<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sex</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:30:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Porter Ladell</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-2/#comment-6793</link>
		<dc:creator>Porter Ladell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:59:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-6793</guid>
		<description>I have been a devoted fan of this web site for a while and never really given anything back, I really hope to improve that later on with an increase of dialogue.Thanks for another new addition on the web site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been a devoted fan of this web site for a while and never really given anything back, I really hope to improve that later on with an increase of dialogue.Thanks for another new addition on the web site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Earl L</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-2/#comment-6238</link>
		<dc:creator>Earl L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 03:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-6238</guid>
		<description>Thank you for talk about this. Good post and nice you talk about this. I was studying your blog post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for talk about this. Good post and nice you talk about this. I was studying your blog post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-2/#comment-5016</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:42:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5016</guid>
		<description>No response?
Okay.
Talk to you soon man.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No response?<br />
Okay.<br />
Talk to you soon man.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Medium Guy</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-2/#comment-5013</link>
		<dc:creator>Medium Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 00:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5013</guid>
		<description>Matt,

I hope your life and ministry bring fulfillment to people and to yourself.

All the best, 

MG</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt,</p>
<p>I hope your life and ministry bring fulfillment to people and to yourself.</p>
<p>All the best, </p>
<p>MG</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-5005</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5005</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s a link with the root meaning of the term bride used in SOS

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3618&amp;t=ESV

Having the love of a father or uncle is not incestous, you eisegeted that passage with our understanding of love for a father.  Love of a father is meaning love, unconditional love.  

You also forgot that Solomon was in fact human.  He&#039;s sinful, and he fell multiple times.  However, that doesn&#039;t contradict that this passage is probably between one male and one female.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a link with the root meaning of the term bride used in SOS</p>
<p><a href="http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3618&amp;t=ESV" rel="nofollow">http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3618&amp;t=ESV</a></p>
<p>Having the love of a father or uncle is not incestous, you eisegeted that passage with our understanding of love for a father.  Love of a father is meaning love, unconditional love.  </p>
<p>You also forgot that Solomon was in fact human.  He&#8217;s sinful, and he fell multiple times.  However, that doesn&#8217;t contradict that this passage is probably between one male and one female.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-5004</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:34:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5004</guid>
		<description>Non sequitur medium.

That was not the arugment she was making.

All logical fallacies aside.

I would absolutely call that jerk out for mistreating his wife, that is ridiculous.  He took that scripture out of context.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Non sequitur medium.</p>
<p>That was not the arugment she was making.</p>
<p>All logical fallacies aside.</p>
<p>I would absolutely call that jerk out for mistreating his wife, that is ridiculous.  He took that scripture out of context.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Medium Guy</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-5003</link>
		<dc:creator>Medium Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5003</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t worry Matt, my boy, I was getting to you.

So, it sounds like you have a certain conceptual framework within which you interpret the Song of Solomon.  Namely, you have concluded that &quot;courtship&quot; implies that you can feel for the one you are courting love that is like that of a father or an uncle.  Sounds a little weird and incestuous to me, but hey, different strokes for different folks.

Also, I&#039;m not really convinced that the language used [i.e. &quot;bride&quot;] is a perfect translation of what was intended as originally written, especially considering that Solomon [yeah, supposedly the wisest man who ever lived, right?] had how many hundreds of wives and how many concubines?  It&#039;s like trying to believe an account of Imelda Marcos falling in love with a pair of shoes at the exclusion of all other pairs, if you know what I mean - kind of ludicrous.

If Solomon&#039;s account of seducing yet another wife or concubine is being held up as the holy grail of &quot;one man, one woman&quot; then I guess I have much to learn about what Christianity supposedly teaches about the sanctity of monogamous unions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t worry Matt, my boy, I was getting to you.</p>
<p>So, it sounds like you have a certain conceptual framework within which you interpret the Song of Solomon.  Namely, you have concluded that &#8220;courtship&#8221; implies that you can feel for the one you are courting love that is like that of a father or an uncle.  Sounds a little weird and incestuous to me, but hey, different strokes for different folks.</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;m not really convinced that the language used [i.e. "bride"] is a perfect translation of what was intended as originally written, especially considering that Solomon [yeah, supposedly the wisest man who ever lived, right?] had how many hundreds of wives and how many concubines?  It&#8217;s like trying to believe an account of Imelda Marcos falling in love with a pair of shoes at the exclusion of all other pairs, if you know what I mean &#8211; kind of ludicrous.</p>
<p>If Solomon&#8217;s account of seducing yet another wife or concubine is being held up as the holy grail of &#8220;one man, one woman&#8221; then I guess I have much to learn about what Christianity supposedly teaches about the sanctity of monogamous unions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Medium Guy</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-5001</link>
		<dc:creator>Medium Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:19:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5001</guid>
		<description>&quot;we would do the same to a porn addict, theif, liar, anyone.&quot;

