Okay, this beats the heck out of me:

What does the Bible basically say about human sexuality, sex and making love?

No input? Perhaps everyone here is monk or nun? And TC is actually a cyber monastery?

is this the Catholic Bible you are speaking about?

Huh?  I didnt know there are different Bibles like the Catholic Bible. But no problem, please feel free to tell if you could tell only according the Catholic Bible. 

Well if I go by the teachings of the Catholic church, sex is for procreation, it is not for pleasure.  A woman should not be or take any kind of contraception, men should not use condoms.  If you are not married, no sex.  You do not want to make a child, no sex.  But this is what I remember from what they taught us and I have not practiced my religion in over 20 years.  Thing is I have not seen it written clearly these rules the churche speak of.

Hmm... Are these stated, clearly or in an implying manner, in the Catholic Bible or only the teachings of the Catholic Church? Though, I know, in most cases these two must and are parallel to each other.

The Bible basically says that having sex is for babies. The Catholic church interprets this most strictly, not allowing condoms and such. Other Christian churches might have different views, and do allow such things as the pill and condoms, as long as it is within a marriage.

Huh? Wwwhattt? For babies?

....Hm... interpretation problem It is basically different than the Quran, which makes comments about sex being a physical need of men. So it´s not just for MAKING () babies. In the Bible sex is basically just for MAKING babies...

This will kill all my fun, but anyway, you seem not to have gotten what I tried to point out, barba. Your previous statement, I took it for a moment like, ´sex is a practice that could be only performed by babies´!

Now the whole fun has now turned into big absurdity. Thanks!

  Where in the Bible it says so?

Let me help you a little bit.

Stumpy talks from Catholic cathechism, not Bible.

There is one Bible. Catholics have changed one thing in the 10 Commandments in order to fit their idea of worshipping the idols. And added one gnostic book to the Old Testament.

I asked you a question where do find it in Bible. Ignorants always babble whatever their saliva brings to their tongues.

Ahm..how about here? You know, the story of Onan is quite famous...

Dear DD, do you know why Onan was killed?

Onan´s obligation was to keep up his brother´s line which he didnt want to.That was an obligation imposed by law.

Within the marriage sex is your business, God doesnt interfere in that sphere, because its intimate and private.

The verses that are quoted in that site, you think are speaking against sex other than the procreation? I think you shouldnt impose the catholic teachings on the biblical teachings.

I know what I´m talking about, and you´re saying it too but interpreting differently. Onan was supposed to take over his brother´s maritial obligations - have sex and have a child. What he did was to have sex and use contraception (withdrawal) -> so, he wanted to have sex but he didn´t want a child. This sounds like a "contraception is bad" idea that Bible conveys. Are there any places in the Bible that say "have sex and enjoy it, having children is not the objective in marriage?" No? I thought so

Any quotes saying God considers marriage private and intimate and doesn´t interfere?

It is all about interpretation, it can be interpreted in both ways, Onan didnt listen to God, and because of disobeidence to God, he was punished or using contraception is something bad forbidden by God so God punished him. But i have to say lemon´s interpretation is correct and direct, other interpretation is something like adding words from your own that God did not say something like that which is not much welcomed in religous teachings, indirect interpretation...

I said basically, not literally. And I also mentioned it was a matter of interpretation. Perhaps you should READ what I write before you bite my head off.

Whatever you say you have to cover yourself. Basically or generally everyone can babble.

Well, Im gonna say to you that you dont know much of Mosaic Laws.

Onan could have and had as much sex as he wanted. His brother´s wife wanted a child or children. For a woman in Israel at those times (or any other woman of those times) not having a child was a shame. Women gained respect through having children.

Nowhere in the Bible it says you cant have sex without the idea of procreation.

Abraham and Sarah had sex for decades and couldnt have children.So did Isaac and Jacob.

God never said to anyone: Go have sex and enjoy it.

Read 1 Cor. 7. 5-6.

