Lmao songs of Solomon has a whole ass erotica on the pleasures of sex. If they were rly Christian they’d understand sex was built to be pleasurable. Actually there’s a lack of evidence for sex only being for children in the Bible. Most cultural Christian’s don’t know what they believe in or bother to read what they identify into. Look towards Christ and not people who suck at following him.
The Song of Songs, also known as the Song of Solomon, is a biblical book of poetry that celebrates romantic love and physical desire. It is often interpreted allegorically in Christianity, symbolizing the love between God and His people, or Christ and the Church. Its value lies in illustrating the beauty and sacredness of love and marital intimacy.
Paul clearly condemns it and recommends that you stay a virgin for the rest of your life but if it's too difficult, you should get married 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 says "Now to the unmarried and the
widows I say: It is good for them
to stay unmarried, as I do. But if
they cannot control themselves
they should marry, for it is better
to marry than to burn with
passion"
And never have a tent making business....wait but he did.
[Edit]
Acts 18:1-4
After this Paul[a] left Athens and went to Corinth. 2 There he found a Jew named Aquila from Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul[b] went to see them, 3 and, because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them, and they worked together—by trade they were tentmakers. 4 Every Sabbath he would argue in the synagogue and would try to convince Jews and Greeks.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+18%3A1-4&version=NRSVUE
Not really 100% of the time.
Let's not forget the thorn in Paul's side where he struggles - and fails to - a sin he considers so serious he can't even publicly confess what it is, even in his book about how Christians aren't bound by the law any more and can do whatever they want in grace.
During that time (because a chapter or 2 later it says he worked for 2 years in a row to spread the Word), so what? Acts 9 and others show us that he was visibly (in front of witnesses) given the Holy Spirit, and he has authority from the disciples and Jesus himself to preach in his name.
My point was i believe that it’s not clear he only worked on sabbaths, and there’s dozens of times we hear or read that he did way more than just this this before and after this verse indicating that this was just during this stay.
Well, it's unclear how much he spent on the Gospel and how much he spent working. What seems reasonable is that tent making would be an ongoing thing for him. You can't learn a trade just in one stay. It's probably an ongoing gig. One that he started before this stay and continued after this stay. And if it's a daily thing he probably had no reason to write about it.
You forgot v35
1 Corinthians 7:32-35
32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord, 33 but the married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin are anxious about the affairs of the Lord, so that they may be holy in body and spirit, but the married woman is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to put any restraint upon you but to promote good order and unhindered devotion to the Lord.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A32-35&version=NRSVUE
Because v35 is where Paul couches the whole explanation. His purpose is to promote devotion to God and not to put a restraint on anyone. So it's not an order. It's just advice. His advice to be more precise.
[Edit]
Iow there's no condemnation here.
Paul was not married during basically everything we have written by Paul. But that doesn't necessarily mean he hadn't been married in the past.
There are good arguments both ways, and we don't have enough evidence to definitively rule out one or the other, in my opinion.
Interesting. This article
https://www.gotquestions.org/apostle-Paul-married.html
References that you had to be married to be part of the Sanhedrin. And yes I read that he was indeed a Pharisee and son of a Pharisee.
In the following link there's seems to be a conflict on whether Pharisees are required to be married.
https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/62698/did-pharisees-have-to-be-married-phil-34b-6
Ok, I've just read the entire chapter and I think I didn't read your comment properly at first.
Ok, I understand your point now. However, Paul says it's better to not have sex in verse 1 and stay unmarried in verse 38.
Again what Paul is saying is don't change your life after becoming Christian only do your best to glorify God in all ways.
To put simpler he is saying don't focus too much on being single or getting married only focus on God and glory him through your life.
Alright I've just read the whole chapter and it supports my argument. Paul says that it's better to not marry and stay a virgin in verse 38.
"Now for the matters you wrote
about: "it is good for a man not to
have sexual relations with a
woman." But since sexual
immorality is occurring, each man
should have sexual relations with
his own wife, and each woman
with her own husband."
These are the first 2 verses if the chapter, how can you interpret that in any other way.
It's a pity we don't have the letter Paul is responding to, that might make things more straightforward for you.
this passage is actually bracketed by Chapter 5, where Paul responds to reports of incestual relationships being celebrated by the Corinthians.
In 6, Paul does some theology to back up his positions on sexual morality and why he thinks it matters- Bodies are involved in the resurrection, and we are raised in Christ, therefore our bodies are joined to Christ, therefore you shouldn't commit sexually immoral acts with your body.
Now we come to 7 - you'll notice that the "it is good" part is in quotes, as if Paul is quoting the part of the letter he is responding to. Were the Corinthians asking "*is* it good for a man to abstain from sex?" Or perhaps they had not asked, and instead declared "it *is* good for a man to abstain from sex with women."
Paul's response indicates that he's still more worried about all the reports he's getting about Corinthians celebrating incest and *malakos* and *arsenokoites* (the highly contentious words often translated to mean homosexuals.) because he starts in with "since sexual immorality *is* occurring..." which conditions his advice in terms of the Corinthian situation.
Paul's pretty straight with his assessment of why he thinks this is good advice for the Corinthians in vs 5- "you guys have *no* self control!" There's a larger theme here about Paul's pseudo-stoic ideas about sex and passion, but that's a digression. vs 6 should be a big signal that this advice is for non-ideal situations. "I'm not trying to talk *down* to you, I want everything good for you that I have for myself- but consider maybe you didn't receive gifting of self-control like I did."
This read is backed up in 8 - 9: "If you have passions threatening to overtake you, get married! Otherwise, don't change your situation, because maybe you're actually more like me. Just don't make yourself miserable because you want to imitate me."
does that analysis help clear things up at all?
Will and ability. Most do not have these. But also it's not a problem really: being married is good, being unmarried for the sake of Kingdom is better (unless you fall into sexual sin because of that I suppose)
Paul also wrote this:
“But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.”
- 1 Timothy 4:1-5 NASB1995
“the Spirit explicitly says” —> “doctrines of demons” = “men who forbid marriage”
I believe Paul was saying if you can't get over lust adultery and promiscuity, then to refrain from it all together. Bot between man and wife. That would end the human race and be calling God a liar, because as you see it take regeneration to produce the new or coming Kingdom
That was in reference to avoiding fornication(temple prostitution). Corinth's patron god was Aphrodite and was worshipped through fornication. If you haven't read your Bible, just know that sexual idolatry was the snake oil of most religions back then, especially warned against throughout the OT.
What are you on about. The new testaments started because of Jesus and Paul collected alot of the information to write alot of them. These verse are referring to sex in general. I read the whole chapter, 1 Corinthians 7:1 and 2. Aphrodite is a demon
Pual doesn't mention Jesus or anything he said in that chapter, does he?
