I have noticed a lot of threads, some making it to the front page, asking about the scriptural propriety of a variety of sexual themes.

For example, in many threads, there has been a fierce debate about whether or not self-service is a sin, whether or not watching pornagraphy with a spouse is a sinornot, and one Op even asked whether or not lusting after one's spouse could be considered a sin.

Consider this:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12
If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her.

The impression from the above scriptural passage is that it is forbidden for a woman to touch her husbands testicles, True or false?

So, I think it is appropriate to ask Christians and Muslims, resident experts on scriptures, whether pre-intimacy and intimate variety, innovations to enhance intimate pleasure between a wedded couple could be a sin or not, and if not, what would be the limits of lasciviousness that would be deemed okay according the expectations of the Abrahamic faiths with these scriptural verses in mind.


1 Corinthians 7:1-40 - Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman.


Matthew 5:28 - But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.


Colossians 3:5 - Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Hm....k

I personally don't believe there are limits in the marriage bed.

Let's look at your first scripture


1 Corinthians 7:1-40 - Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman.

Seriously? The entire chapter? First of all, 1 and 2 Corinthians are comprised of letters written by Paul to the Greek city of Corinth.
Verse 1 refers to unmarried men. Why do I get the feeling you are more than aware of this? In the next verse he (Paul) says to avoid formication by getting married. 3 & 4 basically says married couples should each give themselves generously to each other. (With due benevolence) It goes on to talk about the wife's body belonging to the husband, and husband's to her.(I personally think it is saying you are married, do what you want together) Next it says don't deny one another. Except by mutual consent to fast and pray, but to get right back to it, so satan doesn't tempt you. (For those wives who deny their husbands, or the other way around.) Then he says its better to be celibate like him, but if you can't, you should get married. 10-40 do talk some about sex, but for this topic are not necessarily apropose. If you feel differently, I'm certain you will let me know. To be continued...

^^^
Fair enough.
What is your comment on the Deuteronomy verse?

I believe the deuteronomy verse is saying it is forbidden for a woman to grab another man's testicles while trying to defend her husband during a fight. How you reached the conclusion that she should not grab her husbands testicles at all is beyond me.

Joshthefirst: I believe the deuteronomy verse is saying it is forbidden for a woman to grab another man's testicles while trying to defend her husband during a fight. How you reached the conclusion that she should not grab her husbands testicles at all is beyond me.

It is because you put on dark colored glasses when reading the bible. Now take a look at this, pay attention to the bolded.

Deuteronomy 25:11-12
If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her

Now, remove those glasses and read again

There's no restriction in marriage, as long as you are doing it with your wife/husband you are good to go .

rationalmind:

It is because you put on dark colored glasses when reading the bible. Now take a look at this, pay attention to the bolded.



Now, remove those glasses and read again

Oga rational, maybe you need to put on some glasses...

How is the woman "rescuing" her husband by grabbing him by the genitals?

The verse is obviously talking about the other guy.

And you call yourself "rational"?

rapture_ready:

Oga rational, maybe you need to put on some glasses...

How is the woman "rescuing" her husband by grabbing him by the genitals?

The verse is obviously talking about the other guy.

And you call yourself "rational"? :-/

No let me insult you o. You should ask whoever wrote that verse how seizing ones husband genitals rescues him not me

rationalmind:

It is because you put on dark colored glasses when reading the bible. Now take a look at this, pay attention to the bolded.



Now, remove those glasses and read again

Josh has a point.
He could be correct, it's a use of pronoun, "him" could apply to any of both men there

macof:

Josh has a point.
He could be correct, it's a use of pronoun, "him" could apply to any of both men there

yea, I think the problem there is the translation. Whoever translated it did a bad job

rapture_ready:

Oga rational, maybe you need to put on some glasses...

How is the woman "rescuing" her husband by grabbing him by the genitals?

The verse is obviously talking about the other guy.

And you call yourself "rational"?

lol. Abeg help me ooo. I remember telling him to strengthen his hold on the english language.

rationalmind:

No let me insult you o. You should ask whoever wrote that verse how seizing ones husband genitals rescues him not me

Come on, you had that one coming.

How far, you de go the retreat?

let me help you out with the deuteronomy verse

deut 25 vs 11 When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.

means when two men are having a contentious argument and the wife of one the men interjects and starts berating the other guy, basically what she has done is emasculated the other guy. so her hand represents 'deeds'. like how they say dont recieve the mark of the beast on your hand or your forehead meaning your deeds ( hand ) and your thoughts ( forehead ). so cutting off her hand means chastising her deeds ( actions ). you should tell her not to butt into an argument between you and your male friend. thats all that means bruv. all allegory and esoteric knowledge

obadiah777: let me help you out with the deuteronomy verse

deut 25 vs 11 When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.

means when two men are having a contentious argument and the wife of one the men interjects and starts berating the other guy, basically what she has done is emasculated the other guy. so her hand represents 'deeds'. like how they say dont recieve the mark of the beast on your hand or your forehead meaning your deeds ( hand ) and your thoughts ( forehead ). so cutting off her hand means chastising her deeds ( actions ). you should tell her not to butt into an argument between you and your male friend. thats all that means bruv. all allegory and esoteric knowledge

omo.

