1. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    25 Mar '05 21:301 edit
    In the past, Christianity has rather demonified sexuality. The roots
    for such a perspective derive from a Jewish understanding of the
    body; indeed, some interpret the consumption of the 'fruit of the
    knowledge of good and evil' as becoming sexually aware (we see the
    analogue for this with Prosperpine and Pluto with the pomegranate).

    St Paul has much to say about the separation between earthly things
    and spiritual things, to avoid the lusts of the flesh and focus on the
    divine.

    Whether this reading is accurate or not is of little consequence, but
    the fact that it has been historically used to elevate the state of
    virginity generally and restrained sexuality. In the past, the
    Christian churches have demonize the naked body or any expression
    of sexuality.

    In more recent history, the Christian churches have recognized that
    sexuality in marriage is a healthy thing, if not a supreme form of
    expression, but only within a limited framework. Indeed, the
    notion of sexual exploration, so-called sodomy (be it oral, anal or
    digital), masturbation, and many other related topics are often
    deemed taboo.

    In fact, there are many Christians (perhaps even some on this site)
    who have taken the notion of sexuality to be so filthy and so evil that
    the couple will (at mutual consent) not touch each other in any way
    sexually, for fear of the sin of lust. In order to have children, sperm
    is removed from the male via suction and implanted within the
    woman. As such, their relationship is utterly chaste and pure, free of
    the physical passions which they believe cripple other couples. They
    believe that, by doing this, they are transcending their sinful,
    animalistic, 'fleshy' nature and focusing on the True, Divine, and
    Spiritual things, as per St Paul's writings.

    While not all go to this extreme, many others deem various sorts of
    sexual experiences as sinful and, similarly, avoid them for fear of
    Divine condemnation.

    Is this really a True Biblical message -- that sexual self-denial is a
    higher calling -- or is it a perversion of Christian teaching in an effort
    to establish and maintain control through fear and guilt?

    Discuss.

    Nemesio
  2. Joined
    17 Mar '04
    Moves
    82844
    25 Mar '05 21:55
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    Is this really a True Biblical message -- that sexual self-denial is a
    higher calling -- or is it a perversion of Christian teaching in an effort
    to establish and maintain control through fear and guilt?
    I don't know how in the world humans could have the gift of sexuality and then be made to suffer for it. While moderation and a commited relationship are pivotal to ensure against abuse, and therefore spiritual decline, I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could do something are unnatural as what you described as procreation without actual lovemaking! Are people that hung up about their bodies, and the perception of generating sin in a loving relationship? We humans are a funny (odd, not haha) bunch.
  3. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    25 Mar '05 22:51
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    In the past, Christianity has rather demonified sexuality. The roots
    for such a perspective derive from a Jewish understanding of the
    body; indeed, some interpret the consumption of the 'fruit of the
    knowledge of good and evil' as becoming sexually aware (we see the
    analogue for this with Prosperpine and Pluto with the pomegranate).

    St Paul has muc ...[text shortened]... in an effort
    to establish and maintain control through fear and guilt?

    Discuss.

    Nemesio
    The Bible clearly says that sex in the marriage bed is NOT a sin, but a command from God! What is a sin is sex before marriage, sex with family, sex with animals, sex with the same gender. All of these things are harmful anyway.
  4. Donationkirksey957
    Outkast
    With White Women
    Joined
    31 Jul '01
    Moves
    91452
    25 Mar '05 22:56
    Originally posted by Darfius
    The Bible clearly says that sex in the marriage bed is NOT a sin, but a command from God! What is a sin is sex before marriage, sex with family, sex with animals, sex with the same gender. All of these things are harmful anyway.
    How about a turkey baister?
  5. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    26 Mar '05 02:17
    Originally posted by kirksey957
    How about a turkey baister?
    Priceless. 😀

  6. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    26 Mar '05 02:21
    Originally posted by Darfius
    The Bible clearly says that sex in the marriage bed is NOT a sin, but a command from God! What is a sin is sex before marriage, sex with family, sex with animals, sex with the same gender. All of these things are harmful anyway.
    Homosexual activity is harmful? To whom, your God and right-thinking Christians? That your God would decree that two people of the same sex who love one another and are prepared to commit to one another ought not have sex is just further evidence that your God is deeply unjust.
  7. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    26 Mar '05 02:32
    What is a sin is sex before marriage, sex with family, sex with animals, sex with the same gender. All of these things are harmful anyway.[/b]
    Originally posted by Darfius
    The Bible clearly says that sex in the marriage bed is NOT a sin, but a command from God!

