₦airaland Forum

Sex Was Not Made For Man And Woman But Husband And Wives

Genesis 2:24 (KJV)

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

So if you're not yet married but have started having sex, because you think being a man or a woman automatically qualifies you for sex, you think wrong!

Sex wasn't made for man and woman but for husbands and wives.

God bless.

So man preserve yourself for your wife.

Woman preserve yourself for your husband.

That's how God made it to be in the beginning.

God bless.

SeverusSnape:
Are husbands and wives not men and women?

Are all men and women husbands and wives?

Are husbands and wives not men and women?

Nothing but the Bible truth, though very far from the reality on ground.

Okay...

You just want to sensationalize the topic. I get it.

But it's weird if you put it that way.

I think you should change it considering you are trying to pass a serious message!

So, a husband is not a man and a wife is not a woman? Una go dey form motivational speakers sote una go turn dictionary and Bible upsidedown.

If you say that sex is not meant for a man and a woman that are not married to each other, you are correct. But saying that sex is not meant for man and woman is 100% wrong.

Are you aware that your logic justifies same-sex marriage that is against the religion you try to promote? Saying that sex is not for man and woman indirectly implies that sex can be for man and man or for woman and woman.

I love this.

Two people who aren't married and are having sex, are either committing fortication, Adultery or Homosexuality, which are terrible sins in the eye of God.

May God help and forgive us

immortalcrown:
So, a husband is not a man and a wife is not a woman? Una go dey form motivational speakers sote una go turn dictionary and Bible upsidedown.

If you say that sex is not meant for a man and a woman that are not married to each other, you are correct. But saying that sex is not meant for man and woman is 100% wrong.

Are you aware that your logic justifies same-sex marriage that is against the religion you try to promote? Saying that sex is not for man and woman indirectly implies that sex can be for man and man or for woman and woman.

You are the one devilishly applying the Mischief rule of interpretation, especially in the light that you already know his religion prohibits the same gender marriage.

immortalcrown:
So, a husband is not a man and a wife is not a woman? Una go dey form motivational speakers sote una go turn dictionary and Bible upsidedown.

If you say that sex is not meant for a man and a woman that are not married to each other, you are correct. But saying that sex is not meant for man and woman is 100% wrong.

Are you aware that your logic justifies same-sex marriage that is against the religion you try to promote? Saying that sex is not for man and woman indirectly implies that sex can be for man and man or for woman and woman.

Kasongo yeye...

Nlfpmod

Fp please. Let’s say no to sexual sins

A man can marry more than one wife sha.

Dtruthspeaker:
You are the one devilishly applying the Mischief rule of interpretation, especially in the light that you already know his religion prohibits the same gender marriage.

I pointed out the error (falsehood) in the post.

Can you point out the error or falsehood in my comment? If not, you are a hater of truth.

jesusjnr2020:
Sex Was Not Made For Man And Woman

Sex was made for husbands and wives.

Genesis 2:24 (KJV)

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

So if you're not yet married but have started having sex, because you think being a man or a woman automatically qualifies you for sex, you are wrong!

Sex wasn't made for man and woman but for husbands and wives.

God bless.

This literature isn't for you at all.

Look at the statement that quailfies ... therefore a man shall leave his father and mother..."
It isn't sex

Gen 2:22&23

Because a rib was taken from a man to form a woman, it becomes a flesh(unlike charges attracted)... and shall be called Woman(not wife in this context)


... therefore a man will leave his father and mother to cling back to his wife (used instead of woman )


The passage is only promoting opposite relationships, discourages homosexuality

immortalcrown:
I pointed out the error (falsehood) in the post.

Can you point out the error or falsehood in my comment? If not, you are a hater of truth.

i pointed out that you are using the "mischief rule" of interpretation.

Flangelo12:
A man can marry more than one wife sha.

Because you are a pagan and a heathen and not a Christian.

Dtruthspeaker:
i pointed out that you are using the "mischief rule" of interpretation.

How? Is there any word that I interpreted wrongly in the post? If yes, point it out or remain a hater of truth.

immortalcrown:
How? Is there any word that I interpreted wrongly in the post? If yes, point it out or remain a hater of truth.

You already said "you know his religion prohibits the same gender marriage." so why did you not interprete his post in that light?

Why did you evily and mischievously interprete and twist his post into something you already knew is contrary to his religion?

Dtruthspeaker:
Because you are a pagan and a heathen and not a Christian.

