Christianity and Sex

[gboy72590]

Let me start off by saying that "By no means am I claiming that I hold the right and/or wrong views and opinions on this topic," I am merely stating certain views that I've encountered from my Christian friends, and my views on them. Feel free to debate these views or try to disprove them.

Lets start this off with a big one: Christians view on Pre-marital sex and abstinance.

A major view that a lot of my friends hold is that the Bible forbids premarital sex and that it "makes God sad" for you to sleep with some one, whether out of love or lust, before you are married. My first view on this is obviously, why does it matter, especially if you love someone, to have sex with them before you marry them? First, marriage in a sense can mean to things: one is a "legal" marriage. The other is an "emotional" marriage. These two things are very similar but not the same. One major flaw I see with "no sex before marriage" is; which type of marriage does it mean. I can understand and agree with this policy if it means an "emotional" marriage, by which I mean a great attraction and love for a person who feels the same about you, and you treat him or her as your significant other. So in this since, you have everything that a legal marriage should have, except the legal document stating that you are legally binded to one another. In all senses, doesn't it make sense for it to mean an emotional marriage, because an emotional marriage actually involve love, where a legal marriage doesnt, unfortunately, always contain love. With that said, why is it that it is the current fad among teens and young adults to believe and practice the thoughts of that sex is immoral and wrong before young legally marry someone, and that it magically becomes beautiful and right as soon as you get a peice of legal paper. People marry, or don't marry, for many different reason. Some marry for love, others for money and benefits, and others because they are simply to afraid of commitment, or afraid of breaking a commitment. Now why does it seem to make any sense, that sex should only be enjoyed by two people who are legally binded, but may or may not love each other? It doesn't. Sex should be enjoyed by anyone who is emotionally attatched and devoted to one another, whether they are legally bound or not. On that note, it also should not matter if one has premarital sex, or sex in general, with some one they are not emotionally attatched too. What Im saying is that, casual sex between two consenting and reasonable adults, is not wrong. My main personal view is that I don't believe the view of premarital sex being wrong, because of my already stated reasons coupled with the fact that I have yet to see any solid statements in the Bible banning premarital sex.

My next view that I want to talk about is; why do Christians view sex in general as something sinful and disgusting. Did God not create us? And did He not also create sex between us? So why is it that something God created in us, is viewed as disgusting and wrong? Is sex really wrong, or is it more that we as a society are prone to be afraid of things, in this case; teen pregnancy and STD's? Did we just come up with this idea of sex to prevent these things? I think we did, because as we've lengthened our life times as time goes on, we are now looking down on a natural instinct, made by God, that is hitting us at an age that, a few hundred years ago, would be our sexual prime and we would be married and having kids. We need to look at these views and realize that sex is a natural thing that shouldn't be viewed as wrong or shameful.

With all that said, I open up the floor to you.

[McCulloch]

Welcome to the debates gboy

Christians view on Pre-marital sex and abstinance.

If the purpose of marriage is for procreation as many Christians opposed to homosexual marriage, then shouldn't you wait until the bride is pregnant until you get married? Then if the couple is not fertile but one or the other partners is, that one would not be tied to an infertile partner. I really have not figured out why pregnant Christian brides are not more common, encouraged even. It worked for Mary and Joseph.

why do Christians view sex in general as something sinful and disgusting.

Odd though it may sound to you, that has not been my experience. Yes, they view sex outside of the allowed circumstances (marriage) is morally wrong, but a good number of churches I have been a part of have had quite open and frank discussions about sex. For example, a Mennonite church I was once a part of (not Old Order) held a special workshop for married and soon to be married couples to discuss sex. The discussion was not about the morals or the ethics or even the spiritual significance. It was about technique. The older more experienced ones sharing the wisdom of their experience to the younger ones. They certainly did not see sex as something sinful and disgusting, but something to be celebrated and enjoyed.

[gboy72590]

Welcome to the debates gboy

Christians view on Pre-marital sex and abstinance.

If the purpose of marriage is for procreation as many Christians opposed to homosexual marriage, then shouldn't you wait until the bride is pregnant until you get married? Then if the couple is not fertile but one or the other partners is, that one would not be tied to an infertile partner. I really have not figured out why pregnant Christian brides are not more common, encouraged even. It worked for Mary and Joseph.

This is an interesting point. This idea makes more sense to me in the fact that it is supporting the somewhat widespread idea that Marriage is for procreation. Ill state it now, that I am personally open the idea of all sexual orientations. In other words, I do not descriminate against someone due to sexual orientation. I will also say that I personally am very open with my ideas and views about sex. There are very few sexual acts that I find "sinful" or wrong. I am also not a supporter of the idea of teenage abstinence (obviously), that doesn't mean that I don't respect a person's choice of abstinence, I just don't agree with it. With that all said, I guess what I'm questioning is: Why place so much emphasis on a piece of paper?

