NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p

It says in genesis: "go forth and multiply". And he didn't mean maths.

God hates sex because He isn't getting any: how else can you account for all the mood swings He suffers in the Bible?

GIGO

Start with an incorrect assumption and guess what you get?

A BIG WASTE OF TIME

God hates sex because He isn't getting any: how else can you account for all the mood swings He suffers in the Bible?

Menapause.

God hates sex because He isn't getting any: how else can you account for all the mood swings He suffers in the Bible?He's actually a she..:rolleyes:

God hates sex because He isn't getting any:

Damn, beat me to it;)

Oh, GROAN! You do suffer for your lack of knowledge. Read the Song Of Solomon.

Even Paul ( bless his Patriarcal lil heart ) says, "It is better to marry than to burn [ with lust ]."

God loves sex, christians hate sex.
Thus(oh snap) god hates christians

I'm a Catholic, and to be honest, I actually disagree with alot of the sentiments against sexuality in general.

To me, I look upon sexuality as a natural and pleasurable act. When practiced with good intention, it can be one of the most loving of acts. I'd like to think that what the Bible is talking about is unloving and violent sexual acts, but that is one man's interpretation.

Since the Bible was writen by men and not by God, I do not deem it as fully reliable. Hense I follow my gut about religion, not the words in the Bible, as they contradict way too much.

God doesn't hate sex, that's just what the Christians say.

It's true. God needs to get lucky more. I mean, one virgin?!? 2000 years ago?

Jeez... I'd be humping anything with a pulse by now!

God hates sex because He isn't getting any

Surely if God (supposing there is one) is all-powerful he/she could get some if they wanted? I mean look at the Greek gods, they were always at it. Lol.

God doesn't hate sex, most of the Christians I know don't even hate sex (most of us really like it :D)

We frown upon irresponsible action, and irresponsible sex isn't something we are going to go out of our way to promote either.

God doesn't hate sex, that's just what the Christians say.
Oh? Care to back that up with a source, some stats, quotes ... anything???

or how about

C. God does not exsist now or ever. The bible is simply a book of rules and contradictions made to control other people, and lets not forget to confuse them.


Religion has to be the greatest theft of logic of all time. or something like that

God doesn't hate sex, most of the Christians I know don't even hate sex (most of us really like it :D)

We frown upon irresponsible action, and irresponsible sex isn't something we are going to go out of our way to promote either.
Mornin' Smunkeeville! SIC 'em! LOL!

Surely if God (supposing there is one) is all-powerful he/she could get some if they wanted? I mean look at the Greek gods, they were always at it. Lol.
This is true, buty the Greek Gods (and the Summerian lot, who were even randier) weren't part of a monotheistic religion, were they?

Oh? Care to back that up with a source, some stats, quotes ... anything???
they can't really, btw when I first read song of solomon (I was 11 I think) I thought "whoa, porn in the Bible":p

or how about

C. God does not exsist now or ever. The bible is simply a book of rules and contradictions made to control other people, and lets not forget to confuse them.

Religion has to be the greatest theft of logic of all time. or something like that
Or how about option D?

"Many of those, if not most, who criticise faith do so out of total ignorance as to what it's all about." :)

The way I see it, God is just like some sick old man who handcuffs both your hands to two pipes 4 feet apart and gives you a delicious ice cream cone.

Really, maybe it's just because I'm insane but the whole religion thing does make a lot more sense to me that way.

they can't really, btw when I first read song of solomon (I was 11 I think) I thought "whoa, porn in the Bible":p
Hehehe! I'd hate to tell you what happened to me the first time I read it! ;)

This is true, buty the Greek Gods (and the Summerian lot, who were even randier) weren't part of a monotheistic religion, were they?

No, but why should that have anything to do with it? Surely one God in charge of everything, would be even MORE powerful, and so be able to get laid even MORE?

I mean look at the Greek gods, they were always at it. Lol.Heh, depends on which god you're talking about. Some women would rather be turned to trees, or escape otherwise, than have sex with Apollo :p
I don't think Hephaistos got much action either.

Because the bible was written by men and men have wanted to control access to womens uality since time began. And these were especially narrow minded, bigoted men.

Hehehe! I'd hate to tell you what happened to me the first time I read it! ;)
gross............:p j/k

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p

Produce scripture. Now. Really, I challenge you to produce scripture from the Bible which backs up your claim that in "the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too."

Run along grasshopper to http://www.biblegateway.com/ and find me something to back up your claim.

Best of luck...

Oh dear. Yet another uninformed bible basher :p (see? There's more than one kind). God doesn't hate sex - as you say, He did create it after all, so why would He hate it? However, He doesn't approve (as far as we/I know) of sleeping around - sex is meant to be something special, not just... well, a laugh.

SONG OF SOLOMON

Chapter I

The song of songs, which is Solomon's.
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.
Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee.
Draw me, we will run after thee: the king hath brought me into his chambers: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee.
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: my mother's children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept.
Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest thy flock to rest at noon: for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of thy companions?
If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds' tents.
I have compared thee, O my love, to a company of horses in Pharaoh's chariots.
Thy cheeks are comely with rows of jewels, thy neck with chains of gold.
We will make thee borders of gold with studs of silver.
While the king sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof.
A bundle of myrrh is my well-beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts.
My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of Engedi.
Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art fair; thou hast doves' eyes.
Behold, thou art fair, my beloved, yea, pleasant: also our bed is green.
The beams of our house are cedar, and our rafters of fir.

Now ... that doesn't sound to me as if "God hates sex!" :D

gross............:p j/k
LOL! Hey! I didn't say WHAT happened, now did I! :p

christians hate sex.
sWTF???...

I am a Christian.

Heh, depends on which god you're talking about. Some women would rather be turned to trees, or escape otherwise, than have sex with Apollo :p
I don't think Hephaistos got much action either.

True that. Hephaistos wasn't really in a position to run around getting action really though, being lame and severely top-heavy. But still. Check out Zeus, he was a bit of a randy bugger. A bit of a fucking rapist too, but oh well. Dionysos and Aphrodite got their fair share too. I was working to most people's limited knowledge, it's far easier to make generalisations. Lol.

im pretty sure its because while he has an only begotten son, he never got laid.


not allowing extra-marital sex isnt the same as hating all sex.

LOL! Hey! I didn't say WHAT happened, now did I! :p

Yeah - he clearly said 'Hmm, that's quite interesting,' then went and read some wholesome psalms :D

not allowing extra-marital sex isnt the same as hating all sex.Agreed, but what's so wrong with extra-marital sex anyway, especially (but not exclusively) if it is undertaken within the confines of loving coupledom?

not allowing extra-marital sex isnt the same as hating all sex.Besides, there's wasn't a limit on how many women a man could marry. And I'm pretty sure the bible fails to consider women might be anything other than passive, so they can do pretty much anything; all laws are geared towards men. (The bible could be considered to have something to say against men sleeping with men, but nothing about women sleeping with women, either in or out of marriage, for example)

Yeah - he clear said 'Hmm, that's quite interesting,' then went and read some wholesome psalms :D
ROFLMAO!!! :p :p :p

Agreed, but what's so wrong with extra-marital sex anyway, especially (but not exclusively) if it is undertaken within the confines of loving coupledom?
because it can lead to unwanted consequences (like pregnancy, emotional problems, disease, ect.)

and the fact that people use it for things other than what it is intended for (power, manipulation, ect.)

im pretty sure its because while he has an only begotten son, he never got laid.


not allowing extra-marital sex isnt the same as hating all sex.

