Pensive

Hello, I’m new to these forums, obviously, but have been questioning many aspects of the Bible for a while now. One issue in particular, the Biblical stance on sex, has become the topic of discussion with a certain Christian at another message board.

His is the odd view that sex divorced from its other essential aspects is a corruption and not how God intended. He asserts that love, marriage, sex, and childbearing are parts of a “whole package�, and that—well, see for yourself:


Naturally, he doesn’t advocate the use of contraceptives, and believes that the above holds even within the confines of marriage. Are there any scriptures that support his view on the subject? I was Christian for nineteen years, and I don’t recall EVER having heard such a thing.

Amaleq13

Welcome to the forum! :wave:

Lesson 1: Don't let your opponent make you do his homework for him.

He has given you an excellent opening to request that he provide biblical support for his view:

"You are correct--there is no biblical support for the view that "sex is for the purposes of creation only." This, however, is not the view that I asserted..."

Toto

There is an entire book on this issue: Uta Ranke-Heinemann's Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven (out of print but you might find a used copy.)

Ranke-Heinemann traces the anti-sex attitudes of the Christian Church to the Gnostics, who thought that the entire world was the corrupt invention of an evil god, the Demi-urge, and also from earlier and contemporaneous Greek philosophers. Her position is that Judaism is sex-positive; married people are supposed to enjoy sex (and other aspects of the world.) Gnostics renounced sensual pleasure in general, including sexual pleasure. The Gnostics were eventually defeated by orthodox Christians, but the orthodox incorporated some Gnostic doctrines.

(Not everyone agrees with this bleak picture of the Gnostics, who had varied doctrines.)

It takes her the entire book to trace the development of Christian thought on this matter, from the Roman Empire through Luther. It's been a while since I read it. But there is nothing Biblical about this anti-sex attitude, nothing that can be found in the writings of the NT.

DougP

Im not a real big bible scholar, so I wont answer your question, however, I will say welcome to the boards! If you want to meet some more new people here, head down to the lounge and start a thread to introduce yourself.

-Doug

Anat

I'd say the only situation where the HB requires reproduction is the case of the Levirate marriage, where the levir is required to produce an heir for the deceased brother (see Onan in Genesis).

In Genesis it is emphasized that Joseph's sons were born during the years of plenty, before the famine, whereas Levi had a daughter while entering Egypt, during the famine. This was taken by traditional Jewish commentators to signify a difference of opinion on the commandment to be fruitful and multiply: Joseph's interpretation was that the requirement was to have 2 children, regardless of gender (thus he refrained from further reproduction when the famine came), whereas Levi understood it as a requirement as at least one child of each sex, thus he continued to have more children until his daughter was born despite the famine.

Other than Onan's method of withdrawal there is no mention of means of contraception in the HB (at least to my knowledge) but there are simple methods that although less effective than our modern ones, still could have curbed the number of children per woman in those times. Ecological breastfeeding would be one child-spacing method. Another primitive method of contraception would be acidifying the vagina prior to copulation.

Sven

If someone needs a German version, I can provide one.
Read it nearly 10 years ago, thus I don't remember much - but it's by all means a very nice book!

Javaman

Here's a summary of the book:

Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven:
Women, Sexuality, and the Catholic Church
Uta Ranke-Heinemann
Doubleday 1990 from "Sunshine for Women".

Looks like there are some smaller online book stores that still have English versions available if needed.

itsamysteryhuh

To me it seems that anti-fornication, anti-adultery, anti-pre-marital-sex, anti-prostitution, and anti-homosexuality would be better descriptions than simply anti-sex. I think Christians who go by what is said in the Bible know that sex between a married couple is a gift.....not to be abused of course.....and is also a necessary thing if humans are to reproduce.

exile

Apparently St Jerome held that viriginity was superior to marriage.

Had Christians taken this advice there might not be any left today!

Toto

Actually, this is a modern view, more in accord with the ancient Jewish view. Christianity through much of its history was anti-pleasure, and in particular anti-sexual pleasure. Sex was supposed to only be for procreation.

Under the assault of modern psychology and rationality, Christians have retreated from these "medieval" views. But the Catholic Church is still opposed to contraception, even in a loving marriage that has produced an adequate number of offspring, because it clings to the idea that sexual pleasure without the possibility of conception is a sin.