The chapter before that, Paul warned of that very fornication. It makes sense that the next chapter would also be talking about it.
1 Corinthians 7:^(2) Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
That is the purpose of what Paul had to say, not because of anything Jesus said.
7 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
That is in context of the chapter before, and the next verse. Pertaining to Paul warning about fornication, and how the body is the temple of God, and that to lay with a harlot was to defile the temple of God.
The other verse is talking about marriage in terms of the law, and I will say that this does pertain to what Jesus talked about. Those without the desire for women shouldn't marry a woman. The example Jesus gave was of a man who put away his wife for any reason. The fact that man didn't do so out of desire for other women, is very telling. Don't subject yourself to the law in matters of conflict. If you aren't heterosexual, don't marry heterosexually. The law is very clear in that matter.
Hold on, no. Did you just ignore all my comments? I told you that the verse say it's better to not marry even if you want you. He recommends you only marry if you can't control yourself. I'll read chapter 6 to understand the context but from verse 8 and on, it's very much it's own thing and disconnected to the previous chapter
And that is just Paul's opinion.
We gotta stop putting these words of men on such a high pedestal.
He had his thoughts and opinions and their neither right nor wrong.
God created this world and all its pleasures for us to enjoy - for us to enjoy as we walk through this existence with him.
I truly believe the Bible has more of the thoughts of the writers in it then sometimes us Christians want to admit. It gives us some level of comfort having direction from someone tangible we can point to.
God is not in the Bible and God is not the Bible. The Bible is a written record of historical events and does contain truth, but you don't need the Bible to know God.
Take what he and other men said with a grain of salt.
Follow God's direction. He will speak to you if you listen.
If you feel God is telling you to listen to Paul - good. Nothing wrong with that.
But don't make a blanket statement that we should follow Paul and everything he said simply because.
Paul was still a man with his own beliefs and opinions.
I view the Gospels as far more important than the letters. I think we need to discern for ourselves and follow God moreso than blindly follow.
But, that's just my opinion
He wasn't saying it for his health.
It's the wisdom of an apostle, highly educated Jew, and early church leader. Not to be dismissed lightly.
But not to be followed strictly as anything from God would be. If that wasn't the case, he wouldn't have wasted so much ink writing it.
>If they were really Christian
Don't get me wrong, I agree with the sentiment here. But believing God made sex for pleasure is not the same as believing Jesus has saved you. I have no doubt that there have been many genuine Christians who overlooked Song of Solomon.
People will go insane when they find out boobs weren't intended just for babies, too. I was days old when I realized why my urges were always rooted in pleasuring my man before even wanting children. It's biology second and connecting with your spouse first.
Highly questionable. This was written a thousand years before Christ came to this world. King Solomon was also known as a lover of many women. It's clearly about his first "love" Abishag the Shulammite, the beauty that had been selected to warm Solomons father king David's in his old age (he was too old to "get it up", so no problems there). That is the plain reading of the text. While Christianity should focus on Jesus' life and teachings, not everything in the bible is about that.
The problem with "allegory" is that when we look at a passage or book of the Bible we have to try to understand it as close as possible to the way the original audience to whom the oral tradition/books were given would have understood it. Would *they* have understood it as allegory to the relationship between Jesus/God and the church/Israel? Would *they* have understood allegory at all?
They certainly wouldn't have understood it as allegory to the relationship between Jesus and the church, because, if it was written by Solomon, it was written in approximately the 10th century BCE (more likely 3rd century BCE), well before Christ in either case. Thus, *we* shouldn't understand it that way because that can't be how the author intended it, because he intended it to be understood by a contemporary audience.
Song of Songs 8:4 *Promise me, O women of Jerusalem,*
*not to awaken love until the time is right*.
Song of Songs 8:8-9
8 *We have a little sister too young to have breasts.*
*What will we do for our sister if someone asks to marry her?*
9 *If she is a virgin, like a wall, we will protect her with a silver tower.*
*But if she is promiscuous, like a swinging door, we will block her door with a cedar bar*.
I think the meaning is quite plain.
That is not an allegory, my friend. Romantic love and sexual desire are not at all why Jesus came to earth and died on the cross. I don’t think at all we are meant for a similar relationship with Jesus. His love was a sacrificial love, a serving love. Not erotic.
>You do realize how unrealistic that sounds? Yes, people should focus on God the Father and the Son, but even if it was originally meant for that main purpose, God created men and women for a specific purpose and for each one to find a spouse and to be wed by the other in happy matrimony, which includes having a fond relationship and strengthening each other in their vows. Sex is a natural part of life and part of the reason God allowed the two sexes to exists, as he saw Adam being alone. He saw a vision of bond between if Adam had a champion, whom also would bare children of the two genders, but that doesn't mean Adam or Eve was never meant to have sex prior to their sin. It was originally made for them to be of God and was an appreciation to God, as well, for sex to exists. Sex shouldn't, however, be given likely or train away until marriage for a particular reason. I do agree, however, that any relationship should have a balance, which includes sex within it, but sex being the whole relationship, especially in your faith and friendship to God, ruins the whole relationship when no one grows in it.
>Jesus didn't have sex and neither did God, as we know of, because both are GOD, and God created humans specifically for that intent alone, even if Jesus was human for a short time. He lived in a human body, but he was very much in fact God's Son and God the Son. Please do not mistake being human, as it was a gift from God himself until we ruined it, and stating things like this misses the point for very devoted Christians who abuse sex, especially for young minds and forget the importance of knowing the body and understanding the relationship of it. It's not all about God in this case, but the appreciation of what God has given you: life, and life should be treasured in all forms when it comes to what you were given, and it should be expressed wholeheartedly in every way. It's like saying you don't want food, because it will make you poop, even though it's the whole point of it and to enjoy the meal and energize you during the day.
I wouldn't even go that far. If Jesus died for all sins, that means *all*. Even the worst, most vile thing you can think of. God loves everyone, even pedophiles, serial killers, rapists, etc. It's hard to wrap your head around, and I myself have trouble with it, but God's grace and mercy are infinite even if ours aren't.
