Jehovah's Witneeses only please.?

Question

If a married couple slip and angage in oral sex one time... does this require judicial action... yes or no?

Answer 1

No.

A previous answer quoted from a 1978 article in The Watchtower, so it seems obvious that Jehovah's Witnesses have had a consistent view of this matter for at least thirty years (see The Watchtower of 2/15/1978).

Admittedly in previous decades, Jehovah's Witnesses had understood the bible term "fornication" to refer to ANY "unnatural" sex practice (even within marriage). Even now, certain religions (both Christian and non-Christian) continue to believe that any sex other than penile-vaginal intercourse is "unnatural". Decades ago, that understanding of bible "fornication" (Greek "pornea") was rather common among bible students.

Jehovah's Witnesses proved uncommon in working to adhere to a Godly view of sex and marriage, and in their willingness to correct wrong ideas when research indicated. Thus, for decades now, the publications of Jehovah's Witnesses have pointedly noted that the English term "fornication" does not apply to the actions between spouses within a marriage.


As a religion, Jehovah's Witnesses are no longer entirely certain regarding how Jehovah God feels about various forms of sex within marriage. They have noted that there is strong support for the argument that oral and anal sex are "unclean", but the bible teaches that "uncleanness" must be "gross" and likely involve "greediness" to constitute the kind of "serious sin" which requires congregation action (JWs note The Watchtower of 7/15/2006, page 30).

The Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses does not interest itself in a married couple's specific sexual practices. When a married person performs oral or anal sex on his or her spouse, he or she does not commit "fornication" as the term is used by Jehovah's Witnesses.

(1 Corinthians 7:2-3) Because of prevalence of fornication, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife her due; but let the wife also do likewise to her husband.


A Christian who debases his or her spouse by insisting upon or forcing degrading sexual practices likely commits the kind of "uncleanness" which is a serious sin. A Christian who brazenly advocates any particular sexual practice (even for within marriage) likely commits "loose conduct", which can be a serious sin.

(Ephesians 4:18-19) Because of the insensibility of their hearts. Having come to be past all moral sense, they gave themselves over to loose conduct to work uncleanness of every sort with greediness.


Most true Christians (such as Jehovah's Witnesses) have the good sense and godly devotion to respect their spouses and keep their intimate details private, so it is almost unheard of for this matter to require the attention of any elder body among Jehovah's Witnesses.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.co.uk/e/20040508a/article_01.htm

Answer 2

No. John a million:18 "no one haa2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9 ever a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9een God; the only Son, who a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9 a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9n the boa2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9om of the father, he haa2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9 made ha2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9m standard." There a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9 in basic terms one God Jehovah. Deu 6:4 `hear, O Ia2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9rael, Jehovah our God [a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9a2a551a6458a8de22446cc76d639a9e9] one Jehovah;

Answer 3

No.

It is a matter between the married couple and Jehovah. The congregation elders would NOT get involved.

Answer 4

how does one "slip" and engage in oral sex? wet floor?

maybe it's not a religious issue at all but it's that your wife doesn't like oral sex and is using her religion as a crutch?

Answer 5

Use to be that you could get disfellowshipped for that, but If they kept that law, there would be no more witnesses left, so they changed the rules on oral sex, and made it a mater of conscience...

Why does God change the biblical rules for the witnesses and not for regular Christians?

Pedi...LOL I was wondering the same thing myself......Maybe it is all that oil.

Answer 6

No.

Answer 7

Questions From Readers

● Does the Bible set forth any specific definitions as to what is moral or immoral as regards the sexual relationship between husband and wife? Is it the responsibility of congregational elders to endeavor to exercise control among congregation members in these intimate marital matters?

It must be acknowledged that the Bible does not give any specific rules or limitations as regards the manner in which husband and wife engage in sexual relations. There are brief descriptions of fitting love expressions, such as at Proverbs 5:15-20 and various verses in the Song of Solomon (1:13; 2:6; 7:6-8). These, and texts such as Job 31:9, 10, at least provide an indication of what was customary or normal as regards love play and sexual relations and coincide with what is generally viewed as customary and normal today.

The most forceful counsel in the Scriptures is that we should have complete love for God and love for our neighbor as ourselves; a husband is to love his wife as he does his own body and to cherish her and assign her honor. (Matt. 22:37-40; Eph. 5:25-31; 1 Pet. 3:7) As the apostle states, love “does not behave indecently, does not look for its own interests, does not become provoked.” (1 Cor. 13:4, 5) This would certainly preclude the forcing upon one’s marriage mate unusual practices that the mate considers distasteful or even repugnant and perverted.

Beyond these basic guidelines the Scriptures do not go and, hence, we cannot do more than counsel in harmony with what the Bible does say. In the past some comments have appeared in this magazine in connection with certain unusual sex practices, such as oral sex, within marriage and these were equated with gross sexual immorality. On this basis the conclusion was reached that those engaging in such sex practices were subject to disfellowshiping if unrepentant. The view was taken that it was within the authority of congregational elders to investigate and act in a judicial capacity regarding such practices in the conjugal relationship.

A careful further weighing of this matter, however, convinces us that, in view of the absence of clear Scriptural instruction, these are matters for which the married couple themselves must bear the responsibility before God and that these marital intimacies do not come within the province of the congregational elders to attempt to control nor to take disfellowshiping action with such matters as the sole basis. Of course, if any person chooses to approach an elder for counsel he or she may do so and the elder can consider Scriptural principles with such a one, acting as a shepherd but not attempting to, in effect, “police” the marital life of the one inquiring.

