreative but it's not unitive because there is no sexual union which takes place between the spouses which bonds them together. Therefore it's not within God's will because it separates the procreative purposes of sex from it's unitive purposes. Birth control does the opposite of IVF. The sexual union takes place but it's closed off to procreation thereby rendering the act sterile. So birth control separates the sexual union from it's procreative purposes. Let's take BDSM as another example. It is possible for BDSM to be procreative but hitting, choking, tying up your spouse during sex does not bond you together so it's non unitive and therefore BDSM should also not be practiced in a Christian marriage because it also separates the procreative from the unitive. Unnatural sexual acts are all non procreative and non unitive so it's not within God's design. Not saying God wants us to conceive every time we have sex but we should at least be open to life resulting from that act so if it is impossible that a baby could result from the act you are doing or it's contraceptive then it's wrong. People can look up natural family and use that (prayerfully and with good reason) instead of condoms, birth control and artificial contraceptives if they wish to space out having children. God bless!

This does not point to oral sex and the Song of songs is a picture of Christ's love for his church, not a sex manual. The word "fruit" is used multiple times in the Bible and it does not mean or represent genitals. If you interpret the word "fruit" in the Bible to mean genitals then according to your interpretation of does the nine "fruit" of the Spirit actually mean the nine genitals of the Spirit? And how about when Jesus said you will know them by their "fruit" did he actually mean that you will know them by their genitals? No of course not. The Bible is a holy book. Do not twist the scriptures in order to try and justify sodomy within marriage. If people want to spice up their marriage they can go places, use love, conversation, massages, lingerie, candle light dinners, date night and even walk naked around the house if they want but oral sex and other perversions should be kept out of the marriage bed.

Oral and anal sex are mentioned in the Bible, but not in Song of songs, those falls under sodomy. Webster's dictionary defines sodomy as both anal and oral sex but it could also include all other non procreative methods of having sex which would include toys, masturbation ect. The Bible says no sodomite will enter the kingdom of heaven "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? 'Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor [a]homosexuals, nor [b]SODOMITES, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. " - 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Notice how homosexuals and sodomites are used separately meaning they are two different things. Both oral and anal sex fall under the sin of Onan (masturbation falls under this as well) In Genesis 38:8-10 Onan spilled his seed on the ground and God struck him dead on the spot. Sperm was designed to go into the vagina only it was not meant to be spilled onto the ground, swallowed or wasted in anyway. Remember Jesus said to look at the fruit.(Matthew 7:16-20) Vaginal intercourse produces fruit namely a child. Oral and anal sex on the other hand are both fruitless to God's kingdom and directly goes against His command to "be fruitful and multiply"- Genesis 1:28. Oral and anal sex are unnatural. When a man is having oral or anal sex with his wife he is leaving the natural use of the woman (which is vaginal intercourse) and vice versa: Rom. 1 Verses 26 to 29 "[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." Oral and anal sex are unclean. The Bible talks about uncleanliness multiple times in both the old and new testament (2 Corinthians 6:17& 7:1 being only a few examples) Cleanliness is next to nothing to godliness! It's not godly to go drink from a toilet seat so why would Christians put their mouths where urine, blood and waste come from? The eating of waste and drinking of blood and urine is something Satanists do. How can you praise a holy God, kiss your child or take holy communion with the same mouth you used to suck on someone's genitals? That should not be-James 3:10. There is nowhere in the Bible that says you are allowed to have oral sex so clearly there is way more evidence to prove it's a sin than it's not a sin. Also from a logical point of view anal sex is wrong because it would be hypocritical of us Christians to try and stop the homosexuals from having sex but then we go do the exact same thing in our marriage beds. However lesbians can not have anal sex... They only have oral sex (as well as other unnatural sexual acts but for the sake of the discussion I'll just stick to oral sex) So if oral sex is okay then what exactly is wrong with lesbianism? Nothing! Why can't two lesbians who are married to each other have oral sex but we Christians can? That's also hypocritical. Same sex attraction is not a sin. There are Christians who have same sex attraction but they choose to remain celibate and not to act upon those feelings. So therefore it is the homosexual/ lesbian act that is sinful and what is the homosexual/lesbian act? Any form of non vaginal intercourse (oral sex, anal sex, hand sex, sex toys ect.) So since the act itself is sinful it doesn't matter if heterosexual sexual couples do it it will still be a sin. Either oral sex is allowed for both same sex and heterosexual couples or it's not allowed for both same sex and heterosexual couples. God bless!

@@ABezuidenhout370 Song of Solomon 2:3-7, and Matthew 7:16-23 are similitudes. Strong's G2590 in the following manner: fruit (66x). fruit the fruit of the trees, vines, of the fields the fruit of one's loins, i.e., his progeny, his posterity that which originates or comes from something, an effect, result work, act, deed advantage, profit, utility praises, which are presented to God as a thank offering to gather fruit (i.e., a reaped harvest) into life eternal (as into a granary), is used in fig. discourse of those who by their labours have fitted souls to obtain eternal life Strong’s Definitions פְּרִי pᵉrîy, per-ee'; from H6509; fruit (literally or figuratively):-bough, (first-)fruit(-ful), reward. fruit fruit, produce (of the ground) fruit, offspring, children, progeny (of the womb) fruit (of actions) (fig.) Please grow in the word by studying and showing yourself approved to be tested. The archaic and etymological definitions will provide you with a solid foundation. Also, if you are not fulfilling your duties as a wife because you choose to believe something that is not scriptural, those hardships in your marriage are on you. Lastly, all of the most accredited dictionaries, i.e., Oxfords, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster, all have the exact definition for sodomy archaically.

Hide my response…🤦🏾‍♂️

@@ABezuidenhout370 Hiding my scriptural response is heresy.

