14 things the Bible says or dosen't say about sex

[pghguy]

It seems that over the last 2,000 years, many denominations have taken it upon themselves to interpret and adjust the message of Christ on many issues. And while sexuality is barely mentioned in the Bible compared to other topics (which of course suggests it's not among the top priorities), it has been one of the most addressed by churches. The Book of Revelations tells us that we shall neither add no detract from the words of the Bible as that this is a grave sin. So, in adding many of the messages our religious leaders have, our institutions have committed grave sins against God.

Below is a list of issues the Bible addresses or does not address regarding sexuality. Any suggestions to the contrary are simply reading things into the text that is not there - i.e. adding to the Bible and thus a grave sin.

What the Bible does not address or condemn:
Pre-martial sex
Masturbation
Oral sex
Anal sex
Homosexuality
Kinks
Contraception

What the Bible does address or condemn:
Adultery
Sexual Idolatry
Orgies
Prostitution
Rape (See the odd info below)
Abortion (Thou shall not kill)
Incest

Some very odd info:
The Bible suggests that rape victims should marry their victimizers.

The Bible seems to see nothing wrong with older men marrying virtual children which we know today to be pedophilia.

It's also important to keep in mind that sexuality is a biological natural thing. This being the case, it is of course, part of the natural order or natural law. So, it seems that sexual urges and activity cannot possibly be against natural law. But, like anything else, the key is exercising responsibility.

 

[pghguy]

People also tend to bring up Leviticus in this instance. However, the willingly ingnore many parts of Leviticus today and see no problem in doing so - i.e. the prohibition against cutting one's hair.

We also know from his own words that many comments in the letters of Paul are his personal opinions. This of course means they would not be devinely inspired. If we where to believe that they where, it would be presuming several things, two of which include:

1. Paul himself would likely have to be devine.

2. Paul's suggestion that marriage was not an ideal thing would suggest that the opportunity to and ability to procreate is somehow unholy and against God's will.

 

[Dream]

That is a nice listing and could be close to the bullseye, though it is hard to say. After many uturns in reading Bibles I think it is just a guess. We're dealing with translations of a complex legal and cultural record. Its possible that some of these that seem not to be mentioned actually are mentioned but in an indirect way, like a euphemism; yet it may be very clear to someone who has spent years learning how to see more references. You have the direct quoted laws that are easy to find, but then you have principles and examples of principles in story form, you have examples of people doing the wrong things as well as the right. You also have cryptic remarks, cryptic stories and symbols and other puzzles. These are laws, too, because they contain principles which is what laws are. If something is mentioned directly, it highlights the importance of the subject, and the obvious mentions and references are probably not the only ones. We will probably never track down all of the references.

In that case, its hard to say what the last word is on the subject, however I think this is only confusing when being too strictly fundamental about it. I would not cast fundamentals aside, because they are what put us in touch with the letters. Using sensitivity, historical appreciation and logic it flows better; and it is easier to accept we don't necessarily have all of the facts. The whole thing seen as a unit.

 

[wil]

the bible doesn't address homosexuality???

While I agree with your contention on Leviticus...it surely does address it.


But beyond that...is this and informational thread or where is it leading to?

Paul had some other issues as well...quite possibly homosexuality is that which troubled him so...that and some of his letters aren't his letters...

 

[pghguy]

the bible doesn't address homosexuality???

While I agree with your contention on Leviticus...it surely does address it.


But beyond that...is this and informational thread or where is it leading to?

Paul had some other issues as well...quite possibly homosexuality is that which troubled him so...that and some of his letters aren't his letters...

As far as the homosexuality issue goes, there is no mention that is not based on the reading into something that is not there.

I think I have an idea of which verses you might be referring to and if this is the case I could explain exactly why it does not apply.

 

[Dream]

Wil, hey! Its been a while since I posted you. You've got me thinking, so let me run on for a minute.

Also I have a question: Is there a specific reason some people suspect this was Paul's 'Thorn in the flesh' or do you mean it is one of the possible things? All I know is Paul says his 'Thorn in the flesh' was something given to him by God to keep him humble. Could it be a form of lust? Likely he is alluding to Jacob's wrestling match with the angel in which Jacob was given a gimp in his thigh.

A thorn is a very bad thing to be called, part of the curse upon Adam. "Cursed is the ground because of you. Through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field." You can think of the plants of the field as spiritual food, and the thorns cause pain when you are trying to get that food. Thorns represent a hindrance to gathering. Following through this symbolism over the ages: 1 In Genesis Adam has to toil and experience pain to be spiritually fed. 2 In Moses, it changes so that food comes from heaven as manna thorn & pain free, but each person still must stoop over to collect it from the ground; and in Jesus 3 it comes without any work at all, with neither toiling nor spinning. Now we have Paul saying that he has been given a thorn to keep him humble, set back to state #1, gathering among painful thorns.