There isn't much of a case for hating extra-marital sex even. That really is an annoying little misconception about Christianity. It wasn’t until 1022 when Pope Benedict VIII banned marriages and mistresses for priests and in 1139 Pope Innocent II voided all marriages of priests and all new priests had to divorce their wives. Before that most Catholic priests had several wives and even more mistresses outside of marriage. This was the Judeo-Christian norm for millennia prior. The whole “no sex before marriage” thing wasn’t even a concept until it originated from Saint Augustine (354-430 AD) and even then it wasn’t a Biblical issue or a moral issue but rather a means of regulating population growth in the suffering Roman Empire.

There is not a single condemnation of pre-marital sex in the bible, several examples of it certainly, but no real condemnation.

"If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins." - Exodus 22:16 – 17

At that time marriage was nothing like it is now. Then it was a monetary arrangement between the father and potential husband. The above passage deals with the fact that at the time virgins were worth much more in marriage then non virgins. If a man took a girls virginity outside of marriage he just lowered her “market value” and was required to pay the father according to the loss. Yes it was bullshit but sex being wrong had nothing to do with it.

Final statement, sex is and always was a gift from God. That was pretty much the Jewish view of it and they were very open about performing it and talking about it. What we are dealing with today is pure unadulterated bullshit left over from fucked up Roman Catholic tradition.

Besides, there's wasn't a limit on how many women a man could marry. And I'm pretty sure the bible fails to consider women might be anything other than passive, so they can do pretty much anything; all laws are geared towards men. (The bible could be considered to have something to say against men sleeping with men, but nothing about women sleeping with women, either in or out of marriage, for example)
ive always deeply appreciated that part. for me it helps balance out some of the other more anti-woman parts of the bible.

because it can lead to unwanted consequences (like pregnancy, emotional problems, disease, ect.)Right, but let's assume you're in a non-married, but monogamous relationship. You've either both been tested for STIs (or are virgins - either way, you don't have any). This is the case with my partner and myself. Re: pregnancy, that's always a risk, obviously. Certainly, a stable partnership is probably better for a kid to grow up in but two people can be fully committed to one another and thus raise a stable family without a marriage document.

and the fact that people use it for things other than what it is intended for (power, manipulation, ect.)This is a fair point, but again I don't think that marriage necessarily alleviates such negative consequences. As someone pointed out above, men could have more than one wife at any given point in biblical times, yet women could not have more than one husband - surely that's asserting the power of men over women? Furthermore, having multiple wives could have been construed as some sort of status symbol.

and the fact that people use it for things other than what it is intended for (power, manipulation, ect.)

I remember giving a presentation on promiscuity in evolutionary psychology at uni a couple years ago; made a similar point about how sex, being in of itself a highly pleasant activity, became a tool, or a solution to situations, used way, way out of context.

In the context of this thread, I think the debate's a bit too shallow. The christian (jewish as well? dunno enough about that) god presented in the bible isn't _all that_ interested in sex per se. Rather, the focus is on control of both individual and societal urges and desires. Owing to the widespread use of sexuality in human interactions, it's inevitable that sex gets a fair bit of 'quote time', particularly in the more prescriptive bits of the bible.

The meat of debate could look at how religions, in our societies, need to reinvent themselves; it's no longer enough to give prescriptions for behaviour and simply ban everything else on pain of... well, pain... Mibbe they should look at the individual more than the group, say their message is more about having the ability, rights, and legal position to do xyz, but nonetheless _choosing_ not to do so. That'd make them reexamine their beliefs for logical and ethical consistancy (instead of 'god sed so'), and be more acceptable to non-believers looking on.

Imagine that, religions getting along with one another!

Agreed, but what's so wrong with extra-marital sex anyway, especially (but not exclusively) if it is undertaken within the confines of loving coupledom?
because if you are a loving couple why arent you married? what about your children?? sex is a pair-bonding kinda thing not to be taken lightly. you "do it" with the person you are going to be with for the rest of your life as evidenced by your marrying her

now if youre gay, you have a bit of a problem eh? since when the bible was written there was no concept of being straight or gay. men were men and might end up fucking anything. gay relationships were considered to be "on the side" and thus not appropriate wiithin the "pairbondsex" stuff talked about above.

god, who obviously knew the truth all along, really shoulda passed that on to one of the prophets so that gay people could be married (and thus have sin free sex) the same as anyone else.

Or how about option D?

"Many of those, if not most, who criticise faith do so out of total ignorance as to what it's all about." :)


Calling someone an idiot then following it with a smilie doesn't take away the fact that you just insulted someone.

So far, all i've seen YOU contribute is insults. How about commenting on the actual topic?

I dont think God hates sex, in fact, as the creator of the life he was the main responsable of have give us the way to reproduce we use, in fact what I think God dislike is how we use sex to satisfice our own egoism and opress and betray other people.

if god does not hates sex , why he took the horny Lilith from Adams side and gave him the boring eve ??:confused:

Calling someone an idiot then following it with a smilie doesn't take away the fact that you just insulted someone.

So far, all i've seen YOU contribute is insults. How about commenting on the actual topic?
Pray tell how that was an insult! And, if you think I haven't contributed you obviously haven't been reading. Try actually, you know ... pausing long enough to read my post on Song of Solomon, for example! :p

on the other side....who cares ?
maybe he doesn´t hate sex because he does not know , that it exists

:D another smilie follows the text....huuuu

God did create sex, but he created it with a context in mind. That contex being a marriage. Marriage is the best place for a physical relationship. A commited, monogmous, loving relationship, God knows this because he invented sex. Now some people say "Why do you need a piece of paper to prove you love each other?". The answer is that the piece of paper is a contract, a binding document between the two married partners and God. Its a promise to remain together. With divorce these days however the value of that promise has gone down and down in my estimation. Divorce makes marriage cheeper where as God gave it a value beyond mesure. He wanted us to enjoy love to its fullest.

because if you are a loving couple why arent you married?Why should you be married? What does marriage add?
My brother and his girlfriend have been together for over ten years, probably closer to 15 even. Beats the hell out of a 3-year marriage.

if god does not hates sex , why he took the horny Lilith from Adams side and gave him the boring eve ??:confused:I think some people might like to know who Lillith is. afaik she doesn't feature in the bible.

Ok i would say if god was against sex it was because he had to rape mary to get jesus (immaculate conception my ass-she didnt consent) and is ashamed so proclaimed it evil.

Calling someone an idiot then following it with a smilie doesn't take away the fact that you just insulted someone.

So far, all i've seen YOU contribute is insults. How about commenting on the actual topic?
I see you've chosen to not respond, so perhaps YOURS was the "insult."


I would love to know how this was an "insult:"
Or how about option D?

"Many of those, if not most, who criticise faith do so out of total ignorance as to what it's all about." :)
Do you plan to tell me, or do you just like tossing out random allegations without any substantiation? Hmmm? :D

Why should you be married? What does marriage add?
My brother and his girlfriend have been together for over ten years, probably closer to 15 even. Beats the hell out of a 3-year marriage.
duh
because god hates extramarital sex. thats what the thread is about!

Why should you be married? What does marriage add?
My brother and his girlfriend have been together for over ten years, probably closer to 15 even. Beats the hell out of a 3-year marriage.
why not get married?

besides marriage adds protection for your spouse (is my most non-religious argument) they can make decisions for you when you are sick, can get your stuff when you die, and don't have to testify against you in court when you get in trouble.;)

This god (who they call JHWH) that you talk about is just the tribegod of the jews , he didnt create humanity, he is just a 'minor' god, not important at all.
If you are such a biblefan you should know about 'the other people' in the land of Nod.:D

God did create sex, but he created it with a context in mind. That contex being a marriage. Marriage is the best place for a physical relationship. A commited, monogmous, loving relationship, God knows this because he invented sex. I'm pretty sure Adam and Eve never actually married. Of course it was a very monogamous relationship, there being no other people on the planet at the time.