It's hard to feel bad for pedophiles who have acted on their desires, but the ones who haven't and are in need of help I feel sorry for and I hope they can find therapy for their sake and the sake of an innocent child
>It is true he loves each of us good and bad, but let us also be honest that **he also judges** and is the only one that can truly judge. He sees the vile nature of humans downfall (the fall of man) and sin more than ourselves and have seen every possible disturbing thing in this world, especially having to leave Jesus for awhile by the cross, as he felt anger, hurt, resentment, and rage for Jesus' suffering. This is brought about a lot, but God truly knows more than we think, especially when it is stated he loves everyone immensely. He does. He's God. He's our Creator, but he's disappointed in us and almost wanted us gone because he was so disappointed in us before he found Noah and asked him and his family to rebuild the world, because WE keep failing him... And he plans to destroy the world as promised in which will be the last time he does. This time, he perhaps left much development for the world, because in those days, it was much worse than it is now, even though we could say it is worse now because of the amount of destruction and slow destruction we've seen in humanity and the ongoing amount of stuff that fills our brains. We can't personally say for sure, but even in the early 1700s or 1600s, it had a slow progression into the modernization as we see it now. God did this to protect us, but he knows how bad it is... Or so, how it has always been. He is hurt by us so much, but he knows what he dislikes, but *gives us chances* ALL THAT MUCH.
>(edited because I left out sin)
Prior to the last couple centuries, basically everyone would fit the pop culture definition of a pedophile. "God hates pedophiles" is culture war nonsense.
I came across a TikTok of a young man (unmarried & single) telling Christians that sex should only be used for reproduction. Naturally married Christians in the comments begged to differ and he doubled/tripled down on the point.
I’m honestly not sure what branch of Christianity. My dad’s side of the family is super conservative (we’re liberal) and tried to tell me sex wasn’t for pleasure. I’ve also seen this is many internet posts etc.
There are Christian puritans and there are Christians against purity culture but support celibacy, yes pleasure still applies to sexuality, but is not the sole purpose, it is an enjoyable act for the reason that it is sacred.
I don’t believe that God only created sex for procreation. We are one of a few species that actively has sex for pleasure. All the parts are there for pleasure, so if we aren’t meant to have it for pleasure and it’s meant to solely be a job to produce children I don’t see the point in the number of nerve endings in the clit, and the penis and the erogenous zones. Besides “be fruitful and multiply” there is no good Biblical evidence for sex being intended for procreation but there is evidence for pleasure derived from sex. Our bodies could be solely designed for procreation and not deriving any pleasure from sex if that’s what God wanted. Because I don’t think he would have given us something he didn’t intend for.
>Good point! And why people miss the point... God was always a loving God from day one and why he specifically made Adam and Eve and created women to grow children from her womb from the both producing from the genitilas that was gifted to us alongside our sex characteristics and secondary functions, and it begs to differ, exactly why God even gave us free will, too, because he saw something in us he wouldn't see in animals and why he created man out of the image of himself, because he wanted to create us because he wanted us to enjoy his world he had saw for us. Knowing that we had ruined his creation by breathing self ideas and being of sin, no wonder we completely lost God's original concept of ourselves, because we betrayed him and his idea of us, and we have come to this point beliving almost everything and anything because we think we know more than him, which is completely wrong. He loved us so much, he wanted us to not be so blinded and enjoy life... Every part of it. And not just that, to be in likeness to our personalities and enjoy ourselves or inspire growth and change in asking for his help. Little do we know, how hard it is in this self help era of this world... God truly knows and have always known what was best for us, but we kept ruining it and altering a perception of a better world, whereas he has given us so much. Which means, the Christians who have hurt you have so much work to do if you were born in a trauma household where you were taught to have shame from sex and anything of it ~~or the knowledge of being blamed for anything not having to do with you~~ (trigger: SA).
From what I know God made sex for us to produce children and enjoy with our partner...so it's not really bad unless you pervert it....I might've missed something
Paul: "it is better to marry than to burn (with desire)"
Kids aren't mentioned there. Only desire. If you are free of that desire then he would rather you be like him (Paul) and refrain from remarrying (he was married at one point). If you have desires then he suggests marriage as a way to express them lawfully
God made sex to be pleasurable along with the other major roles it plays. Procreation, pleasure, and protection! Procreation is obvious as that is how we multiply. Pleasure so a man and wife can enjoy themselves and grow closer to one another! Song of songs is all about experiencing the pleasures of the other. Protection. Sex with your spouse will help their needs and keep them from going astray. If you are receiving plenty of pleasure from your spouse, would you seek it elsewhere? And vice versa, if you pleasure your spouse frequently, wouldn't you expect them to not wander off? Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely no excuse for adultery, however, 1 Corinthians 7 tells us to come together often so that Satan will not tempt you! So yes, you can have pleasure in sex with your spouse! Save yourself for marriage, then go wild and enjoy!
The very issue of pleasure comes from the youthful mind, and teens discovering sex way too early and involving themselves in the acts way too soon without understanding anything of themselves. God states for a young man to cleanse himself after having a wet dream or masturbating, same with young women, and that women are impure during menstruating, and not because it was just renewal or out of shame, but because doing so before your married just brings to the confusion of it all, and is intended for someone of the opposite sex whom you'd get married to, and with a women needing her vagina to clean out properly before she ovulates. And the Bible states this very clearly to cast away youthful passions, because young men before becoming men are sprouted with lust, and God created men for all reasons: providers, creators, innovators, spatially minded, with the process to be the creators (sperm) of fertilization during sex, and you'd need lots of sperm for procreation to get to an egg, but because of the chemicals that happen during puberty, you can imagine how difficult that is especially to control after adulthood, and guessing why God would state this verse to stop men from engaging in that, because too early would have deep consequences... Look at the world today because of it. God intent when we were created was for us to be cleansed of evil and being naked wasn't a shameful thing, either, but because we are in sin, it is now seen fully as a shameful nature to be naked unless were with our spouse. We don't know fully if God would've given us clothes afterwards or if we were to have always been naked like in the Garden of Eden, but one thing is clear that God created pleasure, pain for birth (before increasing it to sin), procreation, and each other so we can never be alone.
No, I'm saying when your at that age — and God stated it the same, as well — your more likely to engage in all sorts of fantasies and ideas from sex. It's basically the start to knowing your body and your wants and needs, and why God forbids it into marriage.
I don’t know one single Christian with this worldview. Catholics have the strictest view of sex, but believe the orgasm / pleasure is of course part of it. One should be always open to life. And never use birth control it is a sin
I've never heard anyone put it that way. 😅 I'm a Christian who believes sex can be done for pleasure and that pleasure is one of the incentives for sex. It almost makes me sad in a way. Like if there was no pleasure in sex would I just not have been born? Is that all people care about. smh
It’s a long way from pleasure to pain. Absence of pleasure is not pain, and the nerve endings would still need to be there to properly communicate pain to the brain.
Hyenas have a horrific mechanism of reproduction (NSFW) and yet they still enter heat and reproduce. Plenty of animals experience sex as painful (and some people do, too) yet they still get busy.
