Fornication

[mchawe]

Bill clearly states in various podcasts, that the meaning of FORNICATION is the pursuit of different flesh. However the Oxford Dictionary definition states, "Voluntary sexual intercourse between man (sometimes restricted to unmarried man) & unmarried woman (cf. adultery)".
Bill or anyone else, can you back up that assertion please?

[wmfinck]

The search engine at christogenea.org is quite effective.

Adultery and Fornication - Yahweh's Covenant People 07-31-10:
http://christogenea.org/content/adultery-and-fornication-yahwehs-covenant-people-07-31-10

Further illustration is provided here at the end of this segment of my presentation of the Book of Acts:
http://christogenea.org/content/book-acts-chapter-15-part-1-christogenea-internet-radio-09-27-2013

[Nayto]

Bill clearly states in various podcasts, that the meaning of FORNICATION is the pursuit of different flesh. However the Oxford Dictionary definition states, "Voluntary sexual intercourse between man (sometimes restricted to unmarried man) & unmarried woman (cf. adultery)".
Bill or anyone else, can you back up that assertion please?

I think it basically comes down to finding out what the original writers actually meant when they wrote the word, as opposed to the definition of another word many years later.

I mean, words only have meaning according to what is intended by the speaker/writer. We have a taxonomy or dictionary, but sometimes we don't all agree and even though a word may have a certain definition it might still mean different things to different people. I once read a study where the writer hypothesized and proved -- to some extent -- that in people meaning is found more according to a word's relation to other words, as opposed to the object of the word or the definition of the word itself. I digress though...

The point is that the original Greek word, which has a certain meaning according to the writer, has been translated into an English word which might have different meaning, despite being an approximation. It behooves us to elicit the actual intended meaning of the word instead of trying to box it in with a contemporary definition. I think that's what Bill's studies do: Find the meaning.

It's actually quite fascinating because I find that frequently in my profession -- which is one where being specific and relating to people is important -- if I speak a certain word to convey a meaning people can be confused. If I instead ignore the word but convey the sentiment in terms of pictures or meaning they understand immediately.

I've written way more than I intended when I clicked reply, lol.

[mchawe]

Bill, I have read your two links about three times and still don't get it.
Before you think I am a troll or something, let me be clear. I hate race mixing. I do not hate it because of something in the Bible. I just naturally hate it.
But I need something solid to say to WHITE race mixers. Not only that, there are whites who seem to me to give the seal of approval to race mixing even though they don't do it themselves, Like I am thinking of one white guy in particular. (He, a Brit married a Norwegian woman.)
I can't say to him, "Why don't you go to Bill Fink's web site and read it up for yourself." Especially when I can't understand it myself! I can't say Bill Fink has written about 5000 words on the subject.
Bill with respect, can you not produce something in a few words that shows unequivocally that Fornication means Race mixing in the Scriptures? At the moment most people believe it means sex before marriage, and as we know that has no traction today.

[Kentucky]

In a study about the doctrine of Balaam:

I would venture to guess that the doctrine of Balaam has infiltrated 90% of the churches if not more, because of the tainted Masoretic text translated by antichrist jews. What was the stumblingblock cast before the children of Israel? It was to commit fornication. That’s what we read in Rev. 2:14. Strong’s Concordance and most Bible dictionaries have poor to misleading translations of the Greek word ‘porneia’ (#4202) as simply ‘fornication’, which can inadvertently lead our people to the sin of race mixing. This can be proven with the exchange Jesus had with the mongrel Edomite jews in John 8:41, “We be not born of fornication; we have one father, God.” Our first impression is that this is a misuse of the word ‘fornication’ as simply sexual intercourse. However, as Jesus explains further on, it’s a difference in genetic background. “Jesus said unto them [jews], if God were your father, you would love Me” v.42. A better word than fornication would have been whoredom, and an allusion to Deut. 23:2, “A bastard [i.e. a mongrel, half breed; not an illegitimate child out of wedlock] shall not enter the congregation”; the NIV says, “No one born of a forbidden marriage…” Who were the Israelites forbidden to marry? It would be people like the Ammonites or Moabites mentioned in verse 3 who were mongrels. Why do modern Bible dictionaries exclude any reference to half-breeds, mongrels or miscegenation? Obviously, it is to obscure the sin of marrying those races whom God had forbidden the Israelites to marry. Christ goes on to accuse these jews of having both Abraham and diabolos as their father. The jews were a mixed race people who could not identify with the truth of God, they were natural born liars. Remember that, when discerning the spirit, if someone is of God.

Adultery was not always an illicit affair among married people within their own kind in the Old Testament, but it could also be race mixing. In the New Testament it is distinguished often from the word fornication. Race mixing was always closely associated with pagan religions. The confusion comes by disassociating these pagan idolatries from pagan races. They were inextricably bound together in ancient times. You didn’t race mix, because the alien gods came with the territory. Both were sin. The ancient pagan religions had nothing to do with spirituality as inter-faith judeo-churchianity perceives it today, but rather were fertility religions pertaining to sex, which had no laws prohibiting sex with other races. If the average Christian cannot find these Laws of God, they are not looking hard enough. Ignorance of the Law is no excuse. They may have heard of Baal worship, which God considered an abomination, but they are not told by their ministers today that Baal worship included race mixing.

