The Evangelical Universalist Forum




Yes, quite inexpensively in a hardback dust-jacketed edition. (Back in my promotional phase I gave away somewhere over 700 copies, and a few of them have naturally turned up on Amazon being resold, which is technically illegal but Amazon can’t really do anything about it. There are some legitimate resellers, too.) Click on CoJ’s hyperlink in any of my sigs.

I tend to agree topically with Farrar in what you report of him, but I don’t hold to one and only one mode of inspiration. Somewhere in my mess of docs, I have a short article (that I can’t find anymore) where I identified no less than 7 kinds of inspiration that the scriptures themselves testify to. (Seven was an accidental number, not one I chose trying to fit a theme. I think I found another or two types after writing the article. Some people would include numerology as another type, for example–although I’m not sure if the few “obvious” examples like 666 strictly count as a distinct inspiration type in themselves.)

So for example a lot of the prophetic texts are clearly meant to be taken to be verbal plenary inspiration (or something close to it–I don’t know if spelling and that sort of thing is included, although rabbis and ancient Christians sure thought it was intended and worked out many ingenious if rather flighty theories thereby. :mrgreen: ) But they’re also clearly signposted that way, in contrast to other portions of scripture.


Thanks mate :slight_smile:

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

You crack me up man :stuck_out_tongue:

And some good thoughts in your post, by the way :wink:

Blessings to you :slight_smile:


I have nothing major to add except fornication = bad …good sex= good :slight_smile: I found “Sex in the Bible: A new consideration” by Ellens challenged the less loving approaches I had been raised with. If you have read it let me know what you think. Seems to deal with fornication very sensibly.


Fornication has the wrong definition. I can easily prove it.

Here are all the Fornication Bible verse all with same definition.

All context the same the Paul defined fornication at the joining with pagan fertility god worship compare 1 Cor 10:8 to Nu 25:1-9 Nu 31 Clearly describe fornication that was the same in both OT and NT and all Bible days.

Baal was the major religion of the Bible days and they knew Hebrews and Christian had sexual freedom from God from creation.

So the pagans used the God given sexual freedom to get them to joining in with the pagan worship of Baal fertility god.

This is a super major violation of the first command That get god super angry to kill over 23,000 in one day, for both OT Hebrews and Christians under Age of Grace under Law of Love.

Many Christian Pastor discover the Churches false sex teaching is NOT from the Bible, but only from false traditions of Men which God greatly condemns.

The Church uses man made definition to Change what the Bible and God really teach about sexual freedom to all given at creation.

King David and King Solomon clearly understood and practice This God given sexual freedom given at creation to all. SOS 6:8 2 Sam 12:8**(UNLIMITED SEX PARTNER)**


@inkaboutit even if fornication doesn’t mean sex between unmarried people, Paul condemns “impurity” and “sensuality”, which probably would cover sex between unmarried people.


What terms are you talking about?

“Sensuality” and “impurity”, which are also condemned in Galatians 5:19.

inkaboutit4ucom. replies. ************************************************
Bible Church misunderstands Gal 5:19, 1 Cor 6:9

Again the major context here is the joining in with pagan fertility god Baal worship which was all over the place. Israelite and Christian were alway surrounded and greatly outnumber by these pagan worshippers.

Most all negative sex talk like. this is almost alway in direct connection with this Baal pagan fertility god worship. This is all over the Bible.

If you read the whole Bible, you this pagan fertility god worship everywhere, But at the same time you see God given sexual freedom with no negative words from God everywhere.

Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness,lasciviousness,

20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions,heresies,

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before , as I have also told you in time past , that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

They totally misunderstand and take it out of Bible context. Gal 5:19-21 Don’t focus on individual words or items because they can be misunderstood and have wrong man made definitions and taken out of context, but look at it as Paul is describing a religion group of pagan fertility god worshipers worshiping the fertility pagan god or they are standing on the opposite street corner. (this is the context) This would be part of the Church’s letters to Paul that we do not have, we have to guess.

Think of a group of people doing these group of items regularly, weekly, if not daily. a similar list 4 other times in the Bible**,(1 Cor 6:9, Eph 5:3-6, Col 3:5-6, Rev 22:14-15)** but they are not the same list they different but the same ideal, a group of item, describing a group of pagans worshiper worshiping a fertility god or other Baal pagan gods.

This was the major religion group of the whole Bible times.

They were out numbered and surrounded by them both in the OT and NT , the whole Bible times…1 Cor 10:8, Nu 25: 1-9, Nu 31 This is the correct context to understand these verses.