[gboy72590]

why do Christians view sex in general as something sinful and disgusting.

Odd though it may sound to you, that has not been my experience. Yes, they view sex outside of the allowed circumstances (marriage) is morally wrong, but a good number of churches I have been a part of have had quite open and frank discussions about sex. For example, a Mennonite church I was once a part of (not Old Order) held a special workshop for married and soon to be married couples to discuss sex. The discussion was not about the morals or the ethics or even the spiritual significance. It was about technique. The older more experienced ones sharing the wisdom of their experience to the younger ones. They certainly did not see sex as something sinful and disgusting, but something to be celebrated and enjoyed.[/quote]

This doesn't surprise me, I knew that some churches treated sex in this way. The churches and people that I have dealt with though, all treat sex as something that should be a hushed subject in any setting other than between you and your husband/wife. (If you are wondering, most people that I come into contact with are Southern Baptist) The Question that I want to pose is; Why is sex, from the religious community's perspective, viewed as wrong? (I am disregarding for a moment, the fact that sex is ok in marriage. I am looking at all sex except for sex in wedlock.) Why is it that sex out of wedlock is viewed as wrong and immoral? Why is it that sex is treated as something that only two people in wedlock can enjoy? Why would God create something that is enjoyable and natural, but treat it as immoral and wrong except when enjoyed under a certain context? (i.e., Marriage) What is it that makes married sex ok, but casual sex wrong?

[ChaosBorders]

This doesn't surprise me, I knew that some churches treated sex in this way. The churches and people that I have dealt with though, all treat sex as something that should be a hushed subject in any setting other than between you and your husband/wife. (If you are wondering, most people that I come into contact with are Southern Baptist) The Question that I want to pose is; Why is sex, from the religious community's perspective, viewed as wrong? (I am disregarding for a moment, the fact that sex is ok in marriage. I am looking at all sex except for sex in wedlock.) Why is it that sex out of wedlock is viewed as wrong and immoral? Why is it that sex is treated as something that only two people in wedlock can enjoy? Why would God create something that is enjoyable and natural, but treat it as immoral and wrong except when enjoyed under a certain context? (i.e., Marriage) What is it that makes married sex ok, but casual sex wrong?

Because outside of marriage sex can be a very destructive behavior.
Besides the STDs and unwanted pregnancies, it can result in extensions of mis-matched relationships. Often to the point of marriages that were not the wisest idea, which often end in divorce and results in extreme emotional duress for both the partners involved and any children they may have had.

Within marriage, sex is one of the greatest tools for maintaining a healthy relationship that exists. The churches I've been to have generally been supportive of it in that context, and I can say both from a scientific and biblical perspective that churches that view ALL sex as a bad thing are rather misguided.

However, though sex is a great tool for maintaining a good relationship, it only accounts for about 20% of keeping one's relationship healthy. (I came across that number quite awhile ago. If you challenge it I doubt I can find the article again so I'll probably have to retract it, but I feel it's worth mentioning anyways).

The issue is that communication, ability to compromise, shared interests and goals all have larger roles to play. But when people are so chemically involved with one another, those things often go by the wayside. So they may think they love each other and have a passing relationship because they have a good sex life, but once the initial infatuation and/or limerance wears off and their sex life takes a downturn (as is almost inevitable for people who don't know it's going to happen and take preventative steps) their relationship ends up with a failing grade because they weren't as compatible as they thought when they first started screwing around.

And regarding why God would make things good in one context and not the other, I'd say it's about moderation and self-control. Examples would be alcohol, which if consumed a serving a day is almost absurdly healthy, but if abused is one of the least healthy activities you can engage in. Another example is most food. You need it to get nutrients, energy, muscle, etc., but overindulge and you'll become obese.

[Slopeshoulder]

Great thread/OP.

I think the "Christian view" (if there can be said to be only one) is wrong insofar as it proscribes much of what people actually do and want to do and appear to made to do, and replaces that with a set of moral, mental and physical gymnastics that seek not only to guide but actually undermine many opportunities for our human flourishing (which I take to be a divine goal).

But I think it's right insofar as it emphasizies or creates the preconditions for things like empathy, justice, consent, mutuality, and love that make sex safe, rewarding, and ethical.

Margeret Farley, professor of Christian Ethics emeritus at Yale Divinity School, and my old prof and a simply and truly wonderful person (and a nun) recently wrote a book entitled Just Love which addresses realistically what people actually do sexually, but offers a framework of justice as the basis for a sexual ethics of human flourishing within a Christian context that 1. is workable and 2. is transformative. Check it out.
BTW she also wrote and earlier book about making and breaking Personal Commitments, by that title.