This should not be taken as a condoning of all the various sexual practices that people engage in, for that is by no means the case. It simply expresses a keen sense of responsibility to let the Scriptures rule and to refrain from taking a dogmatic stand where the evidence does not seem to provide sufficient basis. It also expresses confidence in the desire of Jehovah’s people as a whole to do all things as unto him and to reflect his splendid qualities in all their affairs. It expresses a willingness to leave the judgment of such intimate marital matters in the hands of Jehovah God and his Son, who have the wisdom and knowledge of all circumstances necessary to render the right decisions. It is good for us to remember that “we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God” and that “each of us will render an account for himself to God.” (Rom. 14:7-10, 12) “We must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of the Christ, that each one may get his award for the things done through the body, according to the things he has practiced, whether it is good or vile.”—2 Cor. 5:10.

It is also good to recognize that when the apostle wrote his counsel at Colossians 3:5, 6, he did not address it just to single persons but to married persons as well. He said: “Deaden, therefore, your body members that are upon the earth as respects fornication, uncleanness, sexual appetite, hurtful desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.” At 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7 Paul further counsels that “each one of you should know how to get possession of his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in covetous sexual appetite such as also those nations have which do not know God . . . For God called us, not with allowance for uncleanness, but in connection with sanctification.”

By his reference to “sexual appetite” the apostle certainly is not condemning the normal sexual desire that finds proper outlet and expression within the marriage arrangement. We have a normal appetite for food and drink and can properly satisfy it. But one can become a glutton or a drunkard by self-indulgent and unrestrained eating and drinking. So, too, one could get so preoccupied with sex that satisfying sexual desire becomes paramount and the chief aim in itself, rather than an adjunct or subordinate complement to the expressing of love that the Bible urges. When this is the case, then the individual reaches the point of greediness ‘which is idolatry,’ and the sexual desire is that which is idolized.—Eph. 5:3, 5; Phil. 3:19; Col. 3:5.

What, then, of a situation where a married person, perhaps a wife, approaches a congregational elder with the complaint that her marriage mate is abusing her by forcing sexual practices upon her that she rejects as repugnant and perverted? If the marriage mate is willing to discuss the matter, the elder, possibly in company with another elder, can offer to try to help the couple to solve their problem, giving Scriptural counsel.

What if a married person claims that certain sexual practices of the marriage mate are sufficiently gross to come within the scope of the Greek term porneia as used at Matthew 19:9 (“fornication,” New World Translation)? As has been shown, the Scriptures do not give specific information that allows for positive identification of certain sexual practices within marriage as being—or not being—porneia. It may be noted that the Greek term is drawn from a word having the basic meaning of “to sell” or to “surrender or give oneself up to,” and thus porneia has the sense of “a selling or a giving of oneself up to lust or lewdness.” The verb form (porneuo) includes among its meanings that of “to debauch.” (Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon) If a married person believes that the sexual practices of the mate, though not involving someone outside the marriage, are nevertheless of such a gross nature as to constitute a clear surrender to lewdness or a debauching in lewdness, then that must be his or her own decision and responsibility.

Such a one may hold that the circumstances provide Scriptural basis for divorce. If so, he or she must accept full responsibility before God for any divorce action that might be taken. Elders cannot be expected to express approval (Scripturally) of divorce, if they are not sure of the grounds. At the same time they are not authorized to impose their conscience on another when the matter is a questionable one. (Jas. 4:11, 12) Having expressed what Scriptural counsel they find fitting, they can then make clear to the one involved the seriousness of the matter and the full responsibility that must rest upon him or her if divorce action is taken. If a person is simply seeking a pretext to break the marriage bonds, then such a one can only expect God’s disfavor, for of such treacherous dealing with one’s mate God says that “he has hated a divorcing.” (Mal. 2:16) “God will judge fornicators and adulterers” and anyone divorcing simply on a pretext and then remarrying will not escape that judgment. (Heb. 13:4) The elders can be confident that the Lord “will both bring the secret things of darkness to light and make the counsels of the hearts manifest” in his due time. (1 Cor. 4:4, 5) Anyone who sows in deceit and treachery will not escape a harvest of suffering, for “God is not one to be mocked.”—Gal. 6:7, 8.

Even as congregation elders accord to their brothers and sisters the right to exercise their personal conscience in matters where the Scriptures are not explicit, so, too, the elders have a right to exercise their own consciences as to their view of those engaging in questionable actions. If they sincerely feel that the actions of a congregation member in these matters are such that they could not conscientiously recommend him or her for any exemplary service within the congregation, that is their prerogative.—1 Tim. 1:19; 3:2-12; 5:22.

[Footnotes]

Reference has been made to the apostle’s statements at Romans 1:24-27 regarding “the natural use” of male and female bodies. As is evident and has been consistently acknowledged, these statements are made in the context of homosexuality. They do not make any direct reference to sexual practices by husband and wife. It must also be acknowledged that even those love expressions that are completely normal and common between husband and wife would be “unnatural” for persons of the same sex and immoral for unmarried people. Whatever guidance these apostolic statements provide as regards sex practices within marriage, therefore, is indirect and must be viewed as only of a persuasive but not a conclusive nature, that is, not the basis for setting up hard and fast standards for judgment. At the same time there is the possibility and perhaps a likelihood that some sex practices now engaged in by husband and wife were originally practiced only by homosexuals. If this should be the case, then certainly this would give these practices at least an unsavory origin. So the matter is not one to be lightly dismissed by the conscientious Christian simply because no direct reference to married persons appears in the aforementioned texts.

EDIT: Don't pay any attention to the lies of that Noisy Goat below me- check our literature for yourself, there isn't and never has been any such thing as disfellowshipping for oral sex between married people.