Abraham had more than 1.

King Solomon had more than 1.

Jacob had more than 1.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's (The Mormons) in Utah, approve of Polygamy.


Just say you are ignorant.

Flangelo12:
Abraham had more than 1.

King Solomon had more than 1.

Jacob had more than 1.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's (The Mormons) in Utah, approve of Polygamy.
Just say you are ignorant.

And none of them got God's own score of "Perfect"!

It was Noah, Daniel and Job who scored that point and save Daniel, they were married to only 1 female, as God had Commanded.

Dtruthspeaker:
And none of them got God's own score of "Perfect"!

It was Noah, Daniel and Job who scored that point and save Daniel, they were married to only 1 female, as God had Commanded.

Assistant God, we don hear.

wiseone28:
It was made for male and female

Exactly.
It was only promoting opposite sexual relationships

Dtruthspeaker:
You already said "you know his religion prohibits the same gender marriage." so why did you not interprete his post in that light?

Why did you evily and mischievously interprete and twist his post into something you already knew is contrary to his religion?

How does pointing out the implications of his logic mean mischievousness? Answer this. The very statement you consider mischievous is even a question that starts with "Are you aware" and contains "indirectly". And neither you nor the poster has been confident enough to answer the question. You refuse to answer the question because you know I am right.

If you are not the mischievous one here, point out any word I interpreted wrongly in the post. Both Bible and Dictionaries support my interpretation of the post. But you attack me because you are mischievous.

immortalcrown:
How does pointing out the implications of his logic mean mischievousness?...

That is the point of the Law of mischief interpretation. For you already knew (aware) his religion yet you evily twisted it and bent it into what you knew he was not saying and would not be saying based on his religion.

Dtruthspeaker:
That is the point of the Law of mischief interpretation. For you already knew (aware) his religion yet you evily twisted it and bent it into what you knew he was not saying and would not be saying based on his religion.

1.
Did I attack the poster's religion, which is also my religion?

2.
Did I misinterpret any word in the post?

3.
Did I make any statement that goes against the Bible or the rule of English in any of my comments on the thread?

Answer these questions to prove that I twist things here. Answer these questions to prove that you are not a hater of truth. Until you answer these questions, you are the mischievous one here.

immortalcrown:
1.
Did I attack the poster's religion, which is also my religion?

2.
Did I misinterpret any word in the post?

3.
Did I make any statement that goes against the Bible or the rule of English in any of my comments on the thread?

Answer these questions to prove that I twist things here. Answer these questions to prove that you are not a hater of truth. Until you answer these questions, you are the mischievous one here.

What you said and what i responded to is already spelt out, so do not add to what was not addressed.

Dtruthspeaker:
What you said and what i responded to is already spelt out, so do not add to what was not addressed.

You have not been able to point out any word that I misinterpreted in my comments. You have not been able to point out any single sentence of mine that goes against the Bible or against the rule of English.

1.
Did I attack the poster's religion, which is also my religion?

2.
Did I misinterpret any word in the post?

3.
Did I make any statement that goes against the Bible or the rule of English in any of my comments on the thread?

Answer these questions to prove that I twist things here. Answer these questions to prove that you are not a hater of truth. Until you answer these questions, you are the mischievous one here.

immortalcrown:
You have not been able to point out any word that I misinterpreted in my comments. You have not been able to point out any single sentence of mine that goes against the Bible or against the rules...

if i did not point it out you would not have responded saying that "How does pointing out the implications of his logic mean mischievousness?"

So, obviously, the madness that occurs when you have been caught doing something wrong and you can not defend it has begun.

Dtruthspeaker:
if i did not point it out you would not have responded saying that "How does pointing out the implications of his logic mean mischievousness?"

So, obviously, the madness that occurs when you have been caught doing something wrong and you can not defend it has begun.

You have not been able to point out any word that I misinterpreted in my comments. You have not been able to point out any single sentence of mine that goes against the Bible or against the rule of English.

1.
Did I attack the poster's religion, which is also my religion?

2.
Did I misinterpret any word in the post?

3.
Did I make any statement that goes against the Bible or the rule of English in any of my comments on the thread?

Answer these questions to prove that I twist things here. Answer these questions to prove that you are not a hater of truth. Until you answer these questions, you are the mischievous one here.

That was then not now

IṢU ATA YÁN-AN YÀN-AN

YAM PEPPER SCATTER SCATTER