Now some people say "Why do you need a piece of paper to prove you love each other?". The answer is that the piece of paper is a contract, a binding document between the two married partners and God. Its a promise to remain together.So people, and least of all God, can't make a promise and keep it, without writing it on a piece of paper? Adam and Eve didn't have paper.. :rolleyes:
Marriage should be more than a contract. Or rather, a loving relationship should not entail a contract, nor a contract a loving relationship. They are different things.

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p


God never says sex is evil. In fact, sex is considered holy in the Bible. What God hates is how man, in his sinfulness, has distorted God's original plan for sex. God created sex not only for reproductive purposes, but also to demonstrate physically the bond between a husband and his wife. Just as God "married" his bride (Israel), and has stayed true to her, God designed us to marry someone of the opposite sex to stay true to our entire life. But of course, men and women, being sinful and rebelious and all, constantly pervert
God's creations. That is why God speaks so much about how homosexuality and and sex outside marriage is wrong: because thats not how He designed it.

God dosn't hate sex, he just hates it OUSIDE OF MARRAIGE. The Bible dosn't make anyone guilty who has sex after being married, it is when they are OUTSIDE of marraige that it is wrong and called "adultery."

Obviously you never actually looked at it, God doesn't "hate sex". He invented it...The bible just says sex outside of marriage is a sin.

God never says sex is evil. In fact, sex is considered holy in the Bible. What God hates is how man, in his sinfulness, has distorted God's original plan for sex. God created sex not only for reproductive purposes, but also to demonstrate physically the bond between a husband and his wife. Just as God "married" his bride (Israel), and has stayed true to her, God designed us to marry someone of the opposite sex to stay true to our entire life. But of course, men and women, being sinful and rebelious and all, constantly pervert
God's creations. That is why God speaks so much about how homosexuality and and sex outside marriage is wrong: because thats not how He designed it.

What a load of bollocks.

why not get married?Countering 'Why' with 'why not'.. hmmm, doesn't advance the topic much.
Why not? Because I don't feel it has any value. Marriage means nothing these days, with everybody getting divorced willy-nilly. And didn't mean much centuries ago either, when you were simply pressured or forced into it.
And the term has a lot of other baggage I don't care for. But I suppose it has a nice ceremony, and in so much I don't care for it, I don't much care against it either. But I can see reasons people would rather forego it.

besides marriage adds protection for your spouse (is my most non-religious argument) they can make decisions for you when you are sick, can get your stuff when you die, and don't have to testify against you in court when you get in trouble.;)I suppose it has some legal benefits, but you can get all those things worked out outside of marriage just as well (it's just not as automatic).

because if you are a loving couple why arent you married? what about your children?? sex is a pair-bonding kinda thing not to be taken lightly. you "do it" with the person you are going to be with for the rest of your life as evidenced by your marrying herI am in a loving couple, but neither of us have any desire to get married any time soon. Why? Various factors, but the most pressing one is that we want to make absolutely certain that we're compatible - sexually and otherwise - before marriage by living together first. I imagine we are very far from unique in this situation. Also, why do we need a marriage certificate and ceremony to confirm that we're a loving couple? We already know that.

As regards children, my boyfriend and I don't have or want any, but as I stated earlier, there are many non-married couples who bring their children up in a stable, loving home. My boyfriend's mother and her partner are the best example I personally know of this; they have two great children but never even considered getting married.

I see you've chosen to not respond, so perhaps YOURS was the "insult."


I would love to know how this was an "insult:"

Do you plan to tell me, or do you just like tossing out random allegations without any substantiation? Hmmm? :D


Uhhh...i didnt respond immediately because i actually have a LIFE and other things to do than watch this board.

It was insulting because you inferred that the OP was ignorant. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them ignorant. And adding a smiley doesn't take away the sting.

I only commented on it because i see a lot of that out of you in most of the threads you comment on. You use veiled insults all the time, and add a smiley like that makes it okay.

My comment on the topic is the same as others have made, so i didnt think it useful to add mine. I don't think God hates sex. I think religious zealots want people to believe that God hates sex. I believe it is because the religious zealots want to take God as far away from Nature as possible, to differentiate themselves from those who worship nature. So anything "natural' must be NOT of God, and therefore BAD. I agree with the comment on the illogic of the bible.

All the comments i might have made were already made, except for calling Euthrusra out on his 'hostility in smilie clothing'.

Counter 'Why' with 'why not'.. hmmm doesn't advance the topic much.
Why not? Because I don't feel it has any value. Marriage means nothing these days, with everybody getting divorced willy-nilly. And didn't mean much centuries ago, when you were simply pressured or forced into it either.
The term has a lot of baggage I don't care for. But it has a nice ceremony, and in so much I don't care for it, I don't much care against it either. But I can see reasons people would rather forego it.
true, I should have come up with a better argument.

I got married because I wanted to spend the rest of my life with my husband. (a lot of people these days get married for the wrong reasons, and that is why there is so much divorce)

I suppose it has some legal benefits, but you can get all those things worked out outside of marriage just as well (it's just not as automatic).
true again. I have seen too many people that were "together" for 30 years but never got married (or took care of the legal stuff) and it ends up causing them problems.

What a load of bollocks.
Oh? Care to explain that to the rest of us unenlightened ones?

God did create sex, but he created it with a context in mind. That contex being a marriage. Marriage is the best place for a physical relationship. A commited, monogmous, loving relationship, God knows this because he invented sex. Now some people say "Why do you need a piece of paper to prove you love each other?". The answer is that the piece of paper is a contract, a binding document between the two married partners and God. Its a promise to remain together. With divorce these days however the value of that promise has gone down and down in my estimation. Divorce makes marriage cheeper where as God gave it a value beyond mesure. He wanted us to enjoy love to its fullest.

Bullshit. Marriage was a turnover of property rights between the wife’s father and the husband. Even during marriage the husband was free to engage in sexual intercourse with as many concubines and mistresses as he damn well pleased (so long as they weren't married) and marry as many other women as he could afford. Monogamy was not at any point a Biblical principle but rather a forced legal condition originating under the Roman Catholic Church that now only exists as a tradition blindly excepted.

Sexuality and sexual intercourse were never condemned at ANY point in the Bible. All we have are the social and financial ramifications surrounding the ancient idea of marriage.

Sexual immorality on the other hand WAS condemned. The words “sexual immorality” as they appear in the English translation of the Bible comes from the Greek word “porneia” which is very specific and refers to four general points. They are as follows…

1) Sex during women's menstruation. Ehhh, I don’t think I need to elaborate. O.o

2) Adultery which was biblically understood to refer to a married women engaging in sexual intercourse outside of her marriage and a married man engaging in sexual intercourse with another man’s wife. This was a issue of violating property rights. As I said before a man could marry as many women as he could afford and have sex with as many unmarried women as he damn well pleased.

3) Sexual idolatry which biblically referred to the temple prostitutes of pagan gods and goddesses (think Aphrodite and Dionysus). This could be viewed in a similar light as eating food prepared as a sacrifice to pagan gods and not prostitution in general which was and still is widely accepted as normal among the Jews.

4) Pederasty, which was viewed as one of the worst sexual sins, and took various forms. First, the coupling of an older man and a young boy (common among the Greeks of the day – think Catholic priest scandal). Second, the practice of slave prostitution and homosexual (call boys). Third, forced homosexual intercourse for the purpose of degradation (think prison rape). At the time this took the form of soldiers violating enemies they defeated in battle, and also as a way to drive out or publicly humiliate someone as was the case in the Sodom and Gomorra story.

Beyond that, sex was great!