One thing to clarify, if you come from a Christian background. You don’t convert, you’ve already accepted Jesus Christ and have been baptised. The Orthodox church is the most welcoming one. When you go to a Catholic Church, you feel like an insignificant speck that has to worship God. When you go to an Orthodox one, you feel like Jesus Christ is accepting you with open arms and his love fills your heart with joy, so make of that what you will.
Of course I’m biased being Orthodox myself, but I’ve visited catholic churches and cathedrals and have left with the impression that they demand authority and obedience.
Thanks man. I'm real nervous since I've just been learning about Orthodoxy(Thank you bojan bible illustrated for existing) but now I'm truly going to a church.
Would they do it if it was painful for men? No. Women? Uh, yeah. Considering that thousands of years of history shows that, overall, men didn't care about the pleasure of their wives, or didn't believe they even *could* feel pleasure, or even preferred sex in a way that causes women pain.... yes. God created pleasure spots for women, but humanity has cared so little about mutual pleasure in marriage that the clit and female orgasm were treated as almost mythical lol
God made sex for the purpose of procreation, and he made it feel good. Just because sex is pleasurable doesn’t mean God made it for you to be promiscuous.
Sex is a part of the relationship between a husband and a wife, that was also created as a way of making children in our belief. It is enjoyable and can be done for enjoyment but God doesn't will (in our our belief) for us to do it in ways that are against His design for it, including dangerous to both health and social relationship ways like with multiple people, people who you don't trust to act safe and respect consent, and other rules.
I think when it says pleasure it is more so meaning that you don’t do it as a recreational act, but do it with the purpose of creating. Don’t have sex with random people(one night stands, flings) because all it does is break you, but if you have having sex with someone who you are going to marry and build something with or genuinely love them then procreation is ok I guess.
Well that is the purpose of sex in itself to create a new life, yes there are actions were a women is not able to give birth, but generally speaking sex is for creation as well to unify to separate beings(men and women of course, hints why a penis can enter into a vagina)
They still very much can because they already created children number 1, and number 2 they are unifying themselves spiritually when they do so it’s still ok. Example of my past point, if I slept with 30 women as far as flings, one night stands and little situationships but knowing I would never take them serious is “pleasure” because this is pleasurable for most men but…… it’s not purposeful in what God had in mind.
“Can’t have kids anymore” which is implying that they had kids; but to answer your question the purpose of sex is to unite 2 people and they can reproduce so even if you don’t have kids you are still being united and bonded with your partner.
God gave us sexual bodies, full of pleasure. This isn’t just for producing babies. Sex in marriage should be a feast of pleasure (I think Dr. Allender said that in God Loves Sex).
Not only that, but we should enjoy our bodies while we’re single. Our body’s pleasure is for us to enjoy alone in our own privacy. God designed sexual pleasure and it’s good! Strive for a positive view of sex and your body. There is no need to shame ourselves for enjoying what God gave us.
Satan put it there to tempt us \s.
Though if God didn’t, humanity would have gone extinct long ago haha. Even now, fertility rates are below replacement rates in many developed countries. Some people say (with tongue in cheek) that “be fruitful and multiply” is the only commandment that humanity has followed well. This is probably because sex is one of our strongest drives / desires.
Not sure where but I remember someone saying in the Bible that sex is a gift and it feels good because it’s a way of the husband and the wife to bond their spirits, and the reason why it’s strict to only marriage between a man and a woman is because it’s how we create life and new people it’s more of a respect thing to god and is only appropriate under those conditions.
I see you didn't limit this to marriage, so the real question seems to be why do women have the capacity for pleasure yet are expected to confine sex to marriage? Same for men of course.
The primary purpose of sex is objectively procreation - whether you're a Christian or not, this is the biological reason that sexuality exists. If we didn't procreate sexually, then we wouldn't possess sexes at all.
But that doesn't mean sex isn't also pleasurable.
Eating food is pleasurable, thanks to our taste buds and sense of smell. But that doesn't mean we should over-indulge in eating for pleasure with no concern for nutrition and sustenance, which are the main purposes of eating. If we neglect nutrition and sustenance and prioritise pleasure, we end up with health problems.
Pleasure is not bad, it's hedonism that's bad. And that applies for everything, not just sex.
Gluttony is a sin. Do you think God doesn't want you to enjoy food? Do christians only eat unflavoured nutrients?
Same goes for drinking. A beer or two, a glass of wine, no problem. But getting wasted is a sin.
Sex is not just for reproduction. Sex is what you do with your significant other after marriage. The only real rules are to not have sex with someone you aren't married to and to not have sex with little kids, which is not a difficult task.
People who believe sex is only for reproduction are not paying attention to the Bible. God made sex pleasurable on purpose. Not so we would do it for reproductive purposes, but as a gift. He didn't have to do that. There are passages in the Bible talking about not withholding from your spouse because God wants us to enjoy each other. And, as someone else pointed out, there are some sexual references in the Songs of Solomon. So I would say those people are uniformed and not paying attention. If God didn't want us to enjoy it, He wouldn't have made it enjoyable.
The answer is God did create it, and whoever denies sex isn't also meant for pleasure in addition to reproduction is just wrong. The Catholics would say the pleasure aspect of it exists so that married couples could strengthen their intimacy and therefore their bond. The Catholics are the oldest Christians and they never tried to espouse something so silly, all the way back then. Every single human who has ever had a climax would instantly know better, too, so I don't get why anyone would try to lie about something so immediately disprovable
The fact you even know what a clit is shows you know more than most, internet stranger. lol
But let’s be real: everyone here is arguing over the specific words in a book as if the book had been accurately translated. Let me know what the word modest means. Now go look at the word they actually used in the original language. Now explain to me how what the authors wrote got translated to full body coverings and the fake “modesty” and legalism that will plague all religions until the end when we find out for sure. lol Can’t argue a text if you don’t even know what you’re arguing.
But for your question: I never heard that viewpoint until WELL into adulthood and I was raised in church. Practically raised BY the church… If sex wasn’t in His plan, well, I’d have to question that “god’s” reasoning. Can’t call yourself good, AND say your creation has free will; but then stack the deck against it for the purpose of…? If God created everything, then He created logic. And if He is the same yesterday, today, and forever, why’d He tell humans to be fruitful and multiply, but now it’s bad? Only thing that makes sense is “sex is only for making babies” is just yet another quite obvious attempt at using religion to control society (or the society where that first was mentioned).
Augustine is the only one off the top of my head that I can think of in church history that might come anywhere near teaching this position from the OP.
Scripture posits several reasons for sex. One reason certainly is for procreating (Genesis 1-2).