I agree with the theme initiated by McCulloch that most Christian churches love sex within marriage, and point out that Muslims and Jews do to. Although religious folk are probably often not so accepting of some of the more popular recent erotic practices. But there's a range. Some say (usually ultra-orthodox Catholics) that any sex (like oral) that doesn't include the possibility of procreation is wrong, whereas some others (usally young evangelical married pastors trying to be hip, save marriages, and fill a church) get into celebrating every kind of technique for married couples.
As always, and as I was taught, in every area I take the themes of the tradition (and other traditions) as my guide, the emphases rather than the rules, the spirit over the letter, and live my life with my own life-affirming, passionate, yet "well-formed" conscience. Now, where'd the wife go and get off to...?

[Euphrates]

God created order. We live in a world of systems. When you go outside the framework God established for us to live within, bad things happen.

Sex is for procreation.
Marriage is for a healthy family.

Sex outside of marriage is out of its context. It is wrong because it defies the order God created for us. Sex within marriage is holy and wonderful.

[Slopeshoulder]

God created order. We live in a world of systems. When you go outside the framework God established for us to live within, bad things happen.

Sex is for procreation.
Marriage is for a healthy family.

Sex outside of marriage is out of its context. It is wrong because it defies the order God created for us. Sex within marriage is holy and wonderful.

Every sentence you wrote is unsupported and able to be successfully challenged, not only by non-theists, but by other religions and within Christianity itself. All you've shared is a standard set of extreme fundamentalist platitudes. What you called "opinion" in another thread today.

What systems? Who made them? Kindly prove it.

What bad things? Prove that they happen more frequently to people who stray from your forumula.

As a married man who has had a vasectomy so my wife would not die from pregnancy (as doctors predict she would), sex is for expressing love and getting off. As a once not-married man, it was the same. Kids are part of it, but only part. And every Christian who practices birth control agrees. Prove me wrong.

Marriage is to formalize commitment. Many many married people are childless, and many by choice. Perhaps they participate in co-creation by birthing other things (like ideas, invetions, art, solutions). What, is God going to smite them for straying from the system? maybe that explains my lower back pain. Prove it.

When two people marry, that IS a family! Prove me wrong.

All love is good.
Most sex that has honesty, consent, etc, is good. I like it best in marriage (except maybe for a few one nighters that were transcendant and god-inspiring as two stangers came together and wow.). That's opinion, so need to prove anything.
And it's good in God's eyes, if there is one. Systems and control are for engineers and fascists, not religious people.

At least that's what I've concluded after 5 years of formal seminary studies and 23 more informally studying religion and ethics, when I wasn't having non-procreative yet wonderful sex.

If you want to preach your formulas and systems, do it elsewhere. If you mean to be here, read the rules and debate.

Kindly state your sources.

[Euphrates]

What systems? Who made them? Kindly prove it.

I'm sorry. The OP asked questions like "Did God not create us," which led me to believe that this discussion was presupposing that Christianity is true, simply as a place from which to base the conversation. I didn't think I would be asked to prove that God made everything.

What bad things? Prove that they happen more frequently to people who stray from your forumula.

STDs. I'm sure the proof is obvious.

sex is for expressing love and getting off.

Since it looks like I've run into the Prove-it Monster: Can you prove it?

Marriage is to formalize commitment.

Then why don't people marry their kids? Or their jobs?

What, is God going to smite them for straying from the system? maybe that explains my lower back pain. Prove it.

Oh, I get it. I think you misunderstood me. God created sex for procreation, but He also created a whole social system around it. We call it "family". It starts with a husband and wife, where the husband promises to love his wife and she promises to submit to his authority. Then there's sex. Sex outside this system can have negative consequences. STDs being the obvious one. I'm not suggesting that if you are having sex without procreating bad stuff is going to happen to you.

When two people marry, that IS a family! Prove me wrong.

Why would I prove you wrong?

All love is good. I like it best in marriage (except maybe for a few one nighters that were transcendant and god-inspiring as two stangers came together and wow.). That's opinion, so need to prove anything.

There are different types of love. My suggestion is that they all have their place, and when taken out of their proper place, they can be bad. An incestuous relationship, for example.

Most sex that has honesty, consent, etc, is good. And good in God's eyes, if there is one.

How would you know?

Systems and control are for engineers and fascists, not religious people.

Why? What is wrong with systems? They are evidence of order and design.

If you want to preach your formulas and systems, do it elsewhere. If you mean to be here, read the rules and debate.

I'm following the rules. I definitely could have been more descriptive, and I'll try better next time, but you can't bully me out of here.

[Classicus]

Euphrates: When you say sex is ONLY for procreation, do you oppose use of condoms?