Biblical divine sex

Theology from a biblical approach. Topics posted should have a direct relationship to scripture.

Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Fri May 19, 2017 2:31 am

"Divine Sex: Liberating Sex from Religious Tradition"
by Philo Thelos

"Divine Sex examines every Biblical reference to human sexual practice. By using tools of modern scholarship, evidence is produced to show that the Bible does not actually say what generations of professional religionists have told us. The Bible does not forbid all sexual activity other than monogamous heterosexual intercourse. Instead it treats us to a wide range of God-approved, and sometimes even God-supplied, sexual possibilities that the church has never told us about. In fact, the most famous erotic poem in history, is actually a book of the Bible!"

"God is the Architect both of human sexuality, and of sexual pleasure. The passion, pleasure and possibilities of sex are His gift to humanity. Like any proud parent, Father God is pleased and honored when His kids delight in His gift/ God made sex to be fun. He is not embarrassed nor is He angered when we enjoy it. Sex as God designed it to be is truly Divine."

"From polygamy and concubinage, to prostitution, to masturbation, to oral sex, to nudity - and all else besides - this study of what the Bible actually says, and does not say, will surprise, perhaps elate, and we believe will liberate the reader from the sex-stifling effects of church dogma."

"Sex without religious baggage. Sex without guilt and shame. Sex as the Creator meant it to be. Divine Sex."

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/855278.Divine_Sex

The Foreword, Introduction, & other portions can be read online for free:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=KpYJYe ... &q&f=false

https://books.google.ca/books/about/Div ... edir_esc=y

https://www.amazon.ca/Divine-Sex-Libera ... 1553954009
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Paidion » Fri May 19, 2017 4:32 pm

Philo Thelos wrote:The Bible does not forbid all sexual activity other than monogamous heterosexual intercourse.


I think the author uses a pseudonym with which he is trying to say in Greek, "I love desire." I will hereafter refer to him as "PT"

One might ask, "PT refers to which Bible"? There are three books that are called "The Bible": 1)The Catholic Bible, 2)The Orthodox Bible, and 3) The Protestant Bible. Each of the three has a different set of books in their "Old Testament."

However, let's assume that PT means the Protestant Bible. This is a book. A book doesn't forbid anything or say anything. The Bible is a collection of writings of particular inspired men who wrote over a large period of time. Let's examine PT's statement above, assuming that he is speaking of the authors of the Bible. It is true that the Biblical Authors do not forbid ALL sexual activity other than monogamous heterosexual intercourse." One reason is that there is some sexual activity that none of the authors address—for example, masturbation.

PT also wrote:From polygamy and concubinage, to prostitution, to masturbation, to oral sex, to nudity - and all else besides - this study of what the Bible actually says, and does not say, will surprise, perhaps elate, and we believe will liberate the reader from the sex-stifling effects of church dogma.


Where does PT think the church obtained its dogma about sex? Did it invent this dogma? Or did it find most or all of it in the Bible?

If PT is saying that all of the above practices are acceptable to all the authors, he is mistaken. It is true that polygamy and concubinage seemed to be acceptable to the writers of the OT; as far as I know none of them state that God was opposed to these practices. However, the apostle Paul advocated that overseers as well as deacons in the church were to be monogamous. (1 Tim 3:2, 3:12).

Although it does not seem to be written that the Old Testament "saints" were reprimanded by God for consorting with harlots, yet we read in Leviticus 19:29 that the Lord gave this instruction to the Israelites:

Do not prostitute your daughter, to cause her to be a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry, and the land become full of wickedness.

If prostitution were okay with God, why would He desire that the land not fall into harlotry? And why would that result in the land becoming full of wickedness?

And in the New Testament, Paul wrote:
Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never!(1 Corinthians 6:15)

The Greek word translated as "prostitute" or "harlot" is "πορνη" (pornā). This a feminine word. The masculine form is "πορνος" (pornos) and refers to a man who consorts with prostitutes. The word "πορνεια" (porneia) refers to prostitution. The English word "pornography" is derived from "pornā" and literally means "depiction of a prostitute." Many translations render "porneia" as "fornication" and the meaning of the word has been expanded to refer to any form of sexual immorality. The apostle Paul wrote:

For this you know, that no fornicator ("πορνος", pornos), unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:5 NKJV)

As for masturbation, oral sex, and nudity, none of the Biblical writers addresses these practices.

Adultery is condemned in both Old and New Testaments.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Fri May 19, 2017 6:46 pm

Jesus condemned so much as sexually fantasizing about a woman to whom a man is not married, much less having intercourse outside of marriage.

Paul said to let each man have a wife to avoid sexual immorality.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby DaveB » Fri May 19, 2017 7:42 pm

The book sounds like - and forgive the crudeness - some guy's wet dream.
The battle of the ages has always been between Agape and Eros - I don't think the complete, utter difference between the two is even considered in the culture, or even the concept of 'agape'. Eros has always been a strong 'god', and the strength is enough to ruin man/womankind, a dark angel that appears as a messenger of light.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 4008
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sat May 20, 2017 2:35 am

I have the 332 page book on order, but haven't read it myself, except some of the portions available free online, as per the OP. It presents some ideas that i had not heard of before, including arguments that seriously challenge "conservative" interpretations of Scripture. Having once believed but now rejected the popular eternal torment teaching, i have an open mind to the truth on the subject of what the Bible says about sex. If anyone has read the book i would be interested in hearing their comments re Philo Thelos' analysis of various Scripture verses & passages.

A bit about the author, according to the Amazon site referred to earlier:

"The author is a Seminary graduate (B.Th.), licensed and ordained to the Pastorate by three Christian organizations, and a full time minister in the Christian Church for 36 years. His first 18 years of ministry were with the Church of Christ. Since 1984 he has ministered in both "mainline" Evangelical churces and independent Charismatic churches. He recently retired to devote his time to writing. The author and his wife have been married 39 years, raising three daughters and enjoying 10 grandchildren. They both have devote themselves all their married life to religious work and promotion of the gospel of Christ. For 36 years the author employed the modern tools of scholarly Biblical research, to an expository (contextual, verse by verse explanation) approach to both Bible study and preaching. Such study produced frequent discovery that the Bible does not say what he had been trained to believe about many things. In fact, he discovered quite frequently the Bible says the very opposite of what he had been taught. This was especially true regarding the subject of sex. Many modern sexual taboos are founded not on actual Biblical statements but rather, on human opinion and church tradition. The result of his study on human sexuality was so liberating for him and his wife, and for the few with whom he had the opportunity to share his findings, that he decided the information must be published. Hence this book. The author says, "I believe that the average Christian will welcome this book. Not because they are sex-crazed perverts-in-waiting, but because they are honest people who share in common a natural, God-given passion for sex that has been choked off by centuries of ill-founded church traditions. They will know the truth of this book as it bears witness with their spirit." "
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sat May 20, 2017 3:27 am

qaz wrote:Jesus condemned so much as sexually fantasizing about a woman to whom a man is not married, much less having intercourse outside of marriage.