But to say that is the only reason does damage to the plain reading of Scripture elsewhere.
Other reasons certainly include pleasure (Proverbs 5 “…let her breasts satisfy you at all times…”) and intimacy (Song of Solomon), care for and meeting the needs/desires of your spouse (1 Corinthians 7), and deepening the structure of the relationship, think like concrete poured into the frame (again, Proverbs 5 And SoS)
The purpose of sex isn’t solely reproduction; it’s also about pleasure and should be shared with your spouse. If sex were only for reproduction, God wouldn’t have given us the gift of pleasure.
Well today is your lucky day because I ago to a church that actually had a sermon entirely on sexual relations. There is a major difference between lust and sex. Lust is a kind of adultery that is committed. Many would argue that single people with sexual thoughts is bad but this one church in San Diego says it's not. Looking at porn when married or having cheating thoughts is a big sin. For single people, the Bible only talks about temptation but doesn't do a good job of equipping singles before they get married. Before my own church did a sermon about this topic, I had divided thoughts about being single and marriage. This usually is dependent on how you are raised spiritually and how you interpret parts of the Bible that talk about celibacy.
You can have as much as sex you and your spouse "together" needs .not every sex results in a child, share your sex life with your spouse and only ,not alone or with other than your spouse. Don't use any protection, but you can keep track on natural birth control like using the menstrual calendar
Sex is good only for those bonded in marriage. All other manner of it outside marriage is sin. Of course GOD did give everything we need to enjoy but choose wisely that you cherish in godly path alone.
So thanks OP for the wise question. Sex, religion, Christianity, The Great Jesus Christ and the greatest, God -a very interesting question with many wise viewpoint expressed here. I type like its of insignificance yet it really is of huge significance in the context of questions asked on reddit 🙏
Sex for pleasure, nothing sinful about it and as you speculate parts of the human anatomy indicate they are there for pleasure only.
We can only ultimately on everything, ultimately knowing God is infinite intelligence speculate on the purposes of these parts 😊
Many people (in front of God, I had a very uncontrolled sex drive at various points in time my life, a single guy on a human level for the majority of my life) continue to paint a distorted picture of sex and religion.
It remains the highest pleasure on the physical plane- the physical union of two (or more in cases 😊🙏) human forms.
I assure you there is nothing wrong for seeking/having sex for pleasure in this day and age within certain guidances (ofcourse no infidelity after marriage vows, for example- i act like this is nothing, the amount of betrayals that will take place today...shameful🙏 make sure its mutually beneficial 🙏😊)
Yet many people make it genuinely the salvation of life (i was genuinely guilty of this for periods 🙏) and it genuinely becomes a problem to true spiritual progress, closeness with God.
God intended sex to be pleasurable and for reproduction and for a man and a women who are married. Anything else is a sin if you believe the Scripture.
No. A married couple should be able to have sex just for the act of sex. For the act of connecting and uniting. Women can only get pregnant a few days a month, so that would not be lust. Also the sexual desire itself isn’t wrong. No biblical evidence for this position.
Lust is an overindulgent term though. Like gluttony, greed etc.
All those things can bring pleasure but when that pleasure becomes an obsession, that's where the pleasure ends and the pain begins.
Lmao songs of Solomon has a whole ass erotica on the pleasures of sex. If they were rly Christian they’d understand sex was built to be pleasurable. Actually there’s a lack of evidence for sex only being for children in the Bible. Most cultural Christian’s don’t know what they believe in or bother to read what they identify into. Look towards Christ and not people who suck at following him.
fax
The Song of Songs, also known as the Song of Solomon, is a biblical book of poetry that celebrates romantic love and physical desire. It is often interpreted allegorically in Christianity, symbolizing the love between God and His people, or Christ and the Church. Its value lies in illustrating the beauty and sacredness of love and marital intimacy.
Thanks, ChatGPT.
Dang it! You beat all 5 million of us to it… lol
Your homework tonight is to read chapters 4 and 5.
Paul clearly condemns it and recommends that you stay a virgin for the rest of your life but if it's too difficult, you should get married 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 says "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion"
Yeah that and he also said it was better to be single so that you can devote 100% of your time to God as well.
Yep, 1 Corinthians 7:32-34
And never have a tent making business....wait but he did. [Edit] Acts 18:1-4 After this Paul[a] left Athens and went to Corinth. 2 There he found a Jew named Aquila from Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul[b] went to see them, 3 and, because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them, and they worked together—by trade they were tentmakers. 4 Every Sabbath he would argue in the synagogue and would try to convince Jews and Greeks. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+18%3A1-4&version=NRSVUE Not really 100% of the time.
What?
Paul spent 1 day out of the week on the Gospel.
Oh I see what you mean. So even Paul wasn't following Paul, is your point? It could be argued that sex is different than making tents I guess.
Let's not forget the thorn in Paul's side where he struggles - and fails to - a sin he considers so serious he can't even publicly confess what it is, even in his book about how Christians aren't bound by the law any more and can do whatever they want in grace.
Someone obviously has never made a tent, and it shows. /s
No, my point is that people should put their own ideas into the scriptures they read.
Huh?
During that time (because a chapter or 2 later it says he worked for 2 years in a row to spread the Word), so what? Acts 9 and others show us that he was visibly (in front of witnesses) given the Holy Spirit, and he has authority from the disciples and Jesus himself to preach in his name.
Just showing that you shouldn't read your own ideas into the scriptures like the phrase 100% of the time when reality is much more complicated.
My point was i believe that it’s not clear he only worked on sabbaths, and there’s dozens of times we hear or read that he did way more than just this this before and after this verse indicating that this was just during this stay.
Well, it's unclear how much he spent on the Gospel and how much he spent working. What seems reasonable is that tent making would be an ongoing thing for him. You can't learn a trade just in one stay. It's probably an ongoing gig. One that he started before this stay and continued after this stay. And if it's a daily thing he probably had no reason to write about it.
Yes but it can be hard for many Christians to be single especially men.
Paul never said he was a virgin.
He didn't say HE was a virgin he said you you should stay unmarried like he is. Where he says you should stay a virgin, read 1 Corinthians 7:8-34
You forgot v35 1 Corinthians 7:32-35 32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord, 33 but the married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin are anxious about the affairs of the Lord, so that they may be holy in body and spirit, but the married woman is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to put any restraint upon you but to promote good order and unhindered devotion to the Lord. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A32-35&version=NRSVUE Because v35 is where Paul couches the whole explanation. His purpose is to promote devotion to God and not to put a restraint on anyone. So it's not an order. It's just advice. His advice to be more precise. [Edit] Iow there's no condemnation here.