For a person of modern age after a strong humanist propaganda it is very difficult to understand the Laws used in the Ancient times.

So, was Onan killed by God only because he refused to fulfill the wish of his brother´s wife (having a child)?

Yes, exactly!

Armegon - how can you state which interpretation is wrong or right? You may or may not agree with it only Unless, of course, you wrote the Bible and know the correct interpretation

Lemon - Abraham and his wife are a different story - they couldn´t have children, they didn´t want NOt to have them if I remember correctly. I hate that story because of Hagar and how it speak of abuse like it was natural. Anyway, Ab and Sarah(?) didn´t use contraception, they tried to procreate but without luck.

Onan was supposed to take over his brother´s duty. Apparently the duty was not to have intercourse but to inseminate. He didn´t do it so he was punished. So, he didn´t fail to have sex but chose not to inseminate. Hence the punishment. As Bible is but a collection of examples - it can be seen God doesn´t like people wasting their semen. Or homosexuals. Or prostitutes.

That´s it. You may read the Bible, look for inspiration, moral answers etc but it´s hard to imagine you treat it like a text that is still valid these days. The laws have changed and so have moral standards, means of transportation and lifestyles. These make Bible an interesting reading material for historians, sociologists and literature specialist but not a text to be treated literally

And, since God doesn´t speak of letting people enjoy contraceptives, but punishes Onan for avoiding inseminatating, I´m inclined to interpret it like I did. I mean, I would be inclined to interpret it this way if I didn´t give a rat´s tutu about it

DD, i know it is hard for you to understand, if you think about once again, thats an order from God not open to interpretation actually, if you dont do what He orders He says you will be punished, that is all. But God does not say directly "Using contraception is forbidden", this is your interpretation, and he does not need your interpretation. If you have chance to serve in Turkish military, im sure you will understand what i mean , there is only orders, not interpretations to assure the dicipline...

Actually it´s not an order per se. It´s a parable about one ancient guy not having come  inside his brother´s wife and being punished for that. If that´s the way army officials give orders then I´m surprised army has that much power in Turkey

Just imagine that: A general addresses soldiers saying:

"Once upon a time there was a villager in the Black sea region. Instead of working he spent his days on the bench in front of his house, having delicious meals his mum made for him.

As a result he grew very fat. One day he saw a golden chicken. He couldn´t believe his eyes. Having decided it would make a nice contribution to the house budget, he wanted to catch it. Unfortunately, he tripped over his sandals that he had taken off and placed in front of the bench. The poor fellow bruised his elbows badly and the golden chicken ran away"

Do you think the soldiers would be able to decide whether it was an order to start the drill (to avoid being fat), or to clean up (the sandal metaphor) or, maybe to avoid temptation (the chicken and bruise)?

I´ve no idea how you do it in Turkey, in Poland officers just command

 I know the parable dear, but in parable God orders, right? I just tried to help you to understand but it seems i failed...  

This is the text from Genesis re: Onan. He was a son of Judah. Judah was a son of Jacob (Israel). So God killed Israel´s grandson for his wickedness.

Genesis 38

Judah and Tamar

 ¹ At that time, Judah left his brothers and went down to stay with a man of Adullam named Hirah. ² There Judah met the daughter of a Canaanite man named Shua. He married her and lay with her; ³ she became pregnant and gave birth to a son, who was named Er. ⁴ She conceived again and gave birth to a son and named him Onan. ⁵ She gave birth to still another son and named him Shelah. It was at Kezib that she gave birth to him.

 ⁶ Judah got a wife for Er, his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. ⁷ But Er, Judah´s firstborn, was wicked in the LORD´s sight; so the LORD put him to death.

 ⁸ Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother´s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother." ⁹ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother´s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. ¹⁰ What he did was wicked in the LORD´s sight; so he put him to death also.

 ¹¹ Judah then said to his daughter-in-law Tamar, "Live as a widow in your father´s house until my son Shelah grows up." For he thought, "He may die too, just like his brothers." So Tamar went to live in her father´s house.