Paul said to let each man have a wife to avoid sexual immorality.


If the 2nd statement is a reference to 1 Cor.7:2, the author has some remarks re that verse on pages 69-70 in the chapter re monogamy and polygamy:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=KpYJYe ... &q&f=false

I expect he'll address the meaning of the vague term "sexual immorality" elsewhere in the 332 page book, such as in the chapters on fornication.

Your first statement refers to what Scripture? Matthew 5:28? Jeff Priddy has some interesting comments here:

http://www.martinzender.com/clanging_go ... ssue15.pdf
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sat May 20, 2017 3:41 am

Paidion wrote:
It is true that polygamy and concubinage seemed to be acceptable to the writers of the OT; as far as I know none of them state that God was opposed to these practices. However, the apostle Paul advocated that overseers as well as deacons in the church were to be monogamous. (1 Tim 3:2, 3:12).



Pages 70-71 address these verses:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=KpYJYe ... &q&f=false

which continues at p.72, but "Page 72 is not part of this book preview".

My own remarks are as follows:

In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul prefers that men be the husband of no (zero) wives. Compare your verses in Timothy where he says certain ones are to be the husband of one wife.

1 Corinthians 7 speaks of some things said as the commandment of the Lord, others as good, still others what Paul merely thinks as an opinion.

In 1 Corinthians 7 the basis of some or all said is because of the present distress. So does it even apply to other situations or us today?
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby DaveB » Sat May 20, 2017 6:42 am

To be clear - when I used the term 'some guy's *** dream - I was talking about the author of the book, not Origen!!! I hope it wasn't taken that way.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 4008
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby steve7150 » Sat May 20, 2017 7:08 am

Eros has always been a strong 'god', and the strength is enough to ruin man/womankind, a dark angel that appears as a messenger of light.








So deep i'm underwater!! :D
steve7150
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:01 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 7:10 am

Dave,

It seems you have a knee jerk reaction to what the author posits... Yet, isn't this the exact same reaction ECTers have when they hear something that challenges that belief? Is it not wise to read and understand a position before we judge it? I mean, you basically judged the author without hearing his arguments and on this topic, much debate in our world exists. This is far different then someone trying to justify murder, as virtually everyone, religious or not agrees that is wrong. But sexuality? That is hotly contested both from within religious and secular circles. So maybe we should try to understand before we condemn. I mean, it isn't like Evangelical America is the solution on this issue... Addiction to sex has never been so high and it is very likely the prude attitude evangelicals have likely fuel this shame based sin, causing it to increase.
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby DaveB » Sat May 20, 2017 7:26 am

Gabe - I appreciate your position.

I have spent almost 50 years dealing with sexual addictions of one sort or another, in myself and others, I"m read up and studied and I'm very acquainted with the arguments and literature.

Perhaps I should bow out of this topic; it is interesting for a lot of people, and perhaps worth looking into. For many people, sex takes the place of love. The liberation and lightness promised by freer sex/nudity/pornography hides a very dark presence for many, and I am knowledgable of the tremendous harm it can do.

Those that lack the security of being loved by God and others are in the most danger of a warping addiction.

That's my experience and that of thousands of others.

But, you will say, correctly, that should not spoil the fun of talking about the issues. I will bow out of commenting on this thread and leave the field open for the rest of you.

Cheers, brothers and sisters! :D
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 4008
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 7:35 am

DaveB wrote:Gabe - I appreciate your position.

I have spent almost 50 years dealing with sexual addictions of one sort or another, in myself and others, I"m read up and studied and I'm very acquainted with the arguments and literature.

Perhaps I should bow out of this topic; it is interesting for a lot of people, and perhaps worth looking into. For many people, sex takes the place of love. The liberation and lightness promised by freer sex/nudity/pornography hides a very dark presence for many, and I am knowledgable of the tremendous harm it can do.

Those that lack the security of being loved by God and others are in the most danger of a warping addiction.

That's my experience and that of thousands of others.

But, you will say, correctly, that should not spoil the fun of talking about the issues. I will bow out of commenting on this thread and leave the field open for the rest of you.

Cheers, brothers and sisters! :D


Dave, I don't want to bar you or anyone else from the conversation. I am just pointing out that it isn't helpful to bring anyone to your side if you can't explain what is wrong with the author and provide your position and solution. Calling someone an apostate and reprobate is what the average evangelical Christian does when they don't agree with someone and that type of response isn't helpful, or loving.
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 8:31 am

DaveB wrote:Perhaps I should bow out of this topic; it is interesting for a lot of people, and perhaps worth looking into. For many people, sex takes the place of love. The liberation and lightness promised by freer sex/nudity/pornography hides a very dark presence for many, and I am knowledgable of the tremendous harm it can do.


I grew up being taught that nude is lewd, but that is a damaging viewing of the body. When you tell a man that he MUST lust at the sight a nude woman, then he will no doubt respond that way, because he is convinced that is the only response that exists. Of course that will be your response, because you told yourself and your subconscious that you will lust when you see bare skin of a lady. Jesus said that it isn't what goes into a man that defiles him. External objects don't cause lust.

Exodus 20:17 - You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's. -ESV

If external objects are the cause of our coveting, and not our heart (and thus, how we respond to them) - Then how does that verse make sense? Should we try not to look at our neighbor's house? His cow? Should we refrain from looking at his wife? But what sex addicts are taught is this:

"Don't look at the person, keep your eyes from looking at their 'naughty' parts."
"Don't go to public pools or areas where females wear less clothing"
"Don't look through catalogs, you might catch a women in her underwear"
"Bounce your eyes"

All of these rules and ones like them REINFORCE the sexualization of people and yet that is what most Christian counselors continue to peddle as their solution. They don't realize they have been duped by a lie of Satan. That God's creation is 'lewd', so we must cover it up! It is my experience that most "Christian" approaches to sexual based addictions are greatly inferior to the secular approaches. That is one exception: Organizations that break away from the flawed prude view of nude is lewed mentality.

If you have actually read this far, you are probably thinking that I am pro pornography. No, not at all. In fact, that is the opposite side of the prude coin. Pornography (not to be confused with nudity) is degrading and quite evil. Pornography is created to be hyper stimulating. It is designed to captivate the viewer by the "I want you look" from the poses. Not to mentioning the poses are done in a sexually suggestive manner. This is NOT healthy, but one can view such material if it were flashed before them, or accidentally stumbled upon without lust. Seeing a pornographic image does require you lust after it, nor does it defile you unless you let it. You would let it defile you by engaging with it's message. Pornography thrives as a result of the "nude is lewd" belief system that evangelical Christianity perpetuates. They are part of the problem! Who would have thought. My opinion, of course.

