Obsessed with Sex?

[Zzyzx]

.
Why do Bible writers, Bible characters, and many Bible believers place so much emphasis on sex?

Most of the concern seems to be sexual activity of OTHER people. Does this suggest that they are themselves sexually frustrated or deprived (depraved?) -- or in the vernacular "not getting enough" OR "never got any" OR "kinky"?

[Zzyzx]

.

According to Christendom sex is FORBIDDEN except between married male / female couples (and probably where pregnancy is not avoided).

That encompasses more than half of all US adults. "No sex for you unless you are married to the person" is an idealistic / irrational religious belief.

Idealistic? Sure. Irrational? Not at all - there is zero reason why people can't restrain themselves till marriage.

“Till marriage� assumes that everyone will marry OR that they shall abstain for a lifetime. Over fifty percent of adult US citizens are not married – some never will.

“Just abstain because God wants you to -- and preachers say so� sounds quite irrational to many of us.

Marriage is a very rational approach to dealing with the realities of sex in a constructive way. For starters: if pregnancy occurs, the fundamental natural result of sex, then marriage provides a social structure that supports the mother and child.

Unlike in ancient times, it is now possible to eliminate the possibility of pregnancy (vasectomy or tubal ligation) or to virtually eliminate it (multiple overlapping birth control means).

After the child is born and grows a bit older, the child has the benefit of both a mother and father. The man can't be surprised with alimony down the road, and he has a say about his own child. More can be said, but this is sufficient to show how marriage serves to protect all involved: the man, the woman, and the potential child.

Has someone argued that marriage is without SOME merit (such as protection of children)?

BTW, alimony and child support are two different things that should not be confused in reasoned debate.

Something to consider is the age at which people are allowed to marry; culturally we think it wrong for a teenager to marry.

Perhaps we live in different cultures.

In the majority of US jurisdictions the legal age for marriage with parental consent is sixteen. http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/stat ... -laws.html

Are people of 16, 17, 18, 19 teenagers?

Yet we endorse them having sex, getting knocked up, and then aborting their children

You do? Speak for yourself. Many disagree – regardless of theistic position.

Are you aware that Christian women have half a million abortions per year in the US and that many many women having abortions are married? Does anyone need references to learn about this?

... somewhere along the way our priorities became seriously messed up. If you think it too much for teenagers to be asked to not have sex,

Are you aware that “asking teenagers to not have sex� (Abstinence programs) are a dismal failure?

then consider allowing them to do so in the context of a marriage where the boy and girl have the social structure in place to support it.

This seems like an idealistic view of marriage and support structure.

[marco]

There is no doubt Christianity is obsessed with sex..

Obsession is a pysycologicaly harmful disorder and you have yet to present scientifically peer reviewed evidence that the majority of the so-called christian population on earth (ie more than 50%) suffer from sexual obsession. .

The shibboleth of presenting "peer-reviewed evidence" surely moves into absurdity when it is required for the simple statement that concentration on sexual sins is a problem. When one says Christianity is obsessed with sex, the statement happily includes Christian writing, and that would take in the Bible. The absurd weight that is placed on sexual transgression certainly seems to suggest some obsession in the heads of the writers. Who on earth would stone a girl for a sexual transgression? Who would bother about a couple being naked? What possible good is there in recounting an old man's fornication with his two daughters? And in one of his pleasant strolls, Jesus just happens to meet an adulteress. Move from the Bible and you get groups who are stridently opposed to same-sex relationships, and in fact Christian laws over the centuries imprisoned people for private sexual sins. One of our greatest mathematicians in the 20th century was effectively killed for the biblical interpretation of homosexuality as sinful. Is this enough evidence of obsession without troubling people over peer-reviews?

obsession
: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling; also : something that causes such preoccupation—compare compulsion, phobia
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obsession

You have correctly identified the psychiatric definition but failed to record the perfectly ordinary usage. You must know that words are used figuratively and literally. Take that wonderful film, with Hudson and Wyman - Magnificent Obsession, and you'll see that many have successfully moved from the technical meaning.

I hope this helps.

[Peds nurse]

.

Hello Peds. Happy to be arguing with you.

Hahaha...that made my day! Hope you are just wonderful!

That is debate as it should be. Thank you both

OC, I also thoroughly enjoy debating with PN.

Likewise, Mr. Z!! You are one of my favorites

I don't think anyone said anything about repressing those drives, but rather we need to control them..

PN, over 50% of adults in the US are not married – many never have married and never will. According to Christian lore they are forbidden to have sex – even solo sex. Right?

Forbidden is a pretty strong word. Having premarital sex or masturbating is the LEAST of the problems with sexual drives that are not controlled. More out of control to me, is adultery, pornography addiction, rape, incest, and the like. Sex isn't wrong, but when we allow it to control us, by making decisions that hurt people...then it is a problem.