Uhhh...i didnt respond immediately because i actually have a LIFE and other things to do than watch this board.

It was insulting because you inferred that the OP was ignorant. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them ignorant. And adding a smiley doesn't take away the sting.

I only commented on it because i see a lot of that out of you in most of the threads you comment on. You use veiled insults all the time, and add a smiley like that makes it okay.

All the comments i might have made were already made, except for calling Euthrusra out on his 'hostility in smilie clothing'.
Feel better now? Perahps in the future, if you prefer to equate "ignorance" with being an "idiot," it would be wise to not respond to that sort of post. There are several good online dictionaries to which I can refer you if you like.

As to my personal posts and your allegations of "smilie hostility," all I can say is that you choose to interpret my posts and any smilies contained therein as "hostiliy." It's just as easy to interpret them as my personal viewpoints with smiles added for emphasis. Either way, flaming me is not the way to get me to change anything.

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p

First of all, God doesn't hate sex. He just expects us to use it in marriage. Marital sex is in no way condemned in the Bible.

Secondly, you're an atheist because you don't agree with what you perceive as the Bible's views on sex? How ludicrous. That's like saying you don't believe G.W. Bush exists because you don't agree with his politics. What exists, exists! You can't do anything about that!

What exists, exists! You can't do anything about that!Indeed, but there is very little testable evidence to suggest that God does.

Why should you be married? What does marriage add?
My brother and his girlfriend have been together for over ten years, probably closer to 15 even. Beats the hell out of a 3-year marriage.

You make a very good point: the whole marriage thing isn't about sex, it's about commitment and responsibility.
God does not hate sex; the New Testament actually encourages it within marriage...
Why? Because sex is an unbreakable bond between two persons. And it's an awesome experience, to boot.
The concept of marriage was designed to keep the two parties responsible for this bond. It is a public declaration of mutual devotion. The civil institution of marriage (dowries, contracts, etc.) was designed to keep the couple accountable to each other and to society. In essence, marriage exists to protect the relationship and enforce monogomy.

These three-year marriages occur when people are only too willing to rush into things, enjoy it, and then break off at the first sign of trouble. It's an insult to the institution. Divorce is too easy... it was actually originally created for severance in case of infidelity, which would in theory ruin the relationship anyway.
In a way, it's ironic, I know, some people put more effort into the basic unmarried relationship than married. They do it because they want the relationship to go on, not just because they're expected to.

Not that I'm dissing marriage... I've been dating the same woman for almost five years now, and we have mutally agreed (somewhat reluctantly) not to have sex until we can hold each other legally accountable and responsible. The only thing putting off our wedding is my rather poor financial situation: I'm not going to vow to take care of her if I don't think I can. There are a couple of minor social and religious influences involved, too, but it is mostly that reason.

God doesn't hate sex, God just hates the fact that people abuse it.

God created adam and eve not adam and steve that is why homosexuality is wrong but other than that god is not against the act but rather how we proceed with the act. as St. Paul says all things are permisible for me but not all things are benificial. So the thing is not that it is right our wrong but rather is it helpfull or harmfull to ourselves. sex is harmfull to one mentaly and physicly when done outside of marige. think of all the stds that is the physical part if you remain abstanent till after mariage for both partners you have a very slim chance of getting a std. on a mental note think about how you would feel sleeping with some one who may have slept with others before you and might leave you the next day and move one to another the next. security becomes an issue. Plus what are the real benifits of sex? it is the child that is born as a rusult. homos can not get children by having sex with the same sex. this child also will be affected by the strength of the parents relationship the stronger it is the better the child will be. Marrige is like a sort of insurance of a relationship. Thanks to devorce though that has become weaker. That is what makes divorce bad. Sex itsself is not wrong it is infact just and good in marrige

Indeed, but there is very little testable evidence to suggest that God does.

There is very little testable evidence of your existance, either (at least to me). So far as I know, you're just a computer-generated program designed to give stock inane answers to certain statements. In fact, judging by some of the "issues" on NationStates, I'd say that the majority of people who post here aren't real.

Piekrom']God created adam and eve not adam and steve that is why homosexuality is wrong but other than that god is not against the act but rather how we proceed with the act. as St. Paul says all things are permisible for me but not all things are benificial. So the thing is not that it is right our wrong but rather is it helpfull or harmfull to ourselves. sex is harmfull to one mentaly and physicly when done outside of marige. think of all the stds that is the physical part if you remain abstanent till after mariage for both partners you have a very slim chance of getting a std. on a mental note think about how you would feel sleeping with some one who may have slept with others before you and might leave you the next day and move one to another the next. security becomes an issue. Plus what are the real benifits of sex? it is the child that is born as a rusult. homos can not get children by having sex with the same sex. this child also will be affected by the strength of the parents relationship the stronger it is the better the child will be. Marrige is like a sort of insurance of a relationship. Thanks to devorce though that has become weaker. That is what makes divorce bad. Sex itsself is not wrong it is infact just and good in marrige

*Shakes head and grimaces in anguish*

Howdy folks.
Once more I plead for decency. Enough of the name calling. Enough of the useless Christian/Atheist bashing. Enough of the unsubstantiated claims. Can we please have a reasonable discussion without the useless crap coming in?
That said, let me throw out a few points here. I know some very conservative Christians, yet not a one of them will say that sex is an inherently evil thing; rather they would say it is a truly holy event. The best representation I have heard so far is that sex is encouraged by God in a specific context, as stated previously on this thread. Without this context, sex is perverted. Sex is an ability all people have, and like all abilities, can be used wisely for good or stupidly for evil. With that summary completed, may I ask the group what is wrong with this definition, or why they would say this definition is illogical? Please, can we not have the simple "ur a dum christian idiot" responses? I'm actually looking for a good discussion here, if anyone is willing to have it.
- Brian Chut
Official Religious Emissary, Tyslan

Piekrom']God created adam and eve not adam and steve that is why homosexuality is wrong

That statement makes no sense. Adam and Eve just implies God did not dislike the idea of a man and a woman together - it says nothing about His views on 2 males or 2 females coupling.

God doesn't hate sex

Why would he.
God doesn't hate gays, the people who wrote the bible did. God encourages people to be diverse but people like you who make topics like this encourage people to think god is a guy who has no fun and wants everyone to be bored.

Piekrom']God created adam and eve not adam and steve that is why homosexuality is wrong God didn't create clothes, so clothes are wrong. So get nekkid, right now!

Indeed, but there is very little testable evidence to suggest that God does.

Can we not get into this debate?

The question "Why should God hate sex?" immediately assumes that there is a God.

I know that this is a major philosophical stretch for many,
so perhaps could we consider it a hypothetical situation?

Can we operate this forum with that assumption in mind?

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p

the bible never says that sex is evil also all of the jewish preists could get mairried if they wanted to.

Whee! The most popular thread I have ever created! 5 pages so far!

Seriously, I can see that perhaps not all my points in the initial post were too well thought out. It began as a semi - humourous topic, and evolved from there.

Just one thing - the person who said "you became an atheist just because you didn't agree with the bible on sex". Thats not true, I have several other reasons for being an atheist (e.g. size of universe, more convincing explanations througfh science, etc), all of which came about well before this.

Piekrom']Plus what are the real benifits of sex?Relaxation, increased health, it's a good exercise, promotes bonding, etc
Plenty of objective benefits.

Can we not get into this debate?

The question "Why should God hate sex?" immediately assumes that there is a God.

I know that this is a major philosophical stretch for many,
so perhaps could we consider it a hypothetical situation?

Can we operate this forum with that assumption in mind?

No
the question is about God liking sex. Not "is god real"

did someone really post that. There are a load of benefits to sex.