I highly recommend people check out this website in regards: It is way more thorough than the short paragraph I have given it.
http://mychainsaregone.org

Also keep in mind that misattribution is a very real thing when it comes to sexuality. For example, when we believe external objects are the source of our lust, we look to keep away from those external objects. This is a coping mechanism. So when you avoid beaches, only look at a woman's neck or above or try not to look at woman at all, you are reinforcing the belief that they are lust causing, and simultaneously sensitizing yourself to respond with lust should you break one of those rules. So avoidance is a copying mechanism to keep those external objects that are LUST filled out of your life. This then causes anxiety, which then causes fear should you be put into a situation where those external objects exist. Fear and anxiety are often mistake for sexual arousal as both impact the body in a similar manner. Because you have conditioned yourself with a wrong belief that they are the cause of lust and that you can respond no other way, you, of course, fail. You then feel shameful and try all the harder to abstain from said situations again the future, causing more reclusive behavior, because if something doesn't work, try harder is ALWAYS the answer! The addict gets worse and worse, more reclusive and isolated. Self esteem drops and eventually madness ensues and it all starts with a simple lie... "You are a guy, and you must lust after females if they are not clothes properly. It is just the way you are" What a crappy "Christian" message we have given our young men.

Men are NOT more visual than women. That is a lie! It is only true because we tell people and they believe it! When you grow up hearing it and are told that is how it is, of course you believe and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. The biggest proof of this will only become more and more understood as women becoming increasing addicted to pornography. The new generation of gals are not being told the same thing my generation was "That girls are not visual, but men are" hence, what you have is what I would predicted: Increased rate of pornographic viewing among young females. You see a trend in that the latest generation of young women have much higher rates of pornographic viewing than the generation above them.

The feminist movement is both good and bad. Good because it is going to illuminate that men and women are both visual. It is just so sad that so many are becoming addicted to pornography. That said, this is become a bit crazy... All these war on drugs? Like 20% of the populace is considered drug abusers. But over 80% of the populace are 'porn abusers'... Seems like a much bigger problem to me. Of course, the secular viewpoint still isn't on board that porn is bad, but they are at least acknowledging it CAN be bad, and that is a very big step in the right direction.

Again, I highly recommend Christian's check out the website http://mychainsaregone.org
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 9:22 am

In regards to Matthew 5:28, we should apply some common sense. If we apply this to any female (not just married) then we basically end up with a situation that requires a man to sin when finding his mate. In order to find a wife, you must desire her first. Unless you had an arranged marriage, I sure as hope you desired your wife before she was your wife. If not, that would be strange indeed.
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Sat May 20, 2017 10:16 am

Terrific posts, Gabe. I think you hit the nail square on the head. Telling people to 'look away' from women at beaches or water parks is NOT a solution. It does indeed trigger anxiety that often only makes people think more about impure sex and feel guilty. Let us not forget that Jesus said his yoke is light. The yoke of the evangelicals you mentioned is unbearable. Trust me, I tried it.

Gabe Grinstead wrote:In regards to Matthew 5:28, we should apply some common sense. If we apply this to any female (not just married) then we basically end up with a situation that requires a man to sin when finding his mate. In order to find a wife, you must desire her first. Unless you had an arranged marriage, I sure as hope you desired your wife before she was your wife. If not, that would be strange indeed.


A pastor once told me that a person should make zero consideration of looks when it comes to finding a partner. I certainly don't agree with that, but I there's a difference between finding someone attractive and indulging in sexual fantasies about them.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Paidion » Sat May 20, 2017 10:25 am

Gabe, here is a medical site reporting studies that show that men ARE more visual than women when it comes to sexual stimulation. Women are more aroused by "mood type, erotic video clips with a concrete story" whereas men are more aroused by "physical type, directly exposing sexual intercourse and genitalia."

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/808430
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby DaveB » Sat May 20, 2017 11:16 am

I have bowed out, but am still reading what you all have to say. Like I said, I'm bowing out because I don't want to stifle the seekers-after-truth.

The topic does lie at the very center of human Being - but Fallen human beings are different. A fact that must be considered.

Really bowing, now! :D
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 4008
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 11:43 am

Paidion wrote:Gabe, here is a medical site reporting studies that show that men ARE more visual than women when it comes to sexual stimulation. Women are more aroused by "mood type, erotic video clips with a concrete story" whereas men are more aroused by "physical type, directly exposing sexual intercourse and genitalia."

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/808430


Paidion, notice that I said conditioned. We create pathways making it true. I think you must have read past that. We respond and learn based on what we were taught.
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 12:19 pm

Paidion wrote:
As for masturbation, oral sex, and nudity, none of the Biblical writers addresses these practices.



Paidion,

What are your thoughts on those three things?
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Sat May 20, 2017 12:28 pm

qaz wrote:Terrific posts, Gabe. I think you hit the nail square on the head. Telling people to 'look away' from women at beaches or water parks is NOT a solution. It does indeed trigger anxiety that often only makes people think more about impure sex and feel guilty. Let us not forget that Jesus said his yoke is light. The yoke of the evangelicals you mentioned is unbearable. Trust me, I tried it.

Gabe Grinstead wrote:In regards to Matthew 5:28, we should apply some common sense. If we apply this to any female (not just married) then we basically end up with a situation that requires a man to sin when finding his mate. In order to find a wife, you must desire her first. Unless you had an arranged marriage, I sure as hope you desired your wife before she was your wife. If not, that would be strange indeed.


A pastor once told me that a person should make zero consideration of looks when it comes to finding a partner. I certainly don't agree with that, but I there's a difference between finding someone attractive and indulging in sexual fantasies about them.


Thanks.

I agree, there is a difference in finding someone attractive versus indulging in sexual fantasies about them.
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Paidion » Sat May 20, 2017 7:06 pm

Paidion, notice that I said conditioned. We create pathways making it true. I think you must have read past that. We respond and learn based on what we were taught
.

Yes, Gabe, I did notice you said "conditioned" but I gathered from the article that the difference in what arouses a woman and that which arouses a man (visual) is nature, rather than conditioning—although the article doesn't specifically state that it is nature.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Sun May 21, 2017 4:00 am

Does the Bible or this referenced book, talk about sex - between a human and a zombie :?: I'm only referring, to the Biblical sanctioned, heterosexual variety. :?: :roll:

Here's what they say about the book on Amazon at https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Sex-Liberating-Religious-Tradition/dp/1553954009/:

Divine Sex examines every Biblical reference to human sexual practice. By using tools of modern scholarship, evidence is produced to show that the Bible does not actually say what generations of professional religionists have told us. The Bible does not forbid all sexual activity other than monogamous heterosexual intercourse. Instead it treats us to a wide range of God-approved, and sometimes even God-supplied, sexual possibilities that the church has never told us about. In fact, the most famous erotic poem in history, is actually a book of the Bible!


Again, I am particularly interested in this quoted segment:

Instead it treats us to a wide range of God-approved, and sometimes even God-supplied, sexual possibilities that the church has never told us about.


