Today's Watchtower Study

by nomoreguilt 8 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  nomoreguilt

  Paragraph 7

  The things that a sincere Christian needs to avoid are not limited to what the bible specifically prohibits. As an example, consider this forthright statement: Let marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers". (Hebrews 13:4) Even non-Christians and ones who know nothing of the Bible would rightly conclude that this verse rules out commiting adultery. It isplain from this and other Bible passgaes that God condemns sexual intercourse between a married man or woman and someone other than the lawful husband or wife. What, though, about two unmarried personsengaging in oral sex? many teenagers claim that this practice is harmless becasue it is not sexual intercourse. Could a Christian view oral sex as clean?

  Paragraph 8

  Hewbrews 13:4 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 establish that God disapproves of both adultery and fornication(Greek, por-nei'a). What does the latter conclude? The Greek term involves the use of the genital organs in either a natural or a perverted way with lewd intent. It includes all forms of illicit sexual relations outside of Scriptural marriage. So, it includes oral sex, despite the fact that many teenagers around the world have been told or have come to the conclusion that oral sex is acceptable. true Christians do not guide their thinking and actions by the opinions of "profitless talkers and decievers of the mind." (Tituss 1:10) They hold to the higher standard of the Holy Scriptures. Rather than try to make excuses for oral sex, they understand that Scripurally it is fornication, por-nei'a, and they train their conscience accordingly.* -Acts 21:25; 1 Corinthians 6:18; Epeshians 5:3.

  * The watchtower of march 15, 1983,pages 30-1, offers comments for consideration regarding married couples.

  The society must be having a problem with young people accepting oral sex as ok, like eating candy or something........."GEE brother, every bodys doing it, what's the BIG DEAL"?

  Please carry on friends, NO PARROT answers please. LOL
• 

  Priest73

  I thought this topic was licked already. It sucks that we have to revisit it. We've already beaten it to death.
• 

  Elsewhere

  Sounds like the WTS has discovered JWs putting more than just their foot in their mouth.
• 

  V

  Complete Watchtower article and comments here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/148158/1.ashx
• 

  wha happened?

  I used to joke with some of my friends on the topic when ever it came up. I stated that oral sex is acceptable if u are receiving it
• 

  shell69

  Just had a chance to look at V's link and read the cratower article.

  It truely made me feel sick. I'm so glad I dont have to listen to that crap anymore.

  I could almost here the crowing answewrs formt he elders wifes, and super sonic pioneers.

  ((((((BARFF))))))) Just puked Shell69
• 

  WTWizard

  To me, what that paragraph is saying that oral sex among unmarried people counts as fornication, and nothing more. However, I am sure that many people are going to go beyond the things written and interpret this as meaning that oral sex among married couples is wrong again. The hounder-hounder-hounders are going to spread that, and it is going to spread through whole districts and circuits that the Society is once again disfellowshipping those who engage in oral sex within the marriages.

  Even that statement that was within the paragraph is improper. First, tying the thread with the theme of this section, children are supposed to sit through this. The parents are not advised to leave their children under 14 at home; yet, if such was discussed on Oprah Winfrey they would immediately change the channel. There is no warning whatsoever about the graphic sexual content that would render it PG-13 or worse. In fact, any children under 13 that were left at home because of this issue would get Brother Hounder involved (he would hound the family into bringing the children next time). To me, at least that should be endangering the welfare of a minor, especially if there are children under the age of 10 present. As I have seen, children of all ages down to newborns are supposed to be at those boasting sessions.

  Second, they really cannot be discussing oral sex between consenting people, married or not. They just got embarrassed on NBC with the pedophile scandal. People have come forward and reported that they were abused sexually by the hounders during a hounding call. Very often, the children would be coerced in the name of the hounder's authority (giving them double honor). And, nothing is done about it. The victims are threatened that they will get disfellowshipped if they report it to the police or warn others about it. But, at least they are not doing oral sex.

  Finally, it is none of anyone's business if a couple (married or not) that consents is having oral sex or not. Only the involved parties are affected. If such was happening in public where innocent children could see it, that would be the public's business. However, this is happening where others cannot see. Usually, in people's homes. No one is going to know that the hounder on the platform just had, or gave, oral sex to his wife the night before--and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference either way! This reminds me of the Monica Lewinsky scandal: I don't give a damn that Clinton had sex with Monica, or whether it was oral sex, since it did not affect his job (I did, however, have a problem with his brazenly lying about it).

  As long as no one forces, threatens, coerces, or defrauds consent out of anyone, I don't see what the big deal about sex is. There really needs be no rules against it. Especially if the couple is married (or about to be married and test-driving it), there is absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. Even in casual sex situations, the people doing it only affect themselves. If it doesn't affect their ability to function, then why should there be a rule against it?
• 

  Abandoned

  I used to joke with some of my friends on the topic when ever it came up. I stated that oral sex is acceptable if u are receiving it

  Yeah, that would be like their blood policy. You can accept it, but you can't give it....
• 

  bobld

  SINcere christian and non-sincere christians know God's law on sex.Many,many many so called non-christain per wbts definition as well as many many many true christains that don't fit wbts definition of a christian don't believe or practice oral sex.So the problem of practicing oral sex must be prevant in the wbts.

  Bob