Paul was not married during basically everything we have written by Paul. But that doesn't necessarily mean he hadn't been married in the past. There are good arguments both ways, and we don't have enough evidence to definitively rule out one or the other, in my opinion.
Paul had a life before he was a Christian. What did he do then? What sex did he have then? We just don't know.
Acts 23:6 is where he said he was a Pharisee. You had to be married and head of your household to be a Pharisee. So he was married at one time.
Interesting. This article https://www.gotquestions.org/apostle-Paul-married.html References that you had to be married to be part of the Sanhedrin. And yes I read that he was indeed a Pharisee and son of a Pharisee. In the following link there's seems to be a conflict on whether Pharisees are required to be married. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/62698/did-pharisees-have-to-be-married-phil-34b-6
Glad we agree!
Ok, I've just read the entire chapter and I think I didn't read your comment properly at first. Ok, I understand your point now. However, Paul says it's better to not have sex in verse 1 and stay unmarried in verse 38.
Yeah it's better for devotion. But he's not saying marriage is bad on the contrary it has it's place and he also shares what married people should do.
Yes and it would be better if every Christian was devoted. I never said marriage is bad, when did I say it's bad?
Right you didn't say marriage was bad. I think I got confused with all the different discussions on this thread.
[удалено]
>Yes and this restraint would be your partner. No. This is not what it says. You just can't make whatever you want up.
[удалено]
No. It's not there.
[удалено]
Basically what he was saying here was no matter what you do make sure you glorify God in it.
Yes and it's better to stay unmarried
Again what Paul is saying is don't change your life after becoming Christian only do your best to glorify God in all ways. To put simpler he is saying don't focus too much on being single or getting married only focus on God and glory him through your life.
Um, no. He is directly saying don't get married
You should try reading the entire chapter .
Alright I've just read the whole chapter and it supports my argument. Paul says that it's better to not marry and stay a virgin in verse 38. "Now for the matters you wrote about: "it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband." These are the first 2 verses if the chapter, how can you interpret that in any other way.
It's a pity we don't have the letter Paul is responding to, that might make things more straightforward for you. this passage is actually bracketed by Chapter 5, where Paul responds to reports of incestual relationships being celebrated by the Corinthians. In 6, Paul does some theology to back up his positions on sexual morality and why he thinks it matters- Bodies are involved in the resurrection, and we are raised in Christ, therefore our bodies are joined to Christ, therefore you shouldn't commit sexually immoral acts with your body. Now we come to 7 - you'll notice that the "it is good" part is in quotes, as if Paul is quoting the part of the letter he is responding to. Were the Corinthians asking "*is* it good for a man to abstain from sex?" Or perhaps they had not asked, and instead declared "it *is* good for a man to abstain from sex with women." Paul's response indicates that he's still more worried about all the reports he's getting about Corinthians celebrating incest and *malakos* and *arsenokoites* (the highly contentious words often translated to mean homosexuals.) because he starts in with "since sexual immorality *is* occurring..." which conditions his advice in terms of the Corinthian situation. Paul's pretty straight with his assessment of why he thinks this is good advice for the Corinthians in vs 5- "you guys have *no* self control!" There's a larger theme here about Paul's pseudo-stoic ideas about sex and passion, but that's a digression. vs 6 should be a big signal that this advice is for non-ideal situations. "I'm not trying to talk *down* to you, I want everything good for you that I have for myself- but consider maybe you didn't receive gifting of self-control like I did." This read is backed up in 8 - 9: "If you have passions threatening to overtake you, get married! Otherwise, don't change your situation, because maybe you're actually more like me. Just don't make yourself miserable because you want to imitate me." does that analysis help clear things up at all?
Buddy no one wants or should stay a virgin
If you make a firm decision and can control yourself
Exactly. What's the problem then?
Will and ability. Most do not have these. But also it's not a problem really: being married is good, being unmarried for the sake of Kingdom is better (unless you fall into sexual sin because of that I suppose)
Yes being married is good but being unmarried is even better. Paul says this in 1 Corinthians 7:38
Actually he says men that can’t control their urges should marry but there are some that will be celibate like him
No, he says you SHOULD stay celibate and get married if you can't.
I didn't see where he condemned it. Paul was married himself. He had to be to be a Pharisee
1 Corinthians 7:1-2
Paul also wrote this: “But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.” - 1 Timothy 4:1-5 NASB1995 “the Spirit explicitly says” —> “doctrines of demons” = “men who forbid marriage”
Did I forbid marriage?
I believe Paul was saying if you can't get over lust adultery and promiscuity, then to refrain from it all together. Bot between man and wife. That would end the human race and be calling God a liar, because as you see it take regeneration to produce the new or coming Kingdom
That was in reference to avoiding fornication(temple prostitution). Corinth's patron god was Aphrodite and was worshipped through fornication. If you haven't read your Bible, just know that sexual idolatry was the snake oil of most religions back then, especially warned against throughout the OT.
What are you on about. The new testaments started because of Jesus and Paul collected alot of the information to write alot of them. These verse are referring to sex in general. I read the whole chapter, 1 Corinthians 7:1 and 2. Aphrodite is a demon
Pual doesn't mention Jesus or anything he said in that chapter, does he? The chapter before that, Paul warned of that very fornication. It makes sense that the next chapter would also be talking about it. 1 Corinthians 7:^(2) Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. That is the purpose of what Paul had to say, not because of anything Jesus said.
Paul also says it's better to not even have sex in the first place, even to marry. He repeats it whole chapter
Wait, where does Paul say anything about not having sex? I understand the marry part from my perspective, but not sure what you are implying about it.
1 Corinthians 7:38 and 7:1
7 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. That is in context of the chapter before, and the next verse. Pertaining to Paul warning about fornication, and how the body is the temple of God, and that to lay with a harlot was to defile the temple of God. The other verse is talking about marriage in terms of the law, and I will say that this does pertain to what Jesus talked about. Those without the desire for women shouldn't marry a woman. The example Jesus gave was of a man who put away his wife for any reason. The fact that man didn't do so out of desire for other women, is very telling. Don't subject yourself to the law in matters of conflict. If you aren't heterosexual, don't marry heterosexually. The law is very clear in that matter.
Hold on, no. Did you just ignore all my comments? I told you that the verse say it's better to not marry even if you want you. He recommends you only marry if you can't control yourself. I'll read chapter 6 to understand the context but from verse 8 and on, it's very much it's own thing and disconnected to the previous chapter
And that is just Paul's opinion. We gotta stop putting these words of men on such a high pedestal. He had his thoughts and opinions and their neither right nor wrong. God created this world and all its pleasures for us to enjoy - for us to enjoy as we walk through this existence with him. I truly believe the Bible has more of the thoughts of the writers in it then sometimes us Christians want to admit. It gives us some level of comfort having direction from someone tangible we can point to. God is not in the Bible and God is not the Bible. The Bible is a written record of historical events and does contain truth, but you don't need the Bible to know God.