Charismatic / Anglo-Orthodox / Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / ACNA;
Contemplation (i.e. Mindfulness, Yoga, Zen); Holistic Medicine (i.e. Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Traditional, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sun May 21, 2017 9:20 pm

Paidion wrote:Where does PT think the church obtained its dogma about sex? Did it invent this dogma? Or did it find most or all of it in the Bible?



I would think from the same source connected with the crusades, inquisitions & eternal torment might be a good guess as to where he would say various sex dogmas came from. The same church that considers traditions as being of equal authority to Scripture. That also has 'interesting' practices and viewpoints re Mary, priest celibacy, confession, communion, birth control, etc.

As long as the masses were left in the dark ages of ignorance & under threats of 'hell' & the rack, they might be easily manipulated. Relatively recently in history has that largely changed along with freedom of speech to voice one's opinions without fear of punishment.

Concerning "church dogma" re various sex acts, there has not been not one unified viewpoint among the 100's of Christian denominations & groups, but like with almost any doctrinal subject a diversity of opinions.

http://www.oddee.com/item_96646.aspx

Note: anything i link to or quote is for purposes of discussion, information, etc, & does not imply agreement with such.
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Mon May 22, 2017 12:03 am

Paidion wrote:Although it does not seem to be written that the Old Testament "saints" were reprimanded by God for consorting with harlots, yet we read in Leviticus 19:29 that the Lord gave this instruction to the Israelites:

Do not prostitute your daughter, to cause her to be a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry, and the land become full of wickedness.

If prostitution were okay with God, why would He desire that the land not fall into harlotry? And why would that result in the land becoming full of wickedness?



I think there are several reasons why this verse may not be a commandment against sex work for Christians today:

(1) First of all, it is written to OT Israelities under the law. So if you are a Jew, then by all means take it to heart, along with the other instructions in the chapter such as what food you can eat, how to keep your hair, observing the Sabbath, etc. Don't forget the instructions in the rest of Leviticus & the entire OT. OTOH, if you are a Christian under grace, then feel free to get a match & light the verse on fire.

v26 “‘Do not eat any meat with the blood still in it.
v27 “‘Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.
v30 “‘Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the Lord.

"...some texts seem to apply different standards to Jewish and non-Jewish women and are tolerant of Jewish men patronizing non-Jewish prostitutes...Both the narrative and legal parts of the Bible offer mixed messages when it comes to the sexual use of women...The legal sections of the Bible make it clear that you cannot prostitute your daughter: “Do not degrade your daughter and make her a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry and the land be filled with depravity” (Leviticus 19:29). Yet the law allows male soldiers to rape foreign captive woman (Deuteronomy 21:10-14) and permits slavery, calling for differential treatment based on the slave’s religious or cultural origin."
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article ... stitution/


(2) I don't think the verse is proof that a Jewish woman under law in Israel in those days thousands of years ago was not allowed to be a "lady of the night". So it wouldn't prove that a Christian couldn't be either.

What does it mean for the land to "fall into harlotry" or prostitution? Does it refer to a particular kind of prostitution that is offensive to God,
namely temple or "cultic prostitution", rather than prostitution in general? If so, then only this specific kind of sex work is forbidden. In support of that view are a large percentage of commentaries i read & a number of translations that include the words "cult" or "temple" prostitute. Some of those are:

"Do not profane your daughter to make her a cult-prostitute that the land may not prostitute itself and the land be full of lewdness." [CLOT]
Don’t let your daughters serve as temple prostitutes—this would bring disgrace both to them and the land. [CEV]
Do not disgrace your daughters by making them temple prostitutes; if you do, you will turn to other gods and the land will be full of immorality. [GNT]

"Do not prostitute thy daughter.—This refers to the degrading worship of Astarte which prevailed in ancient times, and which at times also broke out among the Jews." [Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers]

"Do not prostitute — As the Gentiles frequently did for the honour of some of their idols, to whom women were consecrated, and publicly prostituted." [Benson Commentary]

"This the Gentiles frequently did for the honour of some of their idols, to whom divers women were consecrated, and publicly prostituted."
[Matthew Poole's Commentary]

"Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore,....it refers to a wicked practice among the Phoenicians or Canaanites, Athanasius (m) speaks of, whose women used to prostitute themselves in the temples of their idols; and to such filthy services, in a religious way, the Israelites, in imitation of them, are forbid to expose their daughters: such filthy practices, under a notion of religion, were committed at Babylon, Corinth, and other places; See Gill on Micah 1:7" [Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible]
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/leviticus/19-29.htm

"prostitute thy daughter" -- The common practice, as a religious act, by the Canaanite and other ancient forms of idolatry"
(Universal Version Bible: The Torah, Lev. 19:29, p.337)

"A further passage that could refer to cultic prostitution is Lev.19:29...It is noteworthy that this verse comes as part of a series of religious and
ritual rather than ethical commandments (vv 26-31). Morover the verb 'profane' used here (piel of 'hll') is elsewhere employed in the Holiness Code in connection with religious and ritual offences, not ethical - including other sexual - sins, which suggests that cultic prostitution is specifally in mind here. (Cf. Lev.21:9, where it is specifically a question of a priest's daughter playing the harlot and where the verb 'hll' is likewise used). [Biblical & Near Eastern Essays By Carmel McCarthy, John F. Healey, p.8]
https://books.google.ca/books?id=vHSvAw ... ry&f=false

The Hebrew word includes among the various meanings that of "cult prostitute":
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 2181&t=LXX


[3] In context a conceivable interpretation is that the "fall into harlotry" regards only the specific type of prostitution spoken of earlier in the verse, namely a harlotry that is forced upon daughters by their own fathers, possibly a kind of pimping as sex slaves. In this view the profession of being a "female companion" is not being forbidden, but rather the "wickedness" of what is described in the first half of the verse. If enough fathers of Israel followed this practice, the land could be filled with this type of wickedness, i.e. the forceful pimping of daughters by their fathers.

The result of such a practice is that many others may be emboldened to imitate the wicked act of those forcefully pimping their own daughter,
leading to the whole "land falling into [such a type of] harlotry" [where fathers force their daughters]. In this interpretation the verse says nothing against those who wish to become prostitutes of their own choice.

The "land fall into prostitution". What kind of prostitution? The kind of the context, in the first half of the verse, that a father forcefully pimps his daughter?

The word "lest" indicates the possible consequences of a father forcing his daughter into prostitution. Many other fathers might follow his example leading to "the land" (Israel) falling to this type of wicked behavior. Thus the land would become full of wickedness. The wickedness of fathers who force their daughters into sex work. In this interpretation the verse says nothing against a woman who freely chooses the profession of her own free will.

If the writer of Leviticus had that in mind he could have said "Do not become a prostitute lest the land fall into wickedness".