We have Baal priests in Christian churches who are race traitors, who are paid extravagantly or should we say bribed with millions of dollars to betray Jesus Christ and the White race. The modern denominational members of the typical Baal church are saying the same thing the Pharisees said to Jesus, “We have one Father, even God” (John 8:41). Jesus told them who their real father was, and “The lusts of your father ye will do” (v.44). The apostate church is no different than Esau whose seed had “gone astray” and married outside of his race, polluting it forever. Both despise(d) their birthright.

What does Ken Ham of ‘Answers In Genesis’ do with Jude 7 where fornication is clearly tied to the pursuit of strange flesh i.e. other races? Well, this wealthy expert of false beliefs takes Rev. 2:14 and has redacted all references to race mixing. He suggests, with a straight face, that the swarthy beauties were merely proselytizing their pagan religion, rather than tempting the young Israelites into bed. Does Ken Ham not have eyes to see the jewish advertising, movies and TV that promote and entice young White boys into the sack with dolled up Jezebels? I’ve heard White boys say how cute Halle Berry is and it’s not because of any religious message she may have. Ken Ham blames “Satan” for a spiritualized fornication to trick people into compromising with the world. I blame Ken Ham for tricking people into thinking there’s nothing wrong with race mixing. He has compromised the real meaning of the doctrine of Balaam by undermining the lusts for strange flesh that fornication explicitly conveys. He plays the old bait and switch game by disappearing race mixing down the memory hole and switching it with his pet doctrine of bashing evolution, which is replaced with his own version of a fast track evolution for the book of Genesis; a sick philosophy of race mixing as elucidated in the biblical rendering of the doctrine of Balaam. It’s a rationalization for sin.

Mark

[Lang]

At the moment most people believe it means sex before marriage, and as we know that has no traction today.

Maybe it would help if you explained to them that its literally impossible to have sex before marriage, even if you want. Look at this post I wrote times ago on SF:

"I think it's stupidity to spend a lot of money on weddings. You don't need to have a big party, a expensive ring and an expensive travel to be married. Thats not the true meaning of marriage as it is originally spoken in Christianity.

When a guy have sex with a girl he is already taking her as his wife - thats the original marriage that Bible talks about. The marriage is actually your first sex, there's no need of big parties and expensive things.

The bad side is that it was totally perverted nowadays. In the modern relationships, we have concubines engaged with male whores - liberals - or people thinking that a marriage happens in a big event, getting divorced and remarrying several times during their lifetimes and thinking that its okay because they are doing this in the church. Its called serial monogamy and is actually an excuse to be a whore "morally" supported by the false morals of todays society - neo conservatives."

[Staropramen]

When Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding was this event a public display of two people having sex for the first time? I'm engaged in other areas of study at the moment but is there not some biblical basis for a God ordained ceremony of some sort prior to sexual union?

[Lang]

When Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding was this event a public display of two people having sex for the first time? I'm engaged in other areas of study at the moment but is there not some biblical basis for a God ordained ceremony of some sort prior to sexual union?

“Therefore what God has joined together, let no man separate”. How does God joins two people together?

The answer is found here: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” Gen. 2:24. The only way to “become one flash”, and what has always united man and woman as such, in both testaments, independent of ceremony or parties, is sexual intercourse. Two becoming one is clearly the sexual act of intercourse. “If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged to anyone and sleeps with her, he must pay the customary and accept her as his wife” (Ex. 22:16). There is no wedding ceremony, legalities, vows, trips, or whatever.

“And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.” Gen. 24:67.

“What? Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? For two, saith he, shall be one flesh.” Cor. 6:16.

If a man has sexual relations with a woman, by this way becoming “only one flash”, they’re already married in the eyes of God. So, there is no such a thing as pre-marital sex. The marriage happens when a man and a woman engage in sexual relations. Not before, neither after it. Therefore, they can’t get married if they had sex, as they are already married. Similarly, nobody is married untill they have sex, for no legalities or men’s cerimony can make two people together. There is only one way - the God’s way.

Traditionally, when you are engaged, you are in a time reserved to know each other, check out your mate’s principles, honor and obedinece to Yahweh and find out if she/he is indeed the right one. This period of time is absent of sexual intimacy, and the next logical step is the marriage. That’s why I also believe that should not exist such a thing as “boyfriend” and “girlfriend”, only groom and bride.

The disconnection between sex and marriage is made in order to make it legit to homossexual couples and interracial couples have sex as long as they get married under the “church of God”, making people believe that if they are both christians and both got married in the church, God is somehow approving their relationship. By this method, Judeo-Churchianity manages to make non-biblical, anti-christian unions morally accepted.

Also, disconnecting sex and marriage is a free pass to serial monogamy, the new socially accepted way of being a slut. A woman marries, gets divorced, marries again, gets divorced, and so on… making it legit to engage in sex with countless different partners, because before the act they are “marrying” in the church, and by this way supposedly getting God’s approval.

Lang.

[Kentucky]

Does God have sex (or its allegorical equivalent) with Israel before the Marriage Supper of the Lamb?

Mark

[Lang]

I'm not sure if its an answer to Staropramen's question or an argument against my answer. But thats a very good question, lol. This verse came in mind: "But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit." 1 Cor. 6:17.

What would be the equivalent of sex between God and Israel? Does the "two bodies become one flash" thing applies to the marriage between God and Israel?

If the equivalent of sex is Israel giving up on mens tradition, secular doctrines and paganism and accepting God as her husband once again, then the marriage happens exactly at the moment of the "sex".