What a dumb ass

Indeed, but there is very little testable evidence to suggest that God does.

True, but under Cartesian philosophy there's more evidence that God exists than Bush.







Of course, that's under Cartesian philosophy

Howdy folks.
Once more I plead for decency. Enough of the name calling. Enough of the useless Christian/Atheist bashing. Enough of the unsubstantiated claims. Can we please have a reasonable discussion without the useless crap coming in?
That said, let me throw out a few points here. I know some very conservative Christians, yet not a one of them will say that sex is an inherently evil thing; rather they would say it is a truly holy event. The best representation I have heard so far is that sex is encouraged by God in a specific context, as stated previously on this thread. Without this context, sex is perverted. Sex is an ability all people have, and like all abilities, can be used wisely for good or stupidly for evil. With that summary completed, may I ask the group what is wrong with this definition, or why they would say this definition is illogical? Please, can we not have the simple "ur a dum christian idiot" responses? I'm actually looking for a good discussion here, if anyone is willing to have it.
- Brian Chut
Official Religious Emissary, Tyslan

Well... sex in humans existed before christianity or judiasm came on the scene (for c.97,000 years of homo sap.'s existence, in fact!) - ergo it came to be be used in certain 'contexts', as you say - isn't your god coming to the party slightly late, as it were? Did those humans before about 1500 BC get a 'free ride' (:p)as it were? Why (morally, or logically-for-God)?

Sex is the physical expression of love between a couple, a beautiful thing. For me. That's a reflection of the way I was brought up. Why is this automatically right? Why can't sex be less 'meaningful', experienced for its physical pleasures? What's wrong, morally (as opposed to preventable mishaps such as STDs and unwanted pregnancies), with that?

Yes it is pretty obvious thatBush exists but of course if you really think God does not exist

Look at the ton of evidence. the bible for one. During the 1st years of AD hardly anyone would bother writing a book that big for the hell of it. Look at jesus who proclaimed so much that God was real that he died. We have proof from the roman records that Jesus was alive after his crucifictin and burial

Yes it is pretty obvious thatBush exists but of course if you really think God does not exist

Look at the ton of evidence. the bible for one. During the 1st years of AD hardly anyone would bother writing a book that big for the hell of it. Look at jesus who proclaimed so much that God was real that he died. We have proof from the roman records that Jesus was alive after his crucifictin and burial

Hehe - study Cartesian philosophy first, then comment on it :p

Of course, I could explain it, but I can't be bothered - it'd take ages. If you really wanna know more buy Descartes' 'Meditations and other metaphysical writings'. If you can understand it (it is, in places, horribly complicated lol) it's rather interesting.

The question is "If God exists, does he hate sex?" not "does God exist?"

Onelast point on "does God exist?" though (sorry for the hypocrisy :p ) We have records which proved that Jesus existed, and called himself the son of God. We Have proof that Caesar called himself a God. This isn't NECCESARILY to say that one, or both, or neither, were Gods.

Hehe - study Cartesian philosophy first, then comment on it

Of course, I could explain it, but I can't be bothered - it'd take ages. If you really wanna know more buy Descartes' 'Meditations and other metaphysical writings'. If you can understand it (it is, in places, horribly complicated lol) it's rather interesting.

i havent studied cartesian philosophy I never said I did
and I dont want too. I just said tht there is loads of proof that Jesus exists spakka

Look at the ton of evidence. the bible for one. During the 1st years of AD hardly anyone would bother writing a book that big for the hell of it.Explain other books, older books, like those from India, claiming a whole set of other gods are real.

We have proof from the roman records that Jesus was alive after his crucifictin and burialI'm gonna call your bluff. Prove it, show us those records, or where they are, articles about it, anything.

First I wish to thank Elgesh for giving me a good response. Second, I wish to slap Richardsky in his metaphorical face. Sorry man, but really, if you can disprove God, then you have done something no philosopher has ever been able to do. I mean not even his Excellency himself, Bertrand Russel. So if you have this magnificant proof against God, I demand you present it here so as to enlighten the world itself. However, if instead you make broad claims without logical back up so as to make a point, then I ask you withdraw this logical fallacy of a point.
Sorry for that rant, allow me to continue. Addressing Elgesh once more, you present the pre-Christian humans and their ideas of sex. As a thought (this may be incorrect, I'm improvising here), perhaps God lowered restrictions do to generic immaturity. It would be like how you treat a child, would you give the newborn the same rules and expectations as the developed culture? I say not, so therefore I feel God relaxing rules upon pre-Judaic humanity is reasonable enough.

As for the purpose of sheer physically pleasing sex, well, I think there is only one point I can really make on this matter. If one believes sex to be beautiful when love is involved, how could one still see it as beautiful without that love being present? Love of physical pleasure, in my opinion, seems a poor substitute. As such, how would you justify perverting a beautiful act by taking away the loving complement to it?
Thank you again for your intelligent comments, they are highly appreciated.
- Brian Chut
Official Religious Emissary, Tyslan

God doesn't hate sex. He just wants it to be something special. Sex is supposed to be something two people do when they really love eachother, not something you do to pass the time. Plus, the bible was written before the pill and safe abortians. God doesn't want a bunch of homeless kids running around and dying. If you had sex in those days, you expected a kid.
But now, thanks to those trying their best to be different from past generations, sex is just something you do to pass the time. It's cheaper than air now. It's the basis for marriage now. It's considered the perfect substitute for love. Women can divorce their husbands just because they want that hot guy right there. Men can divorce their wives just because they aren't as hot as they were a decade ago. God wants it to be something a loving couple do, not two people with too much time on their hands. It's like alcohol and god is the government. Alcohol is great. It's good for your heart(literally). Too much beer can lead you to die and/or kill someone else. The government doesn't like that. That's why the government doesn't want you speeding down residential areas when you're too drunk to see. Alcohol is supposed to be a special drink that sometimes brings pleasure, not something to do when you're not busy.
Sex=good, as long as it is done by a loving couple and not too horny teenagers who don't even know eachother. Marriage is now too cheap to be effective.

Gid doesn't hate sex, he just hates it when its before marriage...

Look at the ton of evidence. the bible for one. During the 1st years of AD hardly anyone would bother writing a book that big for the hell of it. Look at jesus who proclaimed so much that God was real that he died. We have proof from the roman records that Jesus was alive after his crucifictin and burial

Check your facts ;) Most of the new testament was written well after Jesus supposedly lived. Those Roman records you speak of do not exist - nor did anyone else from that time consider it necessary to write something down about that Jesus fellow. If you don't believe me- try to find a single document specifically mentioning Jesus Christ written in the first century AD.

But there already is a topic for this "historical Jesus" part of the discussion.

Gid doesn't hate sex, he just hates it when its before marriage...

I swear, no one reads my posts. I guess they just aren't offensive, ignorant, or inflammatory enough to warrant attention. *le sigh*

I swear, no one reads my posts. I guess they just aren't offensive, ignorant, or inflammatory enough to warrant attention. *le sigh*Maybe if you used bigger letters, more numbers, random capitalization and blinking colors, people would pay more attention ;)

you present the pre-Christian humans and their ideas of sex. As a thought (this may be incorrect, I'm improvising here), perhaps God lowered restrictions do to generic immaturity. It would be like how you treat a child, would you give the newborn the same rules and expectations as the developed culture? I say not, so therefore I feel God relaxing rules upon pre-Judaic humanity is reasonable enough.