It is implied that the land could fall into prostitution if some fathers force their daughters into it. This could be because many other fathers might follow their example and do the same thing. Otherwise, if not forced, it is unlikely many daughters would choose this vocation of their own volition. Therefore the verse does not require an understanding that it is against prostitution in general, but a particular type, namely the pimping of sex slaves.

The resulting wickedness of mass forced pimping of daughters by fathers would not only include the pimping itself but could easily lead to idolatry, bitter daughters etc.

"OK, so parents cannot sell their daughter’s sexuality. Few today would disagree with that principle. Note that this prohibition is on the parent, not the prostitute." https://www.holisticpolitics.org/LawOfL ... rlotry.php

(4) How does a "land" fall into harlotry? What land? Why would God care if it did? Does the reason have totally to do with ancient times & Israel & have no relevance to us today? Did they practice safe sex then or have advanced medical measures to avoid STI's & unwanted pregnancies? Did Israel need to have these instructions so that the OT prophesies could be fulfilled & the Savior of the world arrive?

Note: anything i link to or quote is for purposes of discussion, information, etc, & does not imply agreement with such.
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Tue May 23, 2017 5:15 pm

Paidion wrote:
And in the New Testament, Paul wrote:

Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never!(1 Corinthians 6:15)

The Greek word translated as "prostitute" or "harlot" is "πορνη" (pornā). This a feminine word. The masculine form is "πορνος" (pornos) and refers to a man who consorts with prostitutes. The word "πορνεια" (porneia) refers to prostitution. The English word "pornography" is derived from "pornā" and literally means "depiction of a prostitute." Many translations render "porneia" as "fornication" and the meaning of the word has been expanded to refer to any form of sexual immorality. The apostle Paul wrote:

For this you know, that no fornicator ("πορνος", pornos), unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:5 NKJV)




From what i've read online, the meaning of the Greek words in the porn- family are quite controversial as per internet articles, discussion forums & books for sale.

The popular opinion amongst "conservative" sources is that, as you say, the word porneia refers to "any form of sexual immorality". But a cursory look at the New Testament texts puts that in question when sin lists (Mk.7:21 & Gal.5:19) include both adultery and porneia. If porneia included adultery, then isn't adding adultery to the list redundant & pointless? Which might bring one to ask, what other "forms of sexual" activity are not included in porneia? Or, is porneia even restricted in its meaning to the sexual?

Re the meaning in the LXX one "conservative" author says "The Greek word family -porn- is found approximately 147 times in the canonical books
of the LXX. It is used predominantly in a symbolic way and stands for turning away from the Lord and getting involved in idolatry...the terms are also used in a literal sense. They apply to secular as well as to socalled sacred prostitution."

Which brings us to your quote of a Bible version of 1 Cor.6:15. A number of sources, liberal & conservative re sex, indicate the meaning is, or may be referring to, "sacred prostitutes". That is, temple prostitutes associated with idolatry & demonic worship to pagan gods. In that understanding the verse would not be a prohibition against "consorting with prostitutes" in general. Likewise with Eph.5:5.

In 1 Corinthians 5 porneia seems to refer to incest. In chapter 6 it refers to a (temple) prostitute. In chapter 7 verse 2 it isn't specified, but the context of chapters 5 & 6 indicate at least two possibilities.

In any case, as the final word, the value of sex in a Christian's life, even in marriage, seems clear from this New Testament inspiration:

1 If, then, ye were raised with the Christ, the things above seek ye, where the Christ is, on the right hand of God seated, 2 the things above mind ye, not the things upon the earth, 3 for ye did die, and your life hath been hid with the Christ in God; 4 when the Christ — our life — may be manifested, then also we with him shall be manifested in glory.

5 Put to death, then, your members that [are] upon the earth — .... uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and the covetousness, which is idolatry
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Wed May 24, 2017 1:57 am

Another 'interesting' article by "Martin Zender", titled "The truth about sexual lust; Part 5". In it he:

1. Indicates he may have read the book of the OP [by Philo Telus], as he quotes from several portions of it.

2. Gives his view of the meaning of Greek words in the porn- family.

3. Explains why he thinks the NIV translation of 1 Cor.6 is "grammatically-warped" & "makes a mess of this passage".

4. Details specificly which sexual practices he believes are forbidden by the Bible and

5. That he thinks everything else is allowed, giving a list of examples.

6. Concludes with "By mixing God’s standards with their own, the Pharisees also laid unwarranted, additional burdens upon people’s backs (Mark 7:1-9), to the point that Jesus rebuked them, saying: “You are repudiating the precept of God, that you should be keeping your tradition” (Mark 7:9).

http://martinzender.com/ZWTF/ZWTF6.16.pdf
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Wed May 24, 2017 9:00 am

Origen, to posit that fornication (sex outside of marriage) is not sin requires mental gymnastics. I'll post specific verses later.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Wed May 24, 2017 1:35 pm

1 Cor 7:2
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.


If intercourse outside of marriage weren't sinful, why would Paul tell people to get married as a means of ensuring they can let out their sexual urges in a non-sinful way?

Galatians 5
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do[b] such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Notice how Paul lists sexual immorality and idolatry as two separate things. Why would he do that if what makes sexual immorality bad is that it's linked to idolatry? If that were the case Paul could have simply said "idolatry", and that would have sufficed.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Wed May 24, 2017 1:39 pm

qaz wrote:Origen, to posit that fornication (sex outside of marriage) is not sin requires mental gymnastics. I'll post specific verses later.


I assume you are referring to Martin Zenders' article, since i don't see anyone else here saying "fornication (sex outside of marriage) is not sin".

Paidon merely said "As for masturbation, oral sex, and nudity, none of the Biblical writers addresses these practices."

Here's what Zender wrote:

"People have told me, “You cannot say that just because it is not on these lists, that God doesn’t prohibit it.” Yes, you can.

"There is nothing here about masturbation, or oral sex, or looking at bra ads (or even lusting after women, as we shall see in detail in our “lusting” section); there is nothing about lingerie, high-heels, battery-operated vibrators, sexual bondage, watching a woman swing naked from a chandelier (as long as it’s not your sister),looking at Playboy, masturbating to Playboy; there is nothing here about paying a woman for sexual favors. There is nothing here about two single people having consensual sex."

"God loves sex. Why shouldn’t He? He invented it." [p.8]

http://martinzender.com/ZWTF/ZWTF6.16.pdf
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Wed May 24, 2017 2:41 pm

Image

I don't think the Zombies, ever got their answer - regarding Biblical sanctioned sex. :lol:

Image

Personally, I think they like the kinky type - especially in a group. You know! The stuff you might find, in the Fifty Shades of Grey, movie and book series. With chains, handcuffs, whips, etc. :lol:

Image

So if the bible says nothing against it, then it must be OK - right :?: :oops: :roll:
Last edited by Holy-Fool-P-Zombie on Thu May 25, 2017 3:40 am, edited 3 times in total.
Charismatic / Anglo-Orthodox / Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / ACNA;
Contemplation (i.e. Mindfulness, Yoga, Zen); Holistic Medicine (i.e. Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Traditional, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Wed May 24, 2017 2:49 pm

Origen, please see my post right above your last post.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu May 25, 2017 1:42 pm

qaz wrote:
Galatians 5
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do[b] such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Notice how Paul lists sexual immorality and idolatry as two separate things. Why would he do that if what makes sexual immorality bad is that it's linked to idolatry? If that were the case Paul could have simply said "idolatry", and that would have sufficed.


