Originally Posted by David Carr

To be sure, many have associated the biblical Song of Songs with marriage (it's frequently used for Christian pre-marriage counseling), and there are indications that the lovers it depicts wish that they were married. The man calls his love "my bride" [and his "sister" obviously that's poetry since she's black] (Song of Solomon 4:8, 9), and she sings that "I am my love's and he desires me" (Song of Solomon 7:11). Nevertheless, toward the end of the book the female lover still cannot openly express her affection for him (Song of Solomon 8:1). Overall, the book positively depicts a couple pursuing a love that is not approved by society...The lovers do not live together, but instead must meet outdoors (Song of Solomon 1:17) or in a parent's bedroom (Song of Solomon 3:4; Song of Solomon 8:2), and there is no clear view yet of starting a family. In the process, the lovers mention a number of spices (e.g. pomegranates, honey, myrrh, spikenard) that Athalya Brenner points out in her book "The Intercourse of Knowledge: On Gendering Desire and 'Sexuality' in the Hebrew Bible" (Leiden: Brill, 1996, 72-89) were used by ancient women to prevent pregnancy.

Perhaps most importantly, the book does not suggest anywhere that their sexual relationship is wrong. Their love leads to suffering at points, especially for the woman (Song of Solomon 5:2-6). Nevertheless, Song of Songs celebrates their unsanctioned sexual passion. At the same time the book repeatedly urges caution in engaging in such love, especially through a repeated urging not to "awaken or arouse love until love is ready" (Song of Solomon 2:7; Song of Solomon 3:5; Song of Solomon 8:4)....Elizabeth Bukey, pointed out, "it's easier to list what the Song does not teach. It does not say you've got to be married. It doesn't say men should dominate women and it doesn't get worked up about which particular sexual acts are OK." Instead, the book stresses that one must take care in deciding when "to awaken or arouse love." Perhaps one aspect of that care would be in following the example of the woman of the Song of Songs and taking precautions, when needed, not to have unplanned children. Say, using effective birth control.

Originally Posted by Jeb Thurmond (Post 857009)

Some pervert named David Carr misinterprets a non-KJV bible at Hussytown Post:



Where do I begin with this kind of nonsense? First I'll mention a huge fact the David fails to mentioned: the woman is black:

I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: Song of Solomon 1:5-6

So of course Solomon can't marry him! What the Bible says about interracial marriage:

And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites:
And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.
And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgat the LORD their God, and served Baalim and the groves. - Judges 3:5-7

Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. - Deuteronomy 7:3

Anyway, King Solomon, the wisest man of all time (1 Kings 4:31) was clearly pro-marriage, being eventually married to 300 women. (1 Kings 11:3) (The godliest man of our time, Newt Gingrich, is only up to number 3).

This is not adultry, because adultry is when a woman cheats on her husband. When a husband cheats on his wife (or his 300 wives) there's no victim, and thus no problem.

There is a problem, however, with creating mulatto babies:

The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.
For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass. - Ezra 9:1-2

King Solomon can't mingle his holy seed with that of a black woman. However, anything that kills sperm is murder: Onan was struck dead for practising coitus interuptus: Genesis 38:9

So how is birth control possible with even coitus interuptus is outlawed? Well, there's the rhythm method, but that might involve touching her during her period (Leviticus 15:24, Leviticus 18:19, Leviticus 15:19) but either way King Solomon was clearly randy for the dark meat so his jungle fever could not be expected to wait. No, obviously he did a form of coitus interuptus, in which one of his 300 (white) wives was there to catch his seed.

And as for this nonsense about honey etc. working as birth control...If the woman really was using some secret female potion, the fact that God failed to notice is just more proof that God is a man.

Got that, ladies? Sex outside of marriage may be no problem for the man, but it makes you a whore. The only acceptable reason to use birth control is to prevent the creation of mulattos, and the only acceptable form of birth control is for the man to pull out at the last minute and ejaculate into one of his white wives.

Originally Posted by Paul the Foreigner (Post 857298)

But Solomon married with the egyptian pharaoh's daughter.
That was not sin ?

The "black" word does not mean black hair ?
It is sure that it means black skin ?

I'm just thinking, perhaps she was white woman (not sure).

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond (Post 857009)

Some pervert named David Carr misinterprets a non-KJV bible at Hussytown Post:



Where do I begin with this kind of nonsense? First I'll mention a huge fact David Carr fails to mentioned: the woman is black:

I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: Song of Solomon 1:5-6

So of course Solomon can't marry her! What the Bible says about interracial marriage:

And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites:
And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.
And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgat the LORD their God, and served Baalim and the groves. - Judges 3:5-7

Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. - Deuteronomy 7:3

Anyway, King Solomon, the wisest man of all time (1 Kings 4:31) was clearly pro-marriage, being eventually married to 300 women. (1 Kings 11:3) (The godliest man of our time, Newt Gingrich, is only up to number 3).

This is not adultry, because adultry is when a woman cheats on her husband. When a husband cheats on his wife (or his 300 wives) there's no victim, and thus no problem.

There is a problem, however, with creating mulatto babies:

The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.
For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass. - Ezra 9:1-2

King Solomon can't mingle his holy seed with that of a black woman. However, anything that kills sperm is murder: Onan was struck dead for practising coitus interuptus: Genesis 38:9

So how is birth control possible with even coitus interuptus is outlawed? Well, there's the rhythm method, I'm not sure how this works but it might involve touching her during her period (Leviticus 15:24, Leviticus 18:19, Leviticus 15:19) and either way King Solomon was clearly randy for the dark meat so his jungle fever could not be expected to wait. No, obviously he did a form of coitus interuptus, in which one of his 300 (white) wives was there to catch his seed.

And as for this nonsense about honey etc. working as birth control...If the woman really was using some secret female potion, the fact that God failed to notice is just more proof that God is a man.

Got that, ladies? Sex outside of marriage may be not be a sin for the man, but it makes you a whore. The only acceptable reason to use birth control is to prevent the creation of mulattos, and the only acceptable form of birth control is for the man to pull out at the last minute and ejaculate into one of his white wives.

Originally Posted by spoink47 (Post 1286568)

Being a black woman, never have I ever thought that the book of Solomon applies to me...

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288107)

Interesting, except that since the events of the bible take place in the middle east, everybody has fairly dark skin.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288107)

Interesting, except that since the events of the bible take place in the middle east, everybody has fairly dark skin.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288123)

It seems like an excuse for racism.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288123)

It seems like an excuse for racism.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288123)

It seems like an excuse for racism.

Originally Posted by handmaiden (Post 1288133)

What the world likes to label "racism" is actually adherence to directives from the Almighty regarding dangerous admixture. In the Book of Leviticus we read of God's command:

Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

If that isn't clear enough for you, in Deuteronomy, God spells it out more firmly.

Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.

Now before you post your riposte, please consider that this is a Bible discussion-themed site. It is not a pull-whatever-you-want-out-of-your-back-pocket site.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288204)

...Also, that command from Deuteronomy applied back then, in that special case...

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288107)

Interesting, except that since the events of the bible take place in the middle east, everybody has fairly dark skin.

Originally Posted by Blanche_Locke (Post 1288204)

Also, that command from Deuteronomy applied back then, in that special case.

Originally Posted by Basilissa (Post 1288208)

I didn't see an expiration date on my Bible. :huh: So we are not to follow the Ten Commandments anymore, either?