It would be expected that a very high percentage are Christians (since 70% or so of the adult population self-identifies as Christian).

Christians are not immune to sexual sin.

Are you really prepared to tell them that they should “control� their sex drive and that it is not repression to remain celibate unless they marry -- perhaps for a lifetime?

I am not prepared to tell anyone anything of that sort. However, when sexual drives cause us to hurt people, I believe something should be said. On another thread, debaters were outraged and disgusted at incest, and voiced their opinions of the act, and rightly so. Christians and non Christians can agree that some sexual acts cross boundaries that should never be violated.

Enjoy your day!

[PghPanther]

.
Why do Bible writers, Bible characters, and many Bible believers place so much emphasis on sex?

Most of the concern seems to be sexual activity of OTHER people. Does this suggest that they are themselves sexually frustrated or deprived (depraved?) -- or in the vernacular "not getting enough" OR "never got any" OR "kinky"?

Not sex.........its more like this God of the Bible is absolutely obsessed with male genitals.

From his covenant being a sign of its alteration......... to it being a prize of capture .........to penalties of the touching of it by women in struggle.......

Its a big deal to this God............

[bluethread]

Not sex.........its more like this God of the Bible is absolutely obsessed with male genitals.

From his covenant being a sign of its alteration......... to it being a prize of capture .........to penalties of the touching of it by women in struggle.......

Its a big deal to this God............

Interesting assertion. First, the covenant is not a sign of male genital alteration, male genital alteration is a sign that one is identified with the covenant. There is a big difference. Second, where does one find male genitals "being a prize of capture"? Third, do you think that if you were fighting with someone and his wife ran up and crushed your testicles, that would be acceptable?

[marco]

Not sex.........its more like this God of the Bible is absolutely obsessed with male genitals....

That's a good point. I understand that among less discerning ancient people it was a wonderful thing to bring back genitalia as trophies. I suppose it helped the accountants to number how many enemy had been killed. Some earlier Americans used other body parts as trophies too.

What we can deduce from this is that it is ludicrous for an extraordinarily bright being, architect of the Universe and endowed with an understanding of black hole theory, to have some fetish. It seems ever so likely that his creators, the very people who DID take genitalia as trophies, would mould their god in their own likeness. His conversations sound very like the screen direction of barbarians rather than the honest words of a real god.

[marco]

Second, where does one find male genitals "being a prize of capture"?

Egyptian soldiers exhibited thousands of penises before Ramses III following the battle of Khesef-Tamahu. Among the people of Mowat a victor in battle would wear about him the penis of his conquered enemy; it was considered good luck to do so. The women of Cush cut off the penises of wounded or slain men and stuffed them in the mouths of their enemies. Or so I'm told.

But we can visit one of the holiest people in the Bible, King David, of Royal city fame.

"Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king." 1 Samuel 18: 27

He was asked for only one hundred.

[bluethread]

"Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king." 1 Samuel 18: 27

He was asked for only one hundred.

This is not a commandment of Adonai, or even a request by one approved of by Adonai. This was a requirement of Saul, who Adonai had rejected as king.

[marco]

This is not a commandment of Adonai, or even a request by one approved of by Adonai. This was a requirement of Saul, who Adonai had rejected as king.

I think you have uncharacteristically missed the entire point, bluethread. I was arguing that it was the practice to collect trophies. Those responsible for writing about Yahweh transferred their own desiderata to Yahweh. Of course he had nothing to do with the order here -it was Saul and David obeyed more than enthusiastically.


Since some of us see Yahweh as a simple construct of tribesmen, it makes sense for them to attribute to him a desire for foreskins. The obsession is in the heads of the writers.

[bluethread]

This is not a commandment of Adonai, or even a request by one approved of by Adonai. This was a requirement of Saul, who Adonai had rejected as king.

I think you have uncharacteristically missed the entire point, bluethread. I was arguing that it was the practice to collect trophies. Those responsible for writing about Yahweh transferred their own desiderata to Yahweh. Of course he had nothing to do with the order here -it was Saul and David obeyed more than enthusiastically.


Since some of us see Yahweh as a simple construct of tribesmen, it makes sense for them to attribute to him a desire for foreskins. The obsession is in the heads of the writers.

No, the obsession is presumed by you, based on your premise. This is little more than projection. PghPanther was using this as one of three points to show that Adonai is obsessed with male genitalia. The fact, that the Tanakh reports this exchange between Saul and David, does not indicate that it is an obsession of Adonai. I believe the obsession of Adonai in reporting this exchange, if there is one, is to indicate Saul's lack of understanding of Adonai's ways, and David's willingness to get along with someone who wanted him dead.