Illegal sex, according to the Bible, is not necessarily associated with idol worship, as it may be in the case of pagan temple prostitutes. For example the incest in 1 Corinthians 5. Or the prohibited sex lists in the OT that refer to adultery, bestiality & other sinful sex practices.

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, [porneia], uncleanness, lasciviousness, (Gal. 5:19, KJV)
Now, the effects of the corrupt nature are obvious: illicit sex, perversion, promiscuity, (Gal 5:19, GWT)

According to Zender there are other kinds of prohibited sex in the Scriptures besides those involving idol worship with temple prostitutes. Zender lists bestiality, male to male anal sex, incest, rape, pedophilia, etc.
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu May 25, 2017 2:49 pm

qaz wrote:1 Cor 7:2
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.


If intercourse outside of marriage weren't sinful, why would Paul tell people to get married as a means of ensuring they can let out their sexual urges in a non-sinful way?




Certain types of intercourse outside of marriage are certainly sinful. These include incest, pagan temple prostitution, bestiality, etc.

In 1 Cor.7:2 Paul offers the option of marriage as a way to avoid temptations to illicit sex (e.g. incest & temple prostitution, 1 Cor.5,6,10). He doesn't offer the option of consensual sex between unmarried singles of the opposite sex, or any other type of unmarried intercourse. Therefore many conclude, by argument of silence, that Paul believes any intercourse outside marriage is sinful.

But could the reason Paul does not offer any pre marriage sex alternatives be not because they are all sinful, but because those that are biblicaly allowed were not an option in Corinth at that time of history, either because (1) they were not available, (2) not legal, (3) not healthy, or (4) any combination of the first three?

The reason why there is no condemnation of premarital sex in the Old Testament and only oblique references to it from St Paul, is that there simply weren't any nubile young virgin women running around ready to be deflowered! They were all married, many of them before they hit puberty, and generally before they even lost their virginity.

You can find a thorough description of ancient Hebrew marriage here(yes I know it's probably a JW website, but it pretty accurately describes marriage in ancient Israel). A couple that was betrothed was legally married even if they hadn't consummated their marriage yet. People were often betrothed at a very young age, even as children. In a society where literally everyone is married from childhood or early teenage years, there is no concept of premarital sex unless you're into seducing toddlers. In such a society it makes sense to speak of adultery as a sin rather than pre-marital sex because it would be hard to have pre-marital sex for lack of willing partners.

The only women who in theory would be readily available for extra-marital non-adulterous sex would be widows without family to look after them and orphans. Such women would generally be in a very precarious financial situation, which brings us to the issue of prostitution. You forget that in a pre-industrial, mainly agrarian society without modern medicine and birth control, having extra-marital sex would have been risky. It would have been a very strange woman who would have given it up for free especially if she was in poor - she'd be running the risk of death in childbirth and having a child to support. Any sane woman would have held out for a marriage proposal or demanded cash up front. Just because the bible refers to prostitution but is silent about extra-marital sex without payment doesn't mean the latter wasn't seen as sinful - it simply wasn't seen at all.

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-47972-page-5.html
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Thu May 25, 2017 4:09 pm

The reason why there is no condemnation of premarital sex in the Old Testament and only oblique references to it from St Paul, is that there simply weren't any nubile young virgin women running around ready to be deflowered! They were all married, many of them before they hit puberty, and generally before they even lost their virginity.


So in the ancient near east there were no unmarried women? That premise is ludicrous.

How would any man ever get married if all the women were already married?
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu May 25, 2017 5:34 pm

qaz wrote:
The reason why there is no condemnation of premarital sex in the Old Testament and only oblique references to it from St Paul, is that there simply weren't any nubile young virgin women running around ready to be deflowered! They were all married, many of them before they hit puberty, and generally before they even lost their virginity.


So in the ancient near east there were no unmarried women? That premise is ludicrous.

How would any man ever get married if all the women were already married?


The opinion of the quoted author didn't say there were no unmarried women. In fact he listed widows & orphans as examples of such. He also referred to toddlers, either already promised by their parents in prearranged marriages, or not.

As to his claim "there simply weren't any nubile young virgin women running around ready to be deflowered" because "they were all married", i suppose that is a bit of an exaggeration. I never thought the matter of whether or not premarital sex is biblicaly allowed rested on that point, or whether it was true of only 99.99% instead of 100% of them. Or one verse in the NT in a chapter where Paul is giving his opinions, as opposed to commands of the Lord, and they are based on the "present distress". There are a much larger number of verses that have been claimed either in support of, or in denial of, fornication or premarital relations.

I don't imagine in the first century AD there were many single gals looking to hook up for casual sex in bars, clubs or via cell phones & dating sites.

It seems that prostitution was very common & legal at that time of history. Also using one's slaves for sex. It was obviously a radically different culture than in the Western world today, which in turn influenced how the New Testament writers wrote to their audiences.

What the civil laws & punishments were for fornication would be something to look into. Would Paul recommend something that was biblicaly allowable if it could result in serious punishments for individual Christians & unnecessary persecution of the church?

"...extramarital relations with a free woman were severely dealt with. In the case of adultery, the cuckold had the legal right to kill the offender if caught in the act; the same went for rape. Female adulterers, and by extension prostitutes, were forbidden to marry or take part in public ceremonies.[2] The average age of marriage being 30 for men, the young Athenian had no choice if he wanted to have sexual relations other than to turn to slaves or prostitutes." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitut ... ent_Greece

"Masturbation is little noted in the sources for ancient Roman sexuality.[7] The poet Martial considers it an inferior form of sexual release resorted to by slaves.[8]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_masturbation

"But this form of sexual release thus held little erotic cachet: to use one's own slaves was "one step up from masturbation."[509]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_in_ancient_Rome

"... in ancient Rome it was seen as something only slaves should do."
http://archermagazine.com.au/2015/01/th ... -its-past/

"The Romans demolished Corinth in 146 BC, built a new city in its place in 44 BC, and later made it the provincial capital of Greece...Under the Romans, Corinth was rebuilt as a major city in Southern Greece or Achaia. It had a large[49] mixed population of Romans, Greeks, and Jews. The city was an important locus for activities of the imperial cult, and both Temple E[50] and the Julian Basilica[51] have been suggested as locations of imperial cult activity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Corinth

According to Zender "Paul presents two channels for sexual lust (this does not mean that there are only two): 1) illegal sexual intercourse
(“prostitutions”), and 2) marriage" http://martinzender.com/ZWTF/ZWTF6.12.pdf
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu May 25, 2017 7:13 pm

For Roman citizens...