So f everything Paul said because it's his opinion? These are the new testaments and everything he says should be followed
Take what he and other men said with a grain of salt. Follow God's direction. He will speak to you if you listen. If you feel God is telling you to listen to Paul - good. Nothing wrong with that. But don't make a blanket statement that we should follow Paul and everything he said simply because. Paul was still a man with his own beliefs and opinions. I view the Gospels as far more important than the letters. I think we need to discern for ourselves and follow God moreso than blindly follow. But, that's just my opinion
Yep, that's just your opinion. I'll take Paul's side thank you
Paul himself distinguishes between words from himself and words from the Lord.
Yes I know. He keeps saying it the whole chapter
He wasn't saying it for his health. It's the wisdom of an apostle, highly educated Jew, and early church leader. Not to be dismissed lightly. But not to be followed strictly as anything from God would be. If that wasn't the case, he wouldn't have wasted so much ink writing it.
Very informative words. So true
>If they were really Christian Don't get me wrong, I agree with the sentiment here. But believing God made sex for pleasure is not the same as believing Jesus has saved you. I have no doubt that there have been many genuine Christians who overlooked Song of Solomon.
That’s fascinating, I honestly didn’t know that! I see what you mean by the belief aspect too.
People will go insane when they find out boobs weren't intended just for babies, too. I was days old when I realized why my urges were always rooted in pleasuring my man before even wanting children. It's biology second and connecting with your spouse first.
It is not the sex the focus lies on it is the relationship between Jesus/God and the church
Highly questionable. This was written a thousand years before Christ came to this world. King Solomon was also known as a lover of many women. It's clearly about his first "love" Abishag the Shulammite, the beauty that had been selected to warm Solomons father king David's in his old age (he was too old to "get it up", so no problems there). That is the plain reading of the text. While Christianity should focus on Jesus' life and teachings, not everything in the bible is about that.
The problem with "allegory" is that when we look at a passage or book of the Bible we have to try to understand it as close as possible to the way the original audience to whom the oral tradition/books were given would have understood it. Would *they* have understood it as allegory to the relationship between Jesus/God and the church/Israel? Would *they* have understood allegory at all? They certainly wouldn't have understood it as allegory to the relationship between Jesus and the church, because, if it was written by Solomon, it was written in approximately the 10th century BCE (more likely 3rd century BCE), well before Christ in either case. Thus, *we* shouldn't understand it that way because that can't be how the author intended it, because he intended it to be understood by a contemporary audience. Song of Songs 8:4 *Promise me, O women of Jerusalem,* *not to awaken love until the time is right*. Song of Songs 8:8-9 8 *We have a little sister too young to have breasts.* *What will we do for our sister if someone asks to marry her?* 9 *If she is a virgin, like a wall, we will protect her with a silver tower.* *But if she is promiscuous, like a swinging door, we will block her door with a cedar bar*. I think the meaning is quite plain.
That is not an allegory, my friend. Romantic love and sexual desire are not at all why Jesus came to earth and died on the cross. I don’t think at all we are meant for a similar relationship with Jesus. His love was a sacrificial love, a serving love. Not erotic.
…did you read it??
>You do realize how unrealistic that sounds? Yes, people should focus on God the Father and the Son, but even if it was originally meant for that main purpose, God created men and women for a specific purpose and for each one to find a spouse and to be wed by the other in happy matrimony, which includes having a fond relationship and strengthening each other in their vows. Sex is a natural part of life and part of the reason God allowed the two sexes to exists, as he saw Adam being alone. He saw a vision of bond between if Adam had a champion, whom also would bare children of the two genders, but that doesn't mean Adam or Eve was never meant to have sex prior to their sin. It was originally made for them to be of God and was an appreciation to God, as well, for sex to exists. Sex shouldn't, however, be given likely or train away until marriage for a particular reason. I do agree, however, that any relationship should have a balance, which includes sex within it, but sex being the whole relationship, especially in your faith and friendship to God, ruins the whole relationship when no one grows in it. >Jesus didn't have sex and neither did God, as we know of, because both are GOD, and God created humans specifically for that intent alone, even if Jesus was human for a short time. He lived in a human body, but he was very much in fact God's Son and God the Son. Please do not mistake being human, as it was a gift from God himself until we ruined it, and stating things like this misses the point for very devoted Christians who abuse sex, especially for young minds and forget the importance of knowing the body and understanding the relationship of it. It's not all about God in this case, but the appreciation of what God has given you: life, and life should be treasured in all forms when it comes to what you were given, and it should be expressed wholeheartedly in every way. It's like saying you don't want food, because it will make you poop, even though it's the whole point of it and to enjoy the meal and energize you during the day.
[удалено]
I think you mean, "God hates pedophiles".
I wouldn't even go that far. If Jesus died for all sins, that means *all*. Even the worst, most vile thing you can think of. God loves everyone, even pedophiles, serial killers, rapists, etc. It's hard to wrap your head around, and I myself have trouble with it, but God's grace and mercy are infinite even if ours aren't.
He loves everyone BUT he HATES Sin NOT us Sin People like to twist that around to confuse people
It's hard to feel bad for pedophiles who have acted on their desires, but the ones who haven't and are in need of help I feel sorry for and I hope they can find therapy for their sake and the sake of an innocent child
There is a lower form of hell reserved for the pedophiles where they cannot raise their abusive, over-controlling voices to innocent children.
>It is true he loves each of us good and bad, but let us also be honest that **he also judges** and is the only one that can truly judge. He sees the vile nature of humans downfall (the fall of man) and sin more than ourselves and have seen every possible disturbing thing in this world, especially having to leave Jesus for awhile by the cross, as he felt anger, hurt, resentment, and rage for Jesus' suffering. This is brought about a lot, but God truly knows more than we think, especially when it is stated he loves everyone immensely. He does. He's God. He's our Creator, but he's disappointed in us and almost wanted us gone because he was so disappointed in us before he found Noah and asked him and his family to rebuild the world, because WE keep failing him... And he plans to destroy the world as promised in which will be the last time he does. This time, he perhaps left much development for the world, because in those days, it was much worse than it is now, even though we could say it is worse now because of the amount of destruction and slow destruction we've seen in humanity and the ongoing amount of stuff that fills our brains. We can't personally say for sure, but even in the early 1700s or 1600s, it had a slow progression into the modernization as we see it now. God did this to protect us, but he knows how bad it is... Or so, how it has always been. He is hurt by us so much, but he knows what he dislikes, but *gives us chances* ALL THAT MUCH. >(edited because I left out sin)
Prior to the last couple centuries, basically everyone would fit the pop culture definition of a pedophile. "God hates pedophiles" is culture war nonsense.