Or someone that digs you. Life is too short to play by silly rules.

It is not unclean with 5 either ..

❤a lot nop

Loving not dog behavior. Moral behavioral.

Read carefully where the Word talks about Aninias & Sapphira. Also to God there is no male or female. God's to humans re the 5 fold aren't dependent upon the person's sex.

@@StuStevens-rn7rb exactly.

@@StuStevens-rn7rb That’s not what the scripture says. You do not have permission to read “between the lines”. Try going back to Genesis and understanding why God created women, then to all the Paulean epistles where Paul gives differing instructions concerning men and women. Why even have them?

@@DrChaad exactly.

@@StuStevens-rn7rb The word shouldn’t be capitalized here. The Word is the LORD Jesus Christ, the word is the word of God. Two different things. There is a difference between male and female in God’s eyes.

No. He didn't say that women could not preach. That is just a convenient interpretation of Scripture to "justify" patriarchy. If you take the time to actually read the Gospels, you will clearly see that Yeshua treated women as EQUAL to men. This is one of the things that got him into "trouble" with the Pharisees and the Sanhedron. He had the audacity to correct patriarchy - who was the first person he revealed himself to after his Resurection? A WOMAN! There are many other examples of Yeshua regarding women as equals in society. You insist that our "sisters" stay humble but conveniently neglect to include men in this very same attitude! Hipocracy at its finest.

@@brettbarager9101 Do ur homework! Women will never ever be equal to men,God said all men are created equal,I don’t think he said anything about women other then u were created from a rib hello a rib with no sauce u were made to keep us company from jump street! Everything u supposedly been taught is wrong! U must be on president biden team trying to persuade Uganda a holy land o embrace trasnsgenders and gays 65 million couldn’t do it,listen to the crazy comments been posted by brainwashed people,1 lady said oral sex is wrong Amen lol she probably count the strokes and humps she get real talk ,I’m PK and me and my dad use to debate so many things is the Bible that contradicts or compromises the word I should say my dad church was Pentecostal I told him change the name no church is more holy then the next one every knee shall bow no matter who or what u think u are,Jesus didn’t have. Church he taught on the highways in byways hello and when he laid hands on u he didn’t ask what denomination u be long to hello his is why the Bible stresses women be humble that means shut up indirectly follow ur husband as he follows Christ ,A King James Version might be best for you they made it for the less educated,social media has corrupted so many that the way the sheep’s are coming back home is by death the wages of sin is overflowing! Nevertheless for u to God be the glory and accept him as ur lord n savior seek him 1st and all things will be added unto u! May God renew u and dispatch Goodness n Mercy to keep u from hidden dangers and watch over u and urs ,This is what u say Amen too not oral sex!!

​@@brettbarager9101 Thankyou...... it greaves me that the head (for the most part) is sick. Isaiah 1v5 and it is grevious that they want to put Paul's teaching above TMH. They are only but the creation, whereas TMH is the creator. And in regards to them wanting the males to only teach... well we see how far that has "NOT" got us in terms of truth over the past several centuries.

What?

Yes , off course

from these bullvideos

You will get infection in your gum and kill you. If you have a cavity. People people are foolish.

Actually it doesn't say that. ;) Go read Romans. Paul expressly calls Two Women as Deacon (a "male only role") and an Apostle (a "male only role".) Which you also find in 2 Corinithians that the Church has no such customs. Because Christianity is not Judaism, nor are we Catholic.

@@StylesEste go read Timothy 2:12

@@JesusChristSaves955 I know the Scripture well, bud. But you seem to not understand Romans or 2 Corinithians. Written all by Paul. Paul does not say that women cannot be pastors (not once in the bible does it say this. *anywhere*.) It says "If a man is to be". It was "normal" for men to be in these roles, but it was not dictated, nor custom (law.) The New Covenant has no such laws. And if you need any place else for you, go read Jesus' Word. Not once does He (our God) say that women cannot serve in the ministry of His kingdom. ^The Nicene Creed said this, 325 AD. Not the Apostles, not the Disciples, not Christ Himself.

@StylesEste I think you need to fast and ask God women can't be teaching men God created Adam first then even

​@@JesusChristSaves955 ^A mother teaches her son. "Women teaching men." So if you were to fast and ask God, of whom would you read? Paul's work. ; ) And yet Paul's work is contradictory in Romans (calling a woman a Deacon, and another an Apostle.) Except it is not contradictory, because the bible actually has never said women cannot teach men. *Paul* says that in two passages. And yet in Romans (same writer) he directly states one is a Deacon and the other an Apostle. These roles are *teaching* roles, that Two women occupy. How funny it is that only the Nicene Creed sought to cover up the role of women in ministry. Which does have a defined and biblically accepted and Kingdom-building role. ^Also a "Pastor" is not a church elder, by the way, that would be the Archbiship (or Archdeacon.) Which, by the way, Romans. Again. Paul declares a woman as a Deacon (this is a church leader) and the other an Apostle. You cannot use one work that says women have no authority over men - and then completely ignore the next that openly declares a woman who had authority over a congregation (men.) ^You can't pick and choose, bud. And the old testament does not restrict women in service roles of God (Kingdom-building.) Quite in fact, it is *against* the biblical ethics code (civic law) for a man to instruct a woman; not his wife or daughter. This is left up to her father or husband. So where do women actually learn from? Oh right, other women. Women who were raised up and studied in the Word. They were also worship and praise leaders, child caregivers, laysman, law instructors, and ministers. ^The actual roles women have been in since the beginning *until Catholicism*.

Exactly then husband will get it somewhere else

Where in the world did you get this because it's not in God's Word but from the world.

Where is your Scriptural support for this assertion?