That allusion of a field is not so clear as the allusion to Jacob's struggle. Jacob was given a gimp after 'wrestling with an angel'. Everyone reading Paul's letter knew about Jacob's story, so they should have instantly drawn the connection. Paul may have had a real gimp or other handicap or none at all, which I don't know; but the wrestling is what matters. The wrestling is thought by many to be Jacob's wrestling within himself, so perhaps Paul alludes to this wrestling experience.

If Paul was wrestling with homosexuality, the implication is that Paul thought that Jacob did, too, which would mean an enormous preoccupation with homosexuality among early Christians as well as Paul and maybe with 2nd Temple Jews of certain sects. To me its a little far-fetched. I do not think that was the case, so I do not think the 'Thorn' was homosexuality. It could be, however that everybody was gay at the time. Maybe Christians were so fed up with Hellenistic oppression that they decided to demonize Greek ideals. Nah, probably that is just way out there. Everybody has to struggle within themselves, so his thorn could be almost anything. Probably he was given some obvious horrible wound that would make him unclean, like a boil or Krone's disease etc. Something like that would prevent him from fellowship with other Jews to some extent and also from entering the Temple, so it could be like a thorn in a sense that would hinder him from spiritual food. It could also be because he was imprisoned, or because he had been chased out of Jerusalem.

 

[bob x]

Is there a specific reason some people suspect this was Paul's 'Thorn in the flesh' or do you mean it is one of the possible things? All I know is Paul says his 'Thorn in the flesh' was something given to him by God to keep him humble.

Far more likely it is referring to temporal lobe epilepsy, a condition I had when I was younger that causes "visionary" seizures (a blazing circle of light knocks you down, and a commanding voice says strange things in your head). In Galatians, he explicitly connects his "condition" with the vision on the road to Damascus: "I know my condition must have been a trial to you, but you did not despise me, but rather received me as if I were an angel or the Lord Jesus Himself, for you know it was my condition that started me preaching the gospel in the first place."

 

[Dream]

bobx,
Question about something you said once that you had spent some time as a prophet to Israel. People think of prophecy in different ways. There is a sense in which Pres. Ronald Reagan was a prophet when he asked Gen. Secretary Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. I did not understand what kind of prophet you were when you said that, but I did not ask at the time. What did you mean by saying you had been a prophet, and was it related to this temporal lobe epilepsy?

 

[tychomorpheus]

sexual prohibition is a form of control. its obvious to the naked eye that the sexually frustrated man of woman is a toy to be manipulated. i feel this is the sole reason why the church insists so much on sex, to rule it, to make you do it in a certain way. for you can be a pure man at heart and really have no meanness, envy and honestly love thy fellow man, but mission impossible begins when someone tells you that even looking at a beautiful woman is the beginning of lust. then you become unsure on your motivation, on your drive in life and so there goes the barriers to manipulation.

if you look closely the part of sexuality being addressed in the Bible has a lot to do with social norms of life, they are a guide for a community of men to keep some sense in their relations.

Adultery - usually leads to violence due to jealousy (hurts the other husband/wife)
Sexual Idolatry - like any idolatry corrupts large amounts of people astray from the Path, and the word of God (hurts the spirit)
Orgies - This can be a separate discussion. But socially orgies do rise health issues especially thousands of years ago (may hurt everyone involved)
Prostitution - Same as orgies
Rape (See the odd info below) - Violence creates more violence and usually raped women got revenged by someone (hurts the raped)
Abortion (Thou shall not kill) - self explanatory (hurts the new life)
Incest - some say that condemning incest is the foundation of social norms (hurts the lower aged or female one, seems psychologically speaking incest cannot ever be consensual because one always has some authority somehow in a family)

the part not being addressed according to this list is about the individual, its about what man and woman by themselves.

Pre-martial sex
- frustrated adolescents have rivers of sexual energy that can be better used for ... wars?
Masturbation
- think of the straight simple Lies that have been spread in time about this matter of personal sexuality. It is also part of the church's problem with imagination, as it is a tool trough which man can escape control
Oral sex
Kinks
Anal sex
- all kinks all personal, individual preferences
Homosexuality
- this is also a separate discussion but no matter how you look at it, it still is a matter of the individual

Contraception
- surprisingly considering that contraception has been know for a looooong time. women used all kinds of plants and mechanic remedies to prevent pregnancy, so its not about modernity the lack of mentioning it in the Bible. It still is resprected as an individual choice.