 ¹² After a long time Judah´s wife, the daughter of Shua, died. When Judah had recovered from his grief, he went up to Timnah, to the men who were shearing his sheep, and his friend Hirah the Adullamite went with him.

 ¹³ When Tamar was told, "Your father-in-law is on his way to Timnah to shear his sheep," ¹⁴ she took off her widow´s clothes, covered herself with a veil to disguise herself, and then sat down at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that, though Shelah had now grown up, she had not been given to him as his wife.

 ¹⁵ When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. ¹⁶ Not realizing that she was his daughter-in-law, he went over to her by the roadside and said, "Come now, let me sleep with you."
      "And what will you give me to sleep with you?" she asked.

 ¹⁷ "I´ll send you a young goat from my flock," he said.
      "Will you give me something as a pledge until you send it?" she asked.

 ¹⁸ He said, "What pledge should I give you?"
      "Your seal and its cord, and the staff in your hand," she answered. So he gave them to her and slept with her, and she became pregnant by him. ¹⁹ After she left, she took off her veil and put on her widow´s clothes again.

 ²⁰ Meanwhile Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite in order to get his pledge back from the woman, but he did not find her. ²¹ He asked the men who lived there, "Where is the shrine prostitute who was beside the road at Enaim?"
      "There hasn´t been any shrine prostitute here," they said.

 ²² So he went back to Judah and said, "I didn´t find her. Besides, the men who lived there said, ´There hasn´t been any shrine prostitute here.´ "

 ²³ Then Judah said, "Let her keep what she has, or we will become a laughingstock. After all, I did send her this young goat, but you didn´t find her."

 ²⁴ About three months later Judah was told, "Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant."
      Judah said, "Bring her out and have her burned to death!"

 ²⁵ As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. "I am pregnant by the man who owns these," she said. And she added, "See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are."

 ²⁶ Judah recognized them and said, "She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn´t give her to my son Shelah." And he did not sleep with her again.

 ²⁷ When the time came for her to give birth, there were twin boys in her womb. ²⁸ As she was giving birth, one of them put out his hand; so the midwife took a scarlet thread and tied it on his wrist and said, "This one came out first." ²⁹ But when he drew back his hand, his brother came out, and she said, "So this is how you have broken out!" And he was named Perez. ^{[a] 30} Then his brother, who had the scarlet thread on his wrist, came out and he was given the name Zerah. ^[b]

Your interpretation is not yours it is Catholic.

As you, yourself dont read Bible it doesnt mean that it is invalid.

Customs, traditions, cultures, religions change but God and His Words never.

And, yes, God hates homosexualism, prostitution and our modern day immoral culture.

Its not a parable, its a true story. Do not repeat after DD.

Maybe it is Catholic I wouldn´t know really as I don´t remember talking about Onan in religion classes. And I have never read the Bible either, just fragments during literature classes in secondary school

But reading this fragment you quoted,

" ⁸ Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother´s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother." ⁹ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother´s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. ¹⁰ What he did was wicked in the LORD´s sight; so he put him to death also."

it´s really hard to understand it differently than how i read it. Still, I´m not trying to convince you. If you find something that is not there - enjoy your interpretation I know I lack the finger of God (even the middle one ) so maybe reading the same paragraph we get two different messages. Your seems illogical to me, but that´s just my opinion. You are entitled to believe I shall burn in hell. Suits me just fine

Okay, in the light of Onan story, sex is supposed to end up with male ejaculaton into the female. But what about when no sexual intercourse and/or ejaculation is involved in sex- like in the cases of only caressing, kissing, etc.?  And then there is foreplay! Are these considered as sinns between non-married partners?

The Onan´s story actually is not about sex. God is not telling Onan how to have sex. Nowhere in the Bible you will find instructions how to have sex. Onan´s story is a disobiedience to God. People read and see sex. I read and see disobidience.

God has killed many men and women in many other situations for the disobiedience, and the death was immideate.

