Comments on: The Christian Perspective on Marriage — Part One: Origins http://wordnverse.com/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/ Glorifying Christ; Edifying and Warning the Flock Fri, 05 Dec 2008 11:26:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-RC1 hourly 1 By: Sex? Oh, Yes Please! | Joie de Vivre http://wordnverse.com/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-666 Sex? Oh, Yes Please! | Joie de Vivre Sat, 18 Aug 2007 08:57:34 +0000 http://www.sicarii.net/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/#comment-666 [...] big thanks goes out to Robert and Susan Irwin for first stumbling upon my 3-part series on Christian marriage, and linking to them from a post of his. Because without that I wouldn’t have [...] [...] big thanks goes out to Robert and Susan Irwin for first stumbling upon my 3-part series on Christian marriage, and linking to them from a post of his. Because without that I wouldn’t have [...]

]]> By: A Christian Perspective On Marriage… » Christian Sex Blog http://wordnverse.com/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-665 A Christian Perspective On Marriage… » Christian Sex Blog Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:38:43 +0000 http://www.sicarii.net/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/#comment-665 [...] You can find it here. [...] [...] You can find it here. [...]

]]> By: Sicarii http://wordnverse.com/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-664 Sicarii Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:17:53 +0000 http://www.sicarii.net/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/#comment-664 That's very correct. I had intended to cover it in part 2, but it's good you brought it up too. That’s very correct.

I had intended to cover it in part 2, but it’s good you brought it up too.

]]> By: ET http://wordnverse.com/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-663 ET Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:11:50 +0000 http://www.sicarii.net/2007/07/24/the-christian-perspective-on-marriage/#comment-663 I think the second part, the emphasis isn't so much of marital sex to my understanding. It is more for the purpose of pro-creation to flourish. I think the second part, the emphasis isn’t so much of marital sex to my understanding. It is more for the purpose of pro-creation to flourish.

]]>