"...it was socially acceptable and even expected for freeborn men to have extramarital sex with both female and male partners, especially adolescents, provided they (1) exercised moderation, (2) adopted the dominating role, and (3) confined their activities to slaves and prostitutes or, less commonly, a concubine or ‘kept woman’. As the property of another freeborn man, married or marriageable women and young male citizens were strictly off-limits.

"...The Romans sought in particular to control female sexuality because they thought of it as the basis of the family and, by extension, of social order and prosperity. These notions are epitomized by the cult of Venus, the mother of Aeneas and so of the Roman people, and, of course, by the absolute virginity of the Vestals, who would be buried alive if convicted of fornication."

"... Homosexual behaviour amongst soldiers not only violated the decorum against intercourse with another freeborn man, but also compromised the penetrated soldier’s sexual and therefore military dominance, with rape and penetration the symbols (and sometimes also the realities) of military defeat. According to Polybius, a Greek historian of the 2nd century BC, a soldier who had been penetrated could have attracted the ultimate penalty of fustuarium or cudgelling to death."

"...Most extramarital and same-sex activity took place with slaves and prostitutes. Slaves were regarded as property, and lacked the legal standing that protected a citizen’s body. A freeman who forced a slave into having sex could not be charged with rape, but only under laws relating to property damage, and then only by the slave’s owner. Prostitution was both legal and tolerated, and common, often in brothels or in the fornices (arcade dens) under the arches of the circus. Most prostitutes were slaves or freedwomen. By becoming a prostitute, a freeborn person suffered infamia (loss of esteem or reputation) and became an infamis, losing her or his social and legal standing. Other occupations to suffer from infamia—a concept that still retains some currency in the Roman Catholic Church—included not only pimps but also entertainers such as actors and dancers, and gladiators. Members of these groups, which had in common the pleasuring of others, could be subjected to violence and even killed with relative impunity."

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hi ... cient-rome

Paul himself was a Roman citizen & the church in Corinth may have had a number of Roman citizens.
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Fri May 26, 2017 6:00 am

Origen, there isn't a single text in the NT that condones sex outside of marriage.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Fri May 26, 2017 11:23 pm

qaz wrote:Origen, there isn't a single text in the NT that condones sex outside of marriage.


According to Martin Zender, for freedom Christ sets us free:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICLeyq8hjho

This 6 minute AV message on the subject by Zender doesn't specifically mention "sex outside of marriage", though we've already seen his view on that. It does, however, mention things like drinking, smoking a cigar & listening to Led Zeppelin. Also, if i recall, watching X-rated movies. I guess the more extended version might have mentioned "sex outside of marriage". But you'ld have to ask Zender about that.

New American Standard Bible
It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.(Gal.5:1)
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Sat May 27, 2017 4:29 am

"Life is like photography. You need the negatives to develop."-- Ziad K. Abdelnour


Just a brief commentary. Christ did talk about lust. And lust being as bad as adultery. Can you watch a pornography movie and not lust, after the actresses or actors?

And what if pornography becomes an addiction? Is that right or wrong?

Image

And - as a nerd and geek - I want to introduce the topic, of sex with robots. They can get the appearance right with silicon. And AI can make them smarter and more responsive. Is sex with robots...now or in the future...right or wrong?

From a theological and philosophical perspective...sex with androids, robots, zombies and p-zombies...falls into the same category. Since they all share, a trait in common. ;)

Charismatic / Anglo-Orthodox / Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / ACNA;
Contemplation (i.e. Mindfulness, Yoga, Zen); Holistic Medicine (i.e. Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Traditional, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Sat May 27, 2017 5:48 am

Origen; wrote:
qaz wrote:Origen, there isn't a single text in the NT that condones sex outside of marriage.


According to Martin Zender, for freedom Christ sets us free:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICLeyq8hjho

This 6 minute AV message on the subject by Zender doesn't specifically mention "sex outside of marriage", though we've already seen his view on that. It does, however, mention things like drinking, smoking a cigar & listening to Led Zeppelin. Also, if i recall, watching X-rated movies. I guess the more extended version might have mentioned "sex outside of marriage". But you'ld have to ask Zender about that.

New American Standard Bible
It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.(Gal.5:1)


It's a totally baseless assumption to think that verse condones fornication.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Paidion » Sat May 27, 2017 7:57 am

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1)

You are right, Qaz, that this verse has nothing to do with sex outside of marriage. It is all about our freedom from the Law of Moses, and not to submit again to the slavery of the law—circumcision, Sabbath keeping, observance of the Jewish feasts, having a disobedient son stoned to death, etc. Indeed, almost the whole book of Galatians is about this.

I would point out, however, that the word translated as "fornication" does not mean "sex outside marriage" as is often thought in our day. The feminine form of "fornicator" (pornā) means "prostitute" and the masculine form (pornos) means "consorter with prostitutes."
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Sat May 27, 2017 9:04 am

But paidion, don't you agree that sex outside of marriage is sinful?
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sat May 27, 2017 10:01 am

Paidion wrote: For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1)

You are right, Qaz, that this verse has nothing to do with sex outside of marriage. It is all about our freedom from the Law of Moses, and not to submit again to the slavery of the law—circumcision, Sabbath keeping, observance of the Jewish feasts, having a disobedient son stoned to death, etc. Indeed, almost the whole book of Galatians is about this.



Is this how you define "the Law of Moses":

"The Law of Moses, also called the Mosaic Law or in Hebrew: תֹּורַת מֹשֶׁה‎‎, Torat Moshe, refers primarily to the Torah or first five books of the Hebrew Bible, traditionally believed to have been written by Moses." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Moses

If it includes a law not to fornicate, then does the freedom in Christ (Gal. 5:1) from the law of Moses allow the freedom to fornicate?

"Fornication is generally consensual sexual intercourse between two people not married to each other."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornication
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Sat May 27, 2017 11:31 am

Holy-Fool-P-Zombie wrote:
And what if pornography becomes an addiction? Is that right or wrong?



"All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any." (1 Cor 6:12)

I wonder what Zender thinks about that one.

If all things are lawful, & there is no legitimate God given reasoning, word or conscience against something [e.g. fornication, masturbation, polygamy, oral sex], then is it koshur?

In chapter 6 Paul does not say that buying [or illicit] sex is unlawful or against the law of the Scriptures. To the contrary, he says all things are lawful.

So why does he tell the Corinthians to "flee" the sex workers in Corinth, which was apparently a lawful profession there? Were they carrying the bubonic plaque? He gives a number of arguments.