As for the purpose of sheer physically pleasing sex, well, I think there is only one point I can really make on this matter. If one believes sex to be beautiful when love is involved, how could one still see it as beautiful without that love being present? Love of physical pleasure, in my opinion, seems a poor substitute. As such, how would you justify perverting a beautiful act by taking away the loving complement to it?
Thank you again for your intelligent comments, they are highly appreciated.
- Brian Chut
Official Religious Emissary, Tyslan

Hey guy :) Here's hoping for many more fruitful (more-fruitful...?:p) discussions in future :cool:

Generic Social Immaturity idea. We-ll... it depends what you consider a mature, 'developed' society. Certainly at the time of origin of the jews as a distinct entity, the Egyptian civilisation was already nearing its _decline_! It had been on the go for 1500-2000 years by then - the same length of time that seperates us from Jesus! It's hard to see how a desert tribe was more sophisticated socially than any other of the time, let alone larger, older civilisations.

And of course I'm only using Egypt as an example - there're plently more, but I'm much less familiar with them. Check out Ur, Gilgamesh, the Stele of the Vultures, or Assyria on google for a couple of handy references.

Also, since when was one's society's maturity a prerequisite for _personal_, _individual_ morality? If God is eternal and unchanging, that sort of concern must always have been important to him, ney? Why then does it only manifest itself so very late on in the existence of humanity?

As for the physical pleasure of sex bit > I only experience sex as a 'beautiful', important act because of the way I was raised. A) It's not inherently so, only a product of my socialisation. Ergo, it's not neccessarily 'true'. B) because of A), I can't justify telling other people what they're doing wrong!

I still don't get why sex outside of marriage (of whatever form) is immoral That was my main point, sorry if I obscured it!

i havent studied cartesian philosophy I never said I did
and I dont want too. I just said tht there is loads of proof that Jesus exists spakka

Alright, chill out :p we're all friends here. I wasn't saying you had studied it, but you did contradict it, so I was just saying... oh never mind lol, it really doesn't matter.

Maybe if you used bigger letters, more numbers, random capitalization and blinking colors, people would pay more attention ;)

I suppose it's worth a shot, but I think I would prefer engaging in something less wholly unpleasant...

Like having Yiddish profanity etched on to my back with battery acid.

God doesn't hate sex. God loves sex. God loves square sex, kinky sex, toy sex, clean sex, dirty sex, all positions of sex. because God created sex, he loves it. the only exceptions to this rule are homosexual sex and extra-marital sex. because God didn't create men to have sex with men, he created them to have sex with women. and he knows things in life are so much easier if you don't have affairs, and he also knows things go easier for you if you only ever have sex with your wife/husband. an example of that; if you have sex with like, 50 people before you get married, and a single one of those people was hotter than/better than/otherwise preferable to your spouse, then you won't enjoy sex with him/her nearly as much as you otherwise would. but if you only ever have sex with one person, you won't be able to imagine better sex, and so you'll be happier with what you have, and less tempted to have affairs/get divorced/etc. there are many other practical reasons too. but the bottem line is, God doesn't care how many people you have sex with or how often or in what way, he just doesn't want you to get hurt. so he lays down rules, like a mother telling her children not to talk to strangers.

an example of that; if you have sex with like, 50 people before you get married, and a single one of those people was hotter than/better than/otherwise preferable to your spouse, then you won't enjoy sex with him/her nearly as much as you otherwise would. but if you only ever have sex with one person, you won't be able to imagine better sex, and so you'll be happier with what you have, and less tempted to have affairs/get divorced/etc. there are many other practical reasons too.Right, but you can turn that on its head. If you have sex with even one person before marriage, you can determine whether or not you enjoy sex with that person. Sex is only one part of a relationship, obviously, but if you aren't sexually compatible - whether you've tested that with others or not - it can lead to problems.

Part of me wishes I had not had sex with my ex, but on the other hand, I know that the sex I experience now is truly excellent, precisely because I have something to compare it with. There is a danger that if I had not done that, I would have been wondering what it was like with other people. The point is that 'testing the water' with more than one person can be positive, in that when you finally get great sex, it makes you realise it and appreciate it all the more.

Right, but you can turn that on its head. If you have sex with even one person before marriage, you can determine whether or not you enjoy sex with that person. Sex is only one part of a relationship, obviously, but if you aren't sexually compatible - whether you've tested that with others or not - it can lead to problems.

Part of me wishes I had not had sex with my ex, but on the other hand, I know that the sex I experience now is truly excellent, precisely because I have something to compare it with. There is a danger that if I had not done that, I would have been wondering what it was like with other people. The point is that 'testing the water' with more than one person can be positive, in that when you finally get great sex, it makes you realise it and appreciate it all the more.

that's true. but little kids can also find weird people downtown who actually just wanna give away candy. that doesn't make it safe to take candy from strangers. if the person you loved sucked, what would you do? seperate just to find better sex? you got lucky, but it won't always happen that way. better safe than sorry seems to be a better idea to me.

Because the bible was written by men and men have wanted to control access to womens uality since time began. And these were especially narrow minded, bigoted men. I'd love to do that, but unfortunately I don't know what a woman's uality is, and I'd probably be arrested if I tried to find it.

Anyway… sex is fine, lust is bad.
That… probably didn't make much sense.

if the person you loved sucked, what would you do? seperate just to find better sex?I think a large part of the issue is not poor sex in and of itself. Oftentimes, if you're having rubbish sex with someone you love (or think you love), it's symptomatic rather than causal of some bigger issue within the relationship. In other words, in some cases anyway, you are not completely compatible on x number of levels and that is merely manifested through crap sex. If you are not completely compatible, then maybe marriage is not such a good idea.

I appreciate that this is a huge generalisation, but I think it reflects the truth for some couples. Obviously, I'm talking about bad sex over a sustained period here - not just the odd night!

I am in a loving couple, but neither of us have any desire to get married any time soon. Why? Various factors, but the most pressing one is that we want to make absolutely certain that we're compatible - sexually and otherwise - before marriage by living together first. I imagine we are very far from unique in this situation. Also, why do we need a marriage certificate and ceremony to confirm that we're a loving couple? We already know that.

As regards children, my boyfriend and I don't have or want any, but as I stated earlier, there are many non-married couples who bring their children up in a stable, loving home. My boyfriend's mother and her partner are the best example I personally know of this; they have two great children but never even considered getting married.
well there ya go

too bad your and my opinion of the value of marriage isnt the topic eh?

the question is GOD'S opinion of sex outside of marriage (or of sex in general)

you got a problem with god's opinion, take it to HIM not me.

the question is GOD'S opinion of sex outside of marriage (or of sex in general)

you got a problem with god's opinion, take it to HIM not me.But we can't know God's opinion on the matter.
There's no commandment in the bible "thou shalt have no sex before marriage" Just that you shouldn't be adulterous. And if nobody is married nobody could be adulterous in the first place.
God remains silent on the subject, because he doesn't care. As long as we're nice to each other, "love thy neighbour as [well as] thyself".

But we can't know God's opinion on the matter.
There's no commandment in the bible "thou shalt have no sex before marriage" Just that you shouldn't be adulterous. And if nobody is married nobody could be adulterous in the first place.
God remains silent on the subject, because he doesn't care. As long as we're nice to each other, "love thy neighbour as [well as] thyself". There is a command that people who have sex before marriage must marry as soon as possible - but that's in the Mosaic law.

Sleeping around, whoring around and sexual immorality are definitely discouraged both by Jesus and the apostles.

There is a command that people who have sex before marriage must marry as soon as possible - but that's in the Mosaic law.Wasn't that the one mentioned earlier? Either pay a dowry and take her as a wife, or otherwise compensate the father.

Sleeping around, whoring around and sexual immorality are definitely discouraged both by Jesus and the apostles.I can't say I've heard Jesus on the matter much (he was quite forgiving with whores. In fact the bible is riddled with whores and sons of whores doing important things)

God didn't create clothes, so clothes are wrong. So get nekkid, right now!