    You are talking about 'procreation,' that is, functional sex. Indeed, the Bible says 'Be fruitful
    and multiply' and the like on several occasions.

    However, the Bible also talks (negatively) about the 'pleasures of the flesh,' that is 'recreational
    sex.' So, it would seem that it would be a sin to engage in sexual intercourse when you don't have
    the intention of procreating, or non-procreative sex acts (such as oral, anal or digital sex).

    Would you say that this is a fair assessment, or do you disagree, Darfius? As such, would your
    recommend sex only when intending to procreate? Would you find that position that other
    Christians take -- where no sexual contact is made, but children are born through extraction and
    implantation -- as a more perfect state, avoiding corruption of the flesh but still fulfilling the
    obligation to be fruitful and multiply?

    Also, I don't recall the Bible's ever forbidding sex outside of marriage. Perhaps you could give
    a citation. All I can recall is you shall not commit adultery (i.e., break the bonds of either your
    marriage or another person's marriage). That is, if a couple were getting married then sexual
    relations would not be adultery.

    Perhaps you could clarify, Darfius?

    Nemesio
  8. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    24447
    26 Mar '05 02:321 edit
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Priceless. 😀

    They're on sale now ......🙄
  9. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    24447
    26 Mar '05 02:352 edits
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Homosexual activity is harmful? To whom, your God and right-thinking Christians? That your God would decree that two people of the same sex who love one another and are prepared to commit to one another ought not have sex is just further evidence that your God is deeply unjust.
    Everybody in the homosexual community is laughing their socks off after reading your statement. You sound like someone defending good old family values.
  10. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    26 Mar '05 02:43
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    Everybody in the homosexual community is laughing their socks off after reading your statement. You sound like someone defending good old family values.
    I think you misread his post. I would think that the homosexual community would be
    inclined to agree with him.

    Or am I missing something?

    Nemesio
  11. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    26 Mar '05 03:21
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    Everybody in the homosexual community is laughing their socks off after reading your statement. You sound like someone defending good old family values.
    I value valuable family values, among them monogamy and commitment. I do not value the condemnation and active oppression of those who are in love and harm nobody.
  12. Donationkirksey957
    Outkast
    With White Women
    Joined
    31 Jul '01
    Moves
    91452
    26 Mar '05 03:24
    Originally posted by bbarr
    I value valuable family values, among them monogamy and commitment. I do not value the condemnation and active oppression of those who are in love and harm nobody.
    Bennett, you have no objections to Ben and Jerry's icecream do you?
  13. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    26 Mar '05 03:27
    Originally posted by kirksey957
    Bennett, you have no objections to Ben and Jerry's icecream do you?
    I am pro- "Cherry Garcia", and anti- "Chunky Monkey". Live and let live, I always say (unless we're talking about those without cerebra).
  14. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    24447
    26 Mar '05 03:341 edit
    Originally posted by bbarr
    I value valuable family values, among them monogamy and commitment. I do not value the condemnation and active oppression of those who are in love and harm nobody.
    Bbarr, what is happening to you ? You are presenting yourself as a man of law and order in the Terri Schiavo case and here you are presenting yourself as a man of the good old "valuable" family values.

    .... Are you still a Freethinker or has a conversion occured also in this field ?
  15. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    26 Mar '05 03:57
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    Bbarr, what is happening to you ? You are presenting yourself as a man of law and order in the Terri Schiavo case and here you are presenting yourself as a man of the good old "valuable" family values.

    .... Are you still a Freethinker or has a conversion occured also in this field ?
    These are mutually exclusive? Like every person, Ivanhoe, I contain multitudes.
Back to Top