One of them is that if you join yourself to a prostitute you are one flesh with her & sinning against your own body.
One flesh. As Zender would say, penis in vagina. Sinning against your body would not be practical or "expedient" (v.12).
Unless one is a masochist, has a death wish, or feels it is a good Catholic way to do penance, etc.

How was joining to a sex worker 2000 years ago sinning against your own body? Bad breath? Dust & sweat? STI's? While modern medicine can often prevent or cure STIs easily with a pill or shot, back then it could have resulted in serious consequences, even death. Moreover back in the 1st century AD, without any effective protection, e.g. latex condoms, the risk of being infected would probably have been much higher. Obviously times have changed. We live in a completely different world. Therefore what concerned Paul back then may not have concerned him today.

Additionally, as regards what is "expedient", we have to think of others, too, not only ourself or our body. If the sex worker became pregnant & had a abortion, that would not only have resulted in a murder in which her client had his part, but also the procedure in Paul's time may have been extremely dangerous for the sex worker.

"all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any", such as the power of drug, sex or alcohol addictions.

Zender says:

"We are not under obligation to any commandments, none."

"The law never came to anyone but Israelites, so why would we have to do ANY of them? We behave ourselves because God sheds His love abroad in our hearts, not because we obey laws."

http://www.martinzender.com/QA.htm

7But not everyone has this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that they eat such food as if it were sacrificed to an idol.
And since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us closer to God: We are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. 9Be careful, however, that your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak.…
1 Corinthians 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

13 Therefore let us stop judging one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.
Rom. 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15If your brother is distressed by what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother, for whom Christ died.…

Titus 1:15
To the pure, all things are pure; but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure. Indeed, both their minds and their consciences are defiled.

Gal.5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Galatians 5:18 But if you be led of the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law, but under grace? By no means!…

For you, brothers, were called for freedom. Only don’t use your freedom for gain to the flesh, but through love be servants to one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, in this: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." Galatians 5:13-14
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:39 am

For those interested in additional discussion related to this general topic, perhaps the following may be of interest:

https://www.christianforums.com/threads ... t.8010466/
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:00 pm

People have brought up that masturbation isn't mentioned directly in the NT. Can't we infer that it's sinful based on what Jesus said on lust? The idea of having a sexual release without thinking of someone you find attractive seems strange to me.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:16 pm

qaz wrote:People have brought up that masturbation isn't mentioned directly in the NT. Can't we infer that it's sinful based on what Jesus said on lust? The idea of having a sexual release without thinking of someone you find attractive seems strange to me.


Didn't Paul say (1 Corinthians 7) if one cannot be single or control lusts then get married? He didn't address the question of what to do if one cannot find a wife. Or what to do with one's uncontrollable lusts in the time (months, years) leading up to finding a suitable wife. I assume he would have thought masturbation preferable to joining a harlot, which he called sinning against one's own body. Though it has been said that masturbation leads to blindness ;
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:12 am

qaz wrote:People have brought up that masturbation isn't mentioned directly in the NT. Can't we infer that it's sinful based on what Jesus said on lust? The idea of having a sexual release without thinking of someone you find attractive seems strange to me.


What if it's a travelling businessman away from home & wife for days, weeks or months at a time? And while doing the deed he's thinking about his wife, or talking to her on the phone, or via video chat?

What are unmarried incarcerated Christians doing significant or life sentences supposed to do?

What was Paul's thorn in the flesh?

"The idea of having a sexual release without thinking of someone you find attractive seems strange to me."

I'm not sure if that would even work. How about imagining what one's future wife would look like? Call it M & M's (monogamous masturbation).

Or envision a fantasy woman who's not real. A Vulcan, Ferengi or Borg, for example. Or how about a Vampire? Though I wouldn't recommend Zombies. Since Mt.5:28 refers to lustful adultery with a real human woman, would it apply to invented alien creatures? Or to a single person finding another unmarried person desirable?

From what Paul says here it would be easy to conclude that an unmarried individual curbing one's lusts via autoeroticism would be preferable to doing it via sex in marriage:

1 Cor 7:28 But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord.
33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and his interests are divided.
An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit.
But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35 I am saying this for your own
good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who
has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right,
but he who does not marry her does better.
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby qaz » Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:52 am

Origen, I can't imagine fantasizing about one's spouse would be a sin, given that intercourse between husband and wife isn't. When I said I think we can infer that masturbation is a sin, I should have specified- while fantasizing about a person that's not one's spouse.
qaz
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Biblical divine sex

Postby Origen; » Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:51 am

The following article delves into the meaning of Matthew 5:28:

"“Whoever Looks at a Woman With Lust”: Misinterpreted Bible Passages #1"

"...Matthew 5:27–28: Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη· οὐ μοιχεύσεις. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ βλέπων γυναῖκα πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι αὐτὴν ἤδη ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ.

“You heard it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman in order to covet her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

"...The ordinary interpretation of this passage is that lust is equivalent to adultery; that is, if a man sexually desires a woman, he has already committed adultery with her in God’s eyes."

"...The first thing to understand in this passage is that Jesus is in no way intensifying the Law here, nor is he saying anything new. What’s that, you say? The Law doesn’t forbid lusting after a woman? Well, as it turns out, the Greek word usually translated “lust” in this passage (ἐπιθυμέω; epithumeô) happens to be the same word used to translate the Hebrew word for “covet” (‏חמד) in the Tenth Command in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament), which says:..."

"“You will not covet your neighbor’s wife. You will not covet your neighbors house or his field or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or any animal which is your neighbor’s.”

"Sounds an awful lot like what Jesus says in this passage, doesn’t it? They’re even more alike once one realizes that the Greek word for “woman” and “wife” happens to be the same. In this passage, Jesus reminds his audience that the Law not only prohibits adultery, it prohibits coveting. This is not so much an intensification of the Law as it is a reminder of what the Law already says. And just as the Law itself was intended to be fulfilled, Jesus intends his words here to be followed (and that following them is entirely possible)."

"Another important point is that the command does not forbid recognition of quality or even desire itself (such would be nonsense) but something else: it forbids the action of coveting (hence the verbal form). “Lust” or “desire,” even the sexual variety, is nowhere forbidden in Scripture, nor is it equated with sin, only with the potential to sin (cf. James 1, where lust leads to sin but is not itself sinful). It is also important to note the distinction between the verbal form and the nominal form: when the Hebrew חמד or Greek ἐπιθυμέω are used as verbs in the OT, it denotes desire directed at obtaining the specific object in question and not merely the existence of the desire itself. This fits well with the Tenth Command, which is perhaps best understood as forbidding fixing one’s desire upon obtaining something that is not rightfully one’s own. In order to explain this point more adequately, a fuller discussion of the meaning of “lust” (Gk. ἐπιθυμία; epithumia) in the New Testament and the culture of that period is necessary."

Continued at:

http://www.jasonstaples.com/bible/most- ... ew-527-28/
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Next

Return to Biblical Theology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 8 guests