Why Christianity's Infatuation With Sex?

[roger1440]

Why Christianity's Infatuation With Sex? Could it be because you live in a predominately Christian nation.

 

[Skwim]

Sure it does: you keep posting threads about sex vis-a-vis Christianity...maybe not exclusively, but often.

Well someone has to !!!

And, you seem to not pay much attention to Christianity's moralizing about sloth, greed, envy, etc. Maybe you have, I just haven't notice...probably because sex is so much more interesting...

How many people care about sloth, greed, envy, etc.? Do you? If you look around, people are far, far more interested in sex. I would guess 25 times more interested than in your sloth, greed, envy, etc. But hey, want to talk about sloth or gluttony? Start a thread. Maybe people here are just waiting for such a discussion. Meanwhile . . . . . thanks for post #2. It's a good one.

Sex is lust of the flesh.

Okay, but it kind of goes without saying doesn't it?

lust
ləst/
noun: lust
1.very strong sexual desire.


.​

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well someone has to !!!


How many people care about sloth, greed, envy, etc.? Do you? If you look around, people are far, far more interested in sex. I would guess 25 times more interested than in your sloth, greed, envy, etc. But hey, want to talk about sloth or gluttony? Start a thread. Maybe people here are just waiting for such a discussion. Meanwhile . . . . . thanks for post #2. It's a good one.


Okay, but it kind of goes without saying doesn't it?

lust
ləst/
noun: lust
1.very strong sexual desire.


.​

Yes..... what are you saying? Sex is a strong desire of the flesh expressed by intercourse. I'm not getting your point.

 

[Skwim]

.

Yes..... what are you saying? Sex is a strong desire of the flesh expressed by intercourse. I'm not getting your point.

Your "of the flesh" is superfluous. Sex is lust---very strong sexual desire for physical contact (in this particular sense of the word.) In other senses it can mean more than desire, including various forms of actual physical contact. And sometimes sexual intercourse in particular. And believe me, sexual intercourse isn't the only target of sexual desire.

Why Christianity's Infatuation With Sex? Could it be because you live in a predominately Christian nation.

You mean if I move from the USA Christians here will no longer be infatuated with sex? C'mon, you're joshin' me. I have no such an influence. Believe me.


.

.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

.
Your "of the flesh" is superfluous. Sex is lust---very strong sexual desire for physical contact (in this particular sense of the word.) In other senses it can mean more than desire, including various forms of actual physical contact. And sometimes sexual intercourse in particular. And believe me, sexual intercourse isn't the only target of sexual desire.


You mean if I move from the USA Christians here will no longer be infatuated with sex? C'mon, you're joshin' me. I have no such an influence. Believe me.


.

.

I don't understand. Why is "of the flesh" superfluous?

To be technical, sex by strict definition has nothing to do with lust. It can be the source of lust. Some people have intercourse with people of the opposite gender, find no lust until they realize they were gay and had sex "for the first time" with a person of the same gender.

 

[psychoslice]

Anything you suppress, will always find a way out, like a big boil full of pus.

 

[idav]

Any thoughts?

Yeah, for Christianity its Pauls fault. Don't know what his obsession was but I have my theories.

 

[Skwim]

I don't understand. Why is "of the flesh" superfluous?

Because in the sense your talking about the word "sex," the word "lust" already implies "of the flesh." because, as defined, "Lust is very strong sexual desire." The desire of the sexual impulse is physical contact (the flesh), so all one needs to say is that sex is lust (sex as in the sense you're implying here). Your comment that "Sex is lust of the flesh." is like saying "Murder is illegal killing by lethal means." If it wasn't a lethal means no killing would have taken place. "Lethal means" is superfluous.


.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Because in the sense your talking about the word "sex," the word "lust" already implies "of the flesh." because, as defined, "Lust is very strong sexual desire." The desire of the sexual impulse is physical contact (the flesh), so all one needs to say is that sex is lust (sex as in the sense you're implying here). Your comment that "Sex is lust of the flesh." is like saying "Murder is illegal killing by lethal means." If it wasn't a lethal means no killing would have taken place. "Lethal means" is superfluous.


.

Could have said "redundant" instead. Sex doesn't always have to do with lust, though, now that I'm thinking about it. It's highly associated with it, especially religious viewpoints.

 

[psychoslice]

Yeah, for Christianity its Pauls fault. Don't know what his obsession was but I have my theories.

Ha, blame Paul, right !.

 

[idav]

Ha, blame Paul, right !.

Yes and Paul had some sort of obsession with Pagans.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes and Paul had some sort of obsession with Pagans.