Actualy god did creat clothes when adam and eve were kiked out of paradice god created some clothing for them to cover themselves.

No
the question is about God liking sex. Not "is god real"

That's what I said!

Piekrom']Actualy god did creat clothes when adam and eve were kiked out of paradice god created some clothing for them to cover themselves.

?! Are you sure? Wasn't this how God found out Adam and Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit, them _wearing_ clothes in the Garden? I think you've some reading to do.

(I haven't read all of the responses in this thread, so please forgive me if I repeat something somebody has already said)

God does not hate sex. Sex is a pleasureable act, when committed within the confines of marriage. Once you're married, you can have sex on the kitchen table and then do it again in the pool...the point is to do it with the partner that you have sworn before God and Man to serve your entire life.

Generally, though, sex is seen as a lustful thing...so Christians are told to avoid it to avoid lust. It's a give and take. It's the best thing in the world when done right, and the most evil thing when done wrong.

Then again, that's from a completely religious standpoint. Christian, in other words. I'm very religious, so that would be my explanation to ya'll.

God doesn't hate sex. He created it to be very good. He celebrated it in the Song of Solomon. He even allowed for polygamy and Solomon had enough women to have like one a day for an entire year, or some nonsense like that. And some of those weren't wives, they were concubines. And did God say "I hate that"? Um, nope. So I dare say God doesn't even hate sex outside marriage! (I know a lot of the other Christians here will dislike that, but look at the evidence, folks.) God clearly created marriage as a reflection of his relationship with his own people - a commitment designed not to be broken. I kinda figure it's better, if you're going to split up, not to get married and just live together than to make vows before God and people and then break them. Plus, what's the difference between having a committed relationship and being married? Basically, being married is being committed, and at least that way you're not being hypocritical when/if you ever break up.

Just because Christians traditionally are prudes and are scared to talk about sex, or anything related to sex doesn't mean God is a prude and scared of sex too. Christians are also traditionally scared to talk about a freakin lot of other things they should be able to talk about. Christians never admit they do anything wrong. They seem to prefer to avoid all reality and live in a nice pretend world where there is no sex, no sin, and nothing but 50s housewives a la Stepford. Does that mean that's how Christians are supposed to be? Um, NO. Does that mean that's how GOD is? Heh, um, NO. Does that mean that's how all Christians are? Still no.

Sex is good. (Understatement of the day.) It's not ALWAYS good, though. Everyone agrees it has its right time and place. It's not good when you're 6. It's not good when it's forced. There's a lot of middle ground between marriage and those, and where people think "good" turns into "bad" varies, even if they all agree on the extremes.

Now for the middle ground. Obviously, God created marriage to house sex. Logically, I'd think he'd at least on some level disapprove of sex outside marriage, but he certainly made a lot of allowances for it in the Old Testament, so maybe it's not as bad as a lot of people say, even if it is sin. And I think it's pretty clear that, whether you like it or not, God disapproves of gay sex. And God disapproves of incest.

Basically, He just created bounderies for good things. It's just like anything else - good, but not in excess or inappropriately. Like it's good to eat, but it's bad to eat too much, and it's bad to eat the wrong things. I don't get why everyone doesn't like that.

Mrs. God cheated with Beelzebub

Now for the middle ground. Obviously, God created marriage to house sex. Logically, I'd think he'd at least on some level disapprove of sex outside marriage, but he certainly made a lot of allowances for it in the Old Testament, so maybe it's not as bad as a lot of people say, even if it is sin. And I think it's pretty clear that, whether you like it or not, God disapproves of gay sex. And God disapproves of incest.

Basically, He just created bounderies for good things. It's just like anything else - good, but not in excess or inappropriately. Like it's good to eat, but it's bad to eat too much, and it's bad to eat the wrong things. I don't get why everyone doesn't like that.


Because your boundaries of moderation are likely to be different from mine, mine will be differenet from his, ad infinitum.

God didn't create marriage, by the way. Humans did. It existed thousands of years before God apparently popped into existence at around 1500 BC.

...Once you're married, you can have sex on the kitchen table and then do it again in the pool...

Generally, though, sex is seen as a lustful thing...so Christians are told to avoid it to avoid lust.

It's a give and take. It's the best thing in the world when done right, and the most evil thing when done wrong.

Just a couple things... how do you manage to do it in the pool? I've always found lubrication to be a problem under water. *blush* And wouldn't the chlorine bug you?

How is "lust" different from "desire"? It's certainly not wrong to want it. Is it just desire is for something you are allowed to have and lust is for something you're not?

I wouldn't say it's either best or most evil. Maybe closer to the best, but wouldn't you say, for example, murder is worse than extramarital sex?

Piekrom']Actualy god did creat clothes when adam and eve were kiked out of paradice god created some clothing for them to cover themselves.Really? Could you quote the passage from the bible?

Okay, I'm sorry about the title, but if it was something boring like "a point to ponder" no one would read it. :D

Yesterday It came to me that, according to the bible, God created man. So this means, by extension, God created (*gasp!*) the reproductive system. He also created the capacity for things like homosexuality, etc.

But the bible, the "word of God" spends its time telling everyone how sex is evil, and homosexuality is REALLY terrible, and how enjoying sex is pretty bad too.

So why didn't God come up with a less "nasty", less enjoyable, method of reproduction, that people would only do if they wanted a child. After all, he's all powerful, right? The laws of nature don't have to apply to him.

Based on this theory, God either:

(a) Created Sex, then saw how much fun people had with it (but he'd know that already, being all-seeing and everything). he got jealous, and decided to make people at least feel guilty about it. But if hes all - powerful, why didn't he change it?

(b) just likes messing with people's minds, and making them feel bad about natural processes. Which would be odd, as he's supposed to be a loving god.

So it seems most likely that the bible was written by a bunch of old priests/holy men who didn't get much action, and wanted to make young people feel bad about it.

This is one of the many reasons why I am an athiest :p

Here is how I see it.

1.) God created Sex
2.)God witnessed how great it was, how much fun it is (I assume sex is fun, because I am a virgin.)
3.) God realised that he has no one up there to have sex, so he decides that sex is "bad" and no one should enjoy his creation.

I mean come on, Hookers don't go to heaven, because they have been paid to enjoy something God himself cannot enjoy;)

Really? Could you quote the passage from the bible?

Genesis 3:21-22 "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." "

Genesis 3:21-22 "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." "

So-o-o... before that, they _were_ naked?:confused:

Elgesh']So-o-o... before that, they _were_ naked?:confused:
If that bothers you, then how about this?

Genesis 2:19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

So, God makes man and animal, man searches animal for a mate, man doesn't find said mate, so then God makes woman

does that mean that beastiality was God's original plan?:p

If that bothers you, then how about this?



So, God makes man and animal, man searches animal for a mate, man doesn't find said mate, so then God makes woman

does that mean that beastiality was God's original plan?:p

Heh! that's one way to read it :D

Okay...I'm a Christian...God does not hate sex. He hates premarital sex, that's sex before marriage for those of you that have no idea what it is. Christians should love sex in marriage. They should hate premarital sex. Easy...

The reason God destroyed Soddom and Gamorra was because the people in those cities did every evil act you can imagine. They murdered, commited suicide, raped, had premarital sex, were homosexual, and were lesbian.

God did not create the "capacity for homosexuality", man did. You are not born gay or whatever. It's a choice that you make. Same with Lesbian. Same with bestiality you sick freaks!

Elgesh']So-o-o... before that, they _were_ naked?:confused:

Yes, that's how God knew they had "eaten" of the tree; when they were hiding because of their nakedness, God knew that they didn't know they were naked before, and thus learned of their disobedience.