Wrong definition of the word fornication. Not single sex , but pagan fertility god worship in hope of getting good farm crops. 1 Cor 10:8 to Nu 25: 1-9 Nu 31 Same thing done in both places. Paul defines the word fornication or sexual immoral as pagan fertility god worship. Pagan fertility god worshiper do not go to heaven.

Fornication , It is the joining in with the worship of the pagan fertility god sex orgy to worship the fertility god. Compare 1 Cor 10:8 to Nu 25:1-9 Nu 31 then religious leaders say single person sex are not saved because of Gal 5:19 fornicators or = to “sex outside one male, one female marriage" are not going to heaven. This is a Wrong conclusion, based on a wrong definition.

**So if you have a normal healthy sex drive you go to hell. 100% wrong. God made sex and gave 100% creation sexual freedom at creation.SOS 6;8 2 Sam 12;8

God said sex is good or excellent Gen 1:31**

**David, Solomon and most every one in the Bible understands they have sexual freedom from God to have unlimited sex partners . 2 Sam 12: 8 , SOS 6:8 all the polygamy in the Bible,

God promote polygamy Nu 31 gave 16,000 pagan girls to 12,000 soldiers. (Remember this is only one battle) Many other examples.**

Many Godly men in the Bible had sex outside the “one male, one female” marriage was no problem to God at all.

There are even Laws in OT to help answer polygamy question like in Ex 21:10, 11


Do you actually have anything else to talk about, or will this dead horse continue to be kicked until we all agree to your crazy hypotheses? What is your end game? When will you move to another subject, maybe evangelical universalism? Self-control? Immortality? Sex - is such old news, guy. The whole society is soaked in it, it is used to SELL products, there are naked people by the thousands at our fingertips doing anything we want them to do (www) - how much MORE do we actually NEED?
As it is, the temptations are everywhere; And here is the big news: SEXUAL APPETITES ARE STRONGER THAN SPIRITUAL INSIGHTS - so it IS a fight to stay pure enough to hear the Spirit of God, who counsels self-control, love, goodness, temperance, faith etc.
Getting it on with a lot of women/men destroys that. It happened to David, it happened to Solomon.
Further - the best picture we have of God is not the fumbling around of tribal folk five thousand years ago, but the SON - the direct image of God the Father. He is our example - and I shudder to think what you might conjecture he was up to in his private moments.
I wish you’d just stop this and go on to something valuable. $,03


see above I have my comment above in bold print


I think this is the most needed dialogue within Christian and family communities.

Dave said: Sex - is such old news, guy. The whole society is soaked in it, it is used to SELL products, there are naked people by the thousands at our fingertips doing anything we want them to do

qaz said:
even if fornication doesn’t mean sex between unmarried people, Paul condemns “impurity” and “sensuality”, which probably would cover sex between unmarried people.

Maybe we all will need to consider (or maybe reconsider) how God made us to be (and how we react) rather than someone telling us what he or she thinks God wants from us. :grinning:


Does what God thinks have any bearing on the matter? Or is ‘what is, is right’ going to be the guiding principle?
Just askin’.


Of course it would. But what does God say about it? If we say the Bible, I would object, because it can be used, seemingly by anyone to prove a point.

God gave us nature. Nature breeds, a lot and I don’t sense that breeding should be deemed shameful. Shameful, would be, getting a girl pregnant and then kicking her out to rot. But the act of getting her pregnant was not shameful.

Seeing that the divorce rate is just as high in Christianity, as the secular world, I fail to see the importance of this legal marriage we speak of.

Our sexual nature is every bit a part of us as is our desire to eat, socialize, sleep. If you tried to condemn any of those things, or put stipulations on them, most people would object, and rightly so. Some may try to argue snacking outside of breakfast, lunch and dinner is wrong and a sin. Or that grabbing sweets is a sin, as such things are designed to be sensual at the very core! I never found the sensuality argument very convincing, if not the least bit because church people are often gluttons and seem to rejoice in it with no conviction that it is wrong.

I think the more this topic is considered hush, hush, the worse the church will get. Lots of young men in the church are being told something that 1) doesn’t work and 2) doesn’t seem to line up with reality. Yet none of the older generation cares to discuss it. When the older generations die off, I suspect people will be able to discuss these things just like we do now with food, drink and a whole host of other non-taboo and non-sin shaming type behaviors.


Still waiting for an intelligent case - other than mine - to be made.

And also thinking about the 60 MILLION kids dead by abortion in this free=thinking (?) culture.


Dave said:

Hmm. Are you really believing that? (and it may well be) But I know many that have been spiritually cajoled that have pushed beyond their appetite’s, (I’m not sure they were sexual)

Just a thought.