Now that Mark Driscoll’s new book is out, it seems everyone has to weigh in on sensitive topics. Please… CBN producers, don’t let Pat Robertson talk about oral sex again.
Thanks, Mark.
Todd
3 Responses to “ “Thanks a lot, Mark Driscoll… see what you started?”
Never thought I would comment on this one but I need to ask/point out…
How can he say if it is a sin in your mind then it is a sin? When did “man” become the gauge?
I would say it is not a sin based on some verses in Song of Solomon, between a married couple. Although I think it is fair to say if one is not comfortable with it then it should be left out.
But again my issue is actually not about the question but his response of a sin is what you think it is.
Did I read into that too much? Did I just open a big can of worms?
I agree and disagree with Keith. The Song of Songs is a pretty erotic book, and it seems to not only condone but celebrate oral sex.
At the same time, Pat is correct if he’s alluding to 1 Corinthians ch8. There the argument is laid out: a thing which is not a sin in itself can be a cause of sin for someone who believes the non-sinful thing is sinful – and you don’t force the issue on that person.
So if one partner in the marriage believes oral sex is sinful, the other who is convinced it is not sinful must surrender that right until and unless the other changes his/her mind – without pressure.
I don’t think he was trying to say that man decides what is sin or not by ignoring God’s law. I think he is saying if one believes God doesn’t want you to do something and you do it anyway, that is sin by definition.
Some people think drinking alcohol is sinful, others don’t. Paul told timothy that a little wine is good for the stomach. He also said to not be drunk on wine but the Holy Spirit. To those who think that drinking is a sin and they take a drink, they’ve sinned against their own beliefs. Likewise, it is sinful for someone who thinks it’s okay to drink to lead or pressure someone to take a drink against their beliefs.
You can apply the same logic to the discussion of oral sex just as well. I just thought I’d offer up a parallel situation for consideration.
Never thought I would comment on this one but I need to ask/point out…
How can he say if it is a sin in your mind then it is a sin? When did “man” become the gauge?
I would say it is not a sin based on some verses in Song of Solomon, between a married couple. Although I think it is fair to say if one is not comfortable with it then it should be left out.
But again my issue is actually not about the question but his response of a sin is what you think it is.
Did I read into that too much? Did I just open a big can of worms?
I agree and disagree with Keith. The Song of Songs is a pretty erotic book, and it seems to not only condone but celebrate oral sex.
At the same time, Pat is correct if he’s alluding to 1 Corinthians ch8. There the argument is laid out: a thing which is not a sin in itself can be a cause of sin for someone who believes the non-sinful thing is sinful – and you don’t force the issue on that person.
So if one partner in the marriage believes oral sex is sinful, the other who is convinced it is not sinful must surrender that right until and unless the other changes his/her mind – without pressure.
I don’t think he was trying to say that man decides what is sin or not by ignoring God’s law. I think he is saying if one believes God doesn’t want you to do something and you do it anyway, that is sin by definition.
Some people think drinking alcohol is sinful, others don’t. Paul told timothy that a little wine is good for the stomach. He also said to not be drunk on wine but the Holy Spirit. To those who think that drinking is a sin and they take a drink, they’ve sinned against their own beliefs. Likewise, it is sinful for someone who thinks it’s okay to drink to lead or pressure someone to take a drink against their beliefs.
You can apply the same logic to the discussion of oral sex just as well. I just thought I’d offer up a parallel situation for consideration.