Well that is where a lot of Christianity came from, its one big pot of plagiarized information, all put together in one book, and that book is then worshiped as if its all true, and on top of that, they believe all other books are wrong, come on, get real.

 

[idav]

Well that is where a lot of Christianity came from, its one big pot of plagiarized information, all put together in one book, and that book is then worshiped as if its all true, and on top of that, they believe all other books are wrong, come on, get real.

This is the 21st century. Why should it matter what books they picked due to political reasons in time of the Roman Empire. Certainly lets get real.

 

[psychoslice]

This is the 21st century. Why should it matter what books they picked due to political reasons in time of the Roman Empire. Certainly lets get real.

It might not matter to you or me, but it does to many other people, people who ignorantly believe god planed the whole thing, and that all the words are from him.

 

[idav]

It might not matter to you or me, but it does to many other people, people who ignorantly believe god planed the whole thing, and that all the words are from him.

It matters because the books the books included in the bible were for purposes of pushing a certain theological take and I choose the "heretical" path of thinking Jesus was a human.

Anyhow the distinction was that Christ didn't harp on sex as much as Paul did, Paul simply had more issues having to do with sins of the flesh.

 

[psychoslice]

It matters because the books the books included in the bible were for purposes of pushing a certain theological take and I choose the "heretical" path of thinking Jesus was a human.

Anyhow the distinction was that Christ didn't harp on sex as much as Paul did, Paul simply had more issues having to do with sins of the flesh.

To me it doesn't matter, if anything is worth taking I will take, all the other I will discard, be that from Jesus or Paul, and also any other scriptures from whatever religion.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

My question would be, why was sex in particular chosen to be an object of purity, and why were rules created to the point of designating some their infractions as sins? Could it actually come down to the nagging thought that somewhere someone is having fun and I'm not? "Nor me!" "Me either." "And I'm not getting any as well." "Hey! Let's make it taboo." "Better yet, a sin."

As obsessed as the biblical authors are with lineages, perhaps it's simply a eugenics-like fascination/obsession. Racial purity is valued by many of many races and can't stand the thought of "mixing genes", despite the fact we can verify such mixing, leaving these claims to go up in smoke. If you're obsessed with lineages, you will do your best to ensure "proper" lineages.

I think because YOU are focused on sex. The history of Christianity over the last 1,000 years or so had included an awful lot of preaching and activity against The Seven Deadly Sins, of which Lust is only one, and it's one of the last ones to have the religious connotation over secular laws in place (Greed, etc., having been effectively moved to the legal realm over the past several hundred years, at least in Western Europe).

How many people were jailed or killed for having that extra heaping of mashed potatoes? How many people were burned at the stake for sleeping on an off day?

you have to be Christian to get sober

Which is highly amusing, given the wedding at Cana.

 

[Milton Platt]

In another thread I quoted a woman who said:

"Christianity is full of messages about sexuality and how that should be expressed for each gender. For example, we were told that women don’t really think about sex (I beg to differ) and that served to multiply my shame and it amplified the feeling that I was “not normal.” I had “too much of a sex drive.” We were told that boys were visually stimulated and thought about sex on a near constant basis. We were often told that “guys use love to get sex, while girls use sex to get love.” Married women would joke about how they tolerated sex because it was their “wifely duty,” and it helped them get their husband to take out the trash. There was no mention of women who engaged in sex enthusiastically, regularly, and for the pure enjoyment of the physical act itself. In the Bible, men were warned to stay away from women like this, because it would surely lead to ruin. Girls who were promiscuous were just “looking for love” or having “daddy issues.” Surely they couldn’t simply be interested in sex because they enjoyed it."​

Although I've wondered about the Bible's various messages about sexuality, I've never asked, Why? Why does Christianity, and by extension, the Bible and it's authors, care sooo much about sex, and why do they feel the need to control how others engage in it?

Any thoughts?

I always wondered why a supposed "god" that made a universe that seems to have almost no limits filled with billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars, many of which have numerous planets (so billions of potential planets) decides that one mammal out of tens of thousands on one incredibly insignificant planet needs to have it's sex life looked into.

 

[Skwim]

I always wondered why a supposed "god" that made a universe that seems to have almost no limits filled with billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars, many of which have numerous planets (so billions of potential planets) decides that one mammal out of tens of thousands on one incredibly insignificant planet needs to have it's sex life looked into.

It's the human conceit.

.

 

[rusra02]

It seems to me the 'messages' claimed to be from Christianity are not based on what the Bible actually says.