The Law was to continue your brother´s line.

If you actually read the whole story (instead of being such a big ignorant) the story ends up with her having babies from her father in law Judah. And the story ends there. The woman wanted a child and she achieved it.

DD, you have no a valid point here. You brought that interpretation from a catholic website. I know you are not a Catholic, but when you speak of Bible you speak from the Catholic perspective, because thats all you ve known growing up.A biblical christianity is alien to you.

Yesterday I gave you a passage from Corinthians. I am sure you didnt read it.

You keep saying that Bible or God of Bible is against the sex if not for procreation. You cant prove it. Theres no such statement in the Bible. And I think you know that you are not truthful in your statement. You said you dont read Bible, and all you know is the bits and pieces from cathechism. And this altogether proves you wrong.

As for Onan, read what I wrote to Gezegen.

³The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. ⁴The wife´s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband´s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. ⁵Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. ⁶I say this as a concession, not as a command.

Ok, lemon, here is a very straightforward question to the point:

If I have sex with a woman resulting in no pregnancy, will I be punished by God in the next life?

A good question.

If that woman is your wife, you have sex, any sex, many sex, mutually agreed and mutually respected.

Theres no restriction to sex within the marriage.

So, in all other cases like no marriage in question, every kind of sex, including foreplay, is forbidden and considered as sinn, right?

If this is out of marriage, not only foreplay but a thought of it is a sin.

E.g. if you looked at a woman (out of your marriage) with a lust you have just committed a sin. Your place is in Hell. Sin is not an action only. Any action starts off and cooked in your mind. If you are in a cafe (your action - you went there), you went there because you thought to go there, you planned it. Your actions follow your thoughts. If you called someone a fool in your thoughts you have already sinned against God.

Welcome to Christianity! 

Ok, you got me lost here. You´re saying

"The Law was to continue your brother´s line."

and I understand it as "inseminate your brother´s wife" not as "do what a husband should, just have sex and maybe something will come out of it" - you don´t but that´s probably because you have the Grace of God and are able to read between the lines

I can´t say I´m not influenced by Catholic interpretations as they were the only ones I heard. Still, reading this passage today and being strongly against Catholicism as a religion, I did my best to try and find a different interpretation that would prove these nasty, backward idea wrong. But I can´t agree to something illogical, that´s not me.

You´re saying I can´t prove God being against contraception (although this is how I see the onan story), well neither can you prove otherwise. And we´ve come to a standstill

So far all the fragments you quoted have not convinced me to change the interpretation of Onan´s story. If there are any other that state "be free to use contraception, God will not kill you" please provide them to me, I´ll gladly read them Oh, you can´t? Well, that´s what I thought

 I am not yet sure if I am comfortable here in Christianity. I mean I would go even just for foreplay and this would be enough as a fore-step! But it is hard sometimes not to desires a woman in mind! Well, we will see... 

I think its time for me to admit that I have to give up.

My point is not to win with you.

My point was to deomstrate God´s will over Onan, not over sex generally.

I did all my best, I think.

Silly you, I am not inviting you to Christianity. You dont need Christianity - you need God.

But why am I now feeling that I need women?

No, i have to give up! I do! I was getting tired and felt like running in circles. Thank you for your attempts, really appreciate the quotes you took time to paste. You know me, i was arguing just out of boredom And, yes, you were grand in supporting your point.

No, no!... My ladies, I am very gentleman! Let me give up first!

 Do what you wanna do Gezegen, I always did and I have not been struck down by lightning yet and if there is a place in hell for me, then so be it, I like the heat!

Do you think you should be punished by being struck down by lightening (if necessary)? Aren´t there any other punishment? Because it´s a very low probability thing (200 to 300 people a year in Europe are stuck down by lightening that something like one in a million chance).

hit by a coconut... I think coconuts kill more people then lightning.

 Errr not where I live  

I was very close to getting struck by lightning once, picking strawberries - it hit the electricity pole beside me and threw me across the field!  So there is a chance