But would you do &quot;the same&quot; to a husband who expects that his wife will give it up even when she&#039;s not up for it because of his interpretation of the so-called &quot;doctrine of submission?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;we would do the same to a porn addict, theif, liar, anyone.&#8221;</p>
<p>But would you do &#8220;the same&#8221; to a husband who expects that his wife will give it up even when she&#8217;s not up for it because of his interpretation of the so-called &#8220;doctrine of submission?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christina</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-5000</link>
		<dc:creator>Christina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-5000</guid>
		<description>I completely agree that sex is great and when you are married you can do it till you are blue in the face. If my future husband is inexperienced It prolly won&#039;t be that fairytale that many girls want for their wedding night. Even still, I can&#039;t wait its gonna be awesome, what I&#039;m am arguing is that she is unwilling to call believers who are having premarital sex out on their sin. 

I understand falling in to that sin. I have definitely failed in that area and so have many of my other brothers and sisters. Sex is a beautiful, awesome thing that because sin has entered the world from the beginning has turned in to this crazy pursuit of pleasure over the pleasures that are at God&#039;s right hand (ps 16.11) Sex outside of a marriage is sin and if our brothers and sisters in christ are falling into that sin we should call them out. Its not being judgemental, it is not saying &quot;you disgusting creature, Go to hell&quot; its saying &quot;Hey, that is not glorifying God,  you should stop because I love you.&quot; we would do the same to a porn addict, theif, liar, anyone.

&quot;Bottom line is, when you pick and choose pet issues at the expense of considering new ones, your credibility suffers and your witness is impaired.&quot; 

But this was the one issue in her post that I truly disagreed with, it wasn&#039;t at the expense of anything. I didn&#039;t automatically stop listening to what she had to say. The supporting arguments of your recent comment weren&#039;t adressed because they really had nothing to do with the problem I had with the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree that sex is great and when you are married you can do it till you are blue in the face. If my future husband is inexperienced It prolly won&#8217;t be that fairytale that many girls want for their wedding night. Even still, I can&#8217;t wait its gonna be awesome, what I&#8217;m am arguing is that she is unwilling to call believers who are having premarital sex out on their sin. </p>
<p>I understand falling in to that sin. I have definitely failed in that area and so have many of my other brothers and sisters. Sex is a beautiful, awesome thing that because sin has entered the world from the beginning has turned in to this crazy pursuit of pleasure over the pleasures that are at God&#8217;s right hand (ps 16.11) Sex outside of a marriage is sin and if our brothers and sisters in christ are falling into that sin we should call them out. Its not being judgemental, it is not saying &#8220;you disgusting creature, Go to hell&#8221; its saying &#8220;Hey, that is not glorifying God,  you should stop because I love you.&#8221; we would do the same to a porn addict, theif, liar, anyone.</p>
<p>&#8220;Bottom line is, when you pick and choose pet issues at the expense of considering new ones, your credibility suffers and your witness is impaired.&#8221; </p>
<p>But this was the one issue in her post that I truly disagreed with, it wasn&#8217;t at the expense of anything. I didn&#8217;t automatically stop listening to what she had to say. The supporting arguments of your recent comment weren&#8217;t adressed because they really had nothing to do with the problem I had with the post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.emergingwomen.us/2009/03/31/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-4999</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergingwomen.us/?p=855#comment-4999</guid>
		<description>Medium, you forgot to address me.
I guess you&#039;re not credible now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Medium, you forgot to address me.<br />
I guess you&#8217;re not credible now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