Genesis 3:21-22 "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." "Ah, ok, thanks :)
I can't be right all the time I guess ;)

Just a couple things... how do you manage to do it in the pool? I've always found lubrication to be a problem under water. *blush* And wouldn't the chlorine bug you?
you have to buy special lubricant.

How is "lust" different from "desire"? It's certainly not wrong to want it. Is it just desire is for something you are allowed to have and lust is for something you're not?
desire is vague, lust is specific.
desire says "I like that guy"
lust says "I would like to have that guy do this........."

I wouldn't say it's either best or most evil. Maybe closer to the best, but wouldn't you say, for example, murder is worse than extramarital sex?
all sins are equal in the eyes of God. One isn't worse that the other.
You will notice that when people make a list of sins from bad to worst, that the ones they find least offensive are the ones they are most likely to commit themselves, and the ones they think are "worst" are the ones they would never imagine doing.

God did not create the "capacity for homosexuality", man did. You are not born gay or whatever. It's a choice that you make. Same with Lesbian.

Yep, got it in one.

I think I'll be gay tomorrow. Oh wait, I can't, I'm not attracted to other men, damn. I was _so_ looking forward to the snide remarks, fear of outing, telling my parents, insurance companies blackballing me, etc etc. I'll just have to find another way to _voluntarily_ make my life harder.

Idiot.

Elgesh']Heh! that's one way to read it :D
yeah depending on the translation it says "helper" or "mate"

it's just a funny question to ask your Sunday school teacher when they are annoying you.;)

well there ya go

too bad your and my opinion of the value of marriage isnt the topic eh?

the question is GOD'S opinion of sex outside of marriage (or of sex in general)

you got a problem with god's opinion, take it to HIM not me.Whoa, slow down there...at what point was I having a go at you or your beliefs?! I was merely providing reasons for my own based on personal experiences, and I fail to see how it was as dramatically off-topic as you seem to believe with the above post. Yes, God's opinion on sex is the topic, but my comments that you were so dissatisfied with were surely in that context, since they were a response to the general Christian viewpoint, presumably regarded as that espoused by God also, that sex before marriage is wrong for x reasons. I was merely detailing why I thought it was not necessarily so.

If you really feel I was somehow hijacking the thread, please post your concerns in the moderation forum.

If that bothers you, then how about this?



So, God makes man and animal, man searches animal for a mate, man doesn't find said mate, so then God makes woman

does that mean that beastiality was God's original plan?:p

Did you know that the Catholic Church recently stated that it no longer stands by the absolute validity of certain parts of the Bible and that the rib story was one of the things declared to be false? I absolutely wouldn’t be surprised if the Church it self was originally responsible for the inaccuracies though.

Here... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html

Okay...I'm a Christian...God does not hate sex. He hates premarital sex, that's sex before marriage for those of you that have no idea what it is. Christians should love sex in marriage. They should hate premarital sex. Easy...

The reason God destroyed Soddom and Gamorra was because the people in those cities did every evil act you can imagine. They murdered, commited suicide, raped, had premarital sex, were homosexual, and were lesbian.

God did not create the "capacity for homosexuality", man did. You are not born gay or whatever. It's a choice that you make. Same with Lesbian. Same with bestiality you sick freaks!
calling people "sick freaks" isn't very Christian-like

Finally, brothers, whatever things are true, whatever things are honorable, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report; if there is any virtue, and if there is any praise, think about these things. Philippians 4:8

I believe that should extend to your speach as well.

it's just a funny question to ask your Sunday school teacher when they are annoying you.;)Yes, that and the incest necessary for Adam and Even to populate the whole earth with their decendants. Who could their children 'marry' except each other :rolleyes:

Did you know that the Catholic Church recently stated that it no longer stands by the absolute validity of certain parts of the Bible and that the rib story was one of the things declared to be false? I absolutely wouldn’t be surprised if the Church it self was originally responsible for the inaccuracies though.

Here... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html
yeah, I really don't care, as I am not Catholic.

Yes, that and the incest necessary for Adam and Even to populate the whole earth with their decendants. Who could their children 'marry' except each other :rolleyes:
what's with the :rolleyes: ?

you mad?

Yes, that and the incest necessary for Adam and Even to populate the whole earth with their decendants. Who could their children 'marry' except each other :rolleyes:

All the people in the 'Land of Nod'? Apparently God didn't make _those_ people, just Adam and Eve. Hmm, one wonders... Any Christian know their lots' teaching on this?

yeah, I really don't care, as I am not Catholic.

Yeah I know, neither am I. Just figured I would bring that up cause it was mentioned. :)

Elgesh']All the people in the 'Land of Nod'? Apparently God didn't make _those_ people, just Adam and Eve. Hmm, one wonders... Any Christian know their lots' teaching on this?

genesis 3:20 Adam named his wife Eve,because she would become the mother of all the living. If she's the mother of all the living, that seems to provide a few problems..

Whoa, slow down there...at what point was I having a go at you or your beliefs?! I was merely providing reasons for my own based on personal experiences, and I fail to see how it was as dramatically off-topic as you seem to believe with the above post. Yes, God's opinion on sex is the topic, but my comments that you were so dissatisfied with were surely in that context, since they were a response to the general Christian viewpoint, presumably regarded as that espoused by God also, that sex before marriage is wrong for x reasons. I was merely detailing why I thought it was not necessarily so.

If you really feel I was somehow hijacking the thread, please post your concerns in the moderation forum.
now who is over reacting?

i just didnt see the point of discussing our various views of whether or not its worth gettting married. especially since it doesnt matter to me one way or the other who gets married and who doesnt.

it seems to matter to god.

what's with the :rolleyes: ?

you mad?Depends on what meaning of mad your asking about..
I just like rolling my eyes, if that makes me mad, so be it :p

Elgesh']All the people in the 'Land of Nod'? Apparently God didn't make _those_ people, just Adam and Eve. Hmm, one wonders... Any Christian know their lots' teaching on this?

I don't think it ever came up back in my day, but I do recall my Catholic school taught evolution without any problems or mention of ID (of course, since we had religion classes that aspect was covered).

Personally, I think the garden would be metaphorical anyways,

If she's the mother of all the living, that seems to provide a few problems..
exactly!

Actually, it's probably just saying 'God made us jews, the true human beings. Those guys? We-ell, they _look_ like us, but they're not like us... no, I don't trust them either...' - most groups of peoples had similar beliefs at one time or another.

Us Scots used to believe the English had tails...;)

More interestingly, it could be a jewish folk memory of Neanderthals, who were big in the Middle East, and shared, possibly seasonally, territory with homo sapians there.

edit: cheers, Vetalia :) Yep, I got the metaphor bit too at school.

now who is over reacting?Merely defending my participation earlier in the thread and reacting to your post; I don't think your tone was entirely fair, regardless of the actual contents.

i just didnt see the point of discussing our various views of whether or not its worth gettting married. especially since it doesnt matter to me one way or the other who gets married and who doesnt.

it seems to matter to god.That's precisely the point: if when and with whom one has sex matters to God, why does it matter to God? That was the OP's broad question, if I'm reading it correctly. It follows, then, that if people are trying to justify and exemplify why it matters to God that others should justify and exemplify why it doesn't matter to them.

But anyway. *shrugs*

True that. Hephaistos wasn't really in a position to run around getting action really though, being lame and severely top-heavy. But still. Check out Zeus, he was a bit of a randy bugger. A bit of a fucking rapist too, but oh well. Dionysos and Aphrodite got their fair share too. I was working to most people's limited knowledge, it's far easier to make generalisations. Lol.

Poor Heph. Well, at least he ran a neat forge and new how to catch his wife in the act.