Joshthefirst: lol. Abeg help me ooo. I remember telling him to strengthen his hold on the english language.

oooh, Professor of English language, If you were to write the verse, is that how you'll write it?

Take note of the sequence, "her husband", "Him"=her husband, and lastly, "Him"=her husband. Even macof recognised the Him could actually refer to either of them. Only you the Professor in your foolishness could see it actually referred to the other man

@obadiah777

Wha?

rapture_ready:

Come on, you had that one coming.

How far, you de go the retreat?

lol, no be only retreat. Its even one of the reasons I don't want to go home now cos if I should go, I just have to attend.

Joshthefirst: omo.

sup Josh. being a while i seen you dude. i modified my post by the way. made a lil error

rationalmind:

oooh, Professor of English language, If you were to write the verse, is that how you'll write it?

Take note of the sequence, "her husband", "Him"=her husband, and lastly, "Him"=her husband. Even macof recognised the Him could actually refer to either of them. Only you the Professor in your foolishness could see it actually referred to the other man

why are you still hanging on to your foolishness?

rapture_ready:

Oga rational, maybe you need to put on some glasses...

How is the woman "rescuing" her husband by grabbing him by the genitals?

The verse is obviously talking about the other guy.

And you call yourself "rational"?

obadiah777: let me help you out with the deuteronomy verse

deut 25 vs 11 When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.

means when two men are having a contentious argument and the wife of one the men interjects and starts berating the other guy, basically what she has done is emasculated the other guy. so her hand represents 'deeds'. like how they say dont recieve the mark of the beast on your hand or your forehead meaning your deeds ( hand ) and your thoughts ( forehead ). so cutting off her hand means chastising her deeds ( actions ). you should tell her not to butt into an argument between you and your male friend. thats all that means bruv. all allegory and esoteric knowledge

as usual

rapture_ready: @obadiah777

Wha?

lol sup my nigga rapture_ready

rationalmind:

as usual

esoteric knowledge my kind sir.

Joshthefirst: why are you still hanging on to your foolishness?

and as usual, you didnt see this

You should ask whoever wrote that verse how seizing ones husband genitals rescues him not me

rationalmind:

lol, no be only retreat. Its even one of the reasons I don't want to go home now cos if I should go, I just have to attend.

C'mon go na, abeg.

There will be a lot of testimonies at the retreat, I would like to discuss them with you on NL later.

Please?

Remember you want to de-convert me. You hope I'll "tread the path you treaded". This is your chance...

rapture_ready:

C'mon go na, abeg.

There will be a lot of testimonies at the retreat, I would like to discuss them with you on NL later.

Please?

Remember you want to de-convert me. You hope I'll "tread the path you treaded". This is your chance...

lol, Macof drank osun river and got healed.

Any explanation you give that is my explanation for any of the miracles.

I've heard thousands of testimonies and they arent convincing, I dont think there is anything new to hear

rationalmind:

and as usual, you didnt see this

You should ask whoever wrote that verse how seizing ones husband genitals rescues him not me

you show your bias by delibrately choosing a foolish interpretation that makes no sense.

Joshthefirst: you show your bias by delibrately choosing a foolish interpretation that makes no sense.

That is the most sensible explanation. The one you chose is the foolish one

rationalmind:

That is the most sensible explanation. The one you chose is the foolish one

yes. It is sensible to help your husband in a fight by grabbing his testicles.

and might i add, your private parts is what seperates you from a woman. it is your manhood. so symbolically her grabbing it means she is holding your manhood. meaning she is emasculating you. and to apply it logically in todays world, it still works. if you and your friend are arguing and his wife starts yabbing you, he has to tell his wife to chill and dont do that. just thought i would throw that in

Joshthefirst: yes. It is sensible to help your husband in a fight by grabbing his testicles.

yea, sensible to whoever translated it

Joshthefirst: I believe the deuteronomy verse is saying it is forbidden for a woman to grab another man's testicles while trying to defend her husband during a fight. How you reached the conclusion that she should not grab her husbands testicles at all is beyond me.

I couldn't have said it better.

Hi Josh. How are you?

rationalmind:

It is because you put on dark colored glasses when reading the bible. Now take a look at this, pay attention to the bolded.


Now, remove those glasses and read again

See below

rapture_ready:

Oga rational, maybe you need to put on some glasses...

How is the woman "rescuing" her husband by grabbing him by the genitals?

The verse is obviously talking about the other guy.

And you call yourself "rational"?

My thoughts exactly.

rationalmind:

No let me insult you o. You should ask whoever wrote that verse how seizing ones husband genitals rescues him not me

You are seeing what you want to see. This is an example of why strictly rational thought is irrational. Sometimes common sense is the smarter choice.

macof:

Josh has a point.
He could be correct, it's a use of pronoun, "him" could apply to any of both men there

Thank you. The English teacher in me just wants to hug you...

rationalmind:

yea, I think the problem there is the translation. Whoever translated it did a bad job

Thank you. See where a little common sense will get you. Even Obadiah's interpretation made more sense than yours. This deserves a hug too. Everyone gets a hug. Hug Hug Hug.

plaetton:
Fair enough.
What is your comment on the Deuteronomy verse?

So have the boys done it for you. I'm going to figure "yes"

Can we continue to Matthew 5:28?