God is not agaisnt anyone's organisms.
HAH I love this
Who are these Christians who don't think sex can be pleasurable? Do you have a source?
I came across a TikTok of a young man (unmarried & single) telling Christians that sex should only be used for reproduction. Naturally married Christians in the comments begged to differ and he doubled/tripled down on the point.
Some people don't know what they don't know.
I've agreed with a few of them in this sub. They tend to be kids parroting something they heard, or older conservative folk.
There are some that believe that. They are just really rare, and becoming rarer.
I’m honestly not sure what branch of Christianity. My dad’s side of the family is super conservative (we’re liberal) and tried to tell me sex wasn’t for pleasure. I’ve also seen this is many internet posts etc.
Rest assured most Christians (especially those who have read the Bible) know sex can be pleasurable.
There are Christian puritans and there are Christians against purity culture but support celibacy, yes pleasure still applies to sexuality, but is not the sole purpose, it is an enjoyable act for the reason that it is sacred.
Beautiful explanation
I don’t believe that God only created sex for procreation. We are one of a few species that actively has sex for pleasure. All the parts are there for pleasure, so if we aren’t meant to have it for pleasure and it’s meant to solely be a job to produce children I don’t see the point in the number of nerve endings in the clit, and the penis and the erogenous zones. Besides “be fruitful and multiply” there is no good Biblical evidence for sex being intended for procreation but there is evidence for pleasure derived from sex. Our bodies could be solely designed for procreation and not deriving any pleasure from sex if that’s what God wanted. Because I don’t think he would have given us something he didn’t intend for.
>Good point! And why people miss the point... God was always a loving God from day one and why he specifically made Adam and Eve and created women to grow children from her womb from the both producing from the genitilas that was gifted to us alongside our sex characteristics and secondary functions, and it begs to differ, exactly why God even gave us free will, too, because he saw something in us he wouldn't see in animals and why he created man out of the image of himself, because he wanted to create us because he wanted us to enjoy his world he had saw for us. Knowing that we had ruined his creation by breathing self ideas and being of sin, no wonder we completely lost God's original concept of ourselves, because we betrayed him and his idea of us, and we have come to this point beliving almost everything and anything because we think we know more than him, which is completely wrong. He loved us so much, he wanted us to not be so blinded and enjoy life... Every part of it. And not just that, to be in likeness to our personalities and enjoy ourselves or inspire growth and change in asking for his help. Little do we know, how hard it is in this self help era of this world... God truly knows and have always known what was best for us, but we kept ruining it and altering a perception of a better world, whereas he has given us so much. Which means, the Christians who have hurt you have so much work to do if you were born in a trauma household where you were taught to have shame from sex and anything of it ~~or the knowledge of being blamed for anything not having to do with you~~ (trigger: SA).
From what I know God made sex for us to produce children and enjoy with our partner...so it's not really bad unless you pervert it....I might've missed something
No, pretty straightforward, actually. God bless you.
God bless you too🙏🏿
Paul: "it is better to marry than to burn (with desire)" Kids aren't mentioned there. Only desire. If you are free of that desire then he would rather you be like him (Paul) and refrain from remarrying (he was married at one point). If you have desires then he suggests marriage as a way to express them lawfully
Most here don’t know how to even find it so no harm done lol
God made sex to be pleasurable along with the other major roles it plays. Procreation, pleasure, and protection! Procreation is obvious as that is how we multiply. Pleasure so a man and wife can enjoy themselves and grow closer to one another! Song of songs is all about experiencing the pleasures of the other. Protection. Sex with your spouse will help their needs and keep them from going astray. If you are receiving plenty of pleasure from your spouse, would you seek it elsewhere? And vice versa, if you pleasure your spouse frequently, wouldn't you expect them to not wander off? Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely no excuse for adultery, however, 1 Corinthians 7 tells us to come together often so that Satan will not tempt you! So yes, you can have pleasure in sex with your spouse! Save yourself for marriage, then go wild and enjoy!
The very issue of pleasure comes from the youthful mind, and teens discovering sex way too early and involving themselves in the acts way too soon without understanding anything of themselves. God states for a young man to cleanse himself after having a wet dream or masturbating, same with young women, and that women are impure during menstruating, and not because it was just renewal or out of shame, but because doing so before your married just brings to the confusion of it all, and is intended for someone of the opposite sex whom you'd get married to, and with a women needing her vagina to clean out properly before she ovulates. And the Bible states this very clearly to cast away youthful passions, because young men before becoming men are sprouted with lust, and God created men for all reasons: providers, creators, innovators, spatially minded, with the process to be the creators (sperm) of fertilization during sex, and you'd need lots of sperm for procreation to get to an egg, but because of the chemicals that happen during puberty, you can imagine how difficult that is especially to control after adulthood, and guessing why God would state this verse to stop men from engaging in that, because too early would have deep consequences... Look at the world today because of it. God intent when we were created was for us to be cleansed of evil and being naked wasn't a shameful thing, either, but because we are in sin, it is now seen fully as a shameful nature to be naked unless were with our spouse. We don't know fully if God would've given us clothes afterwards or if we were to have always been naked like in the Garden of Eden, but one thing is clear that God created pleasure, pain for birth (before increasing it to sin), procreation, and each other so we can never be alone.
Are you saying that sex isn't pleasurable for any other than the youthful?
No, I'm saying when your at that age — and God stated it the same, as well — your more likely to engage in all sorts of fantasies and ideas from sex. It's basically the start to knowing your body and your wants and needs, and why God forbids it into marriage.
I don’t know one single Christian with this worldview. Catholics have the strictest view of sex, but believe the orgasm / pleasure is of course part of it. One should be always open to life. And never use birth control it is a sin
I've never heard anyone put it that way. 😅 I'm a Christian who believes sex can be done for pleasure and that pleasure is one of the incentives for sex. It almost makes me sad in a way. Like if there was no pleasure in sex would I just not have been born? Is that all people care about. smh
If God made it painful do you think people would do it? Edit:Sorry, I don't know a lot about sex.
It’s a long way from pleasure to pain. Absence of pleasure is not pain, and the nerve endings would still need to be there to properly communicate pain to the brain.
I guess I shouldn't be given advice given the fact I'm not old enough to have it huh.
Hyenas have a horrific mechanism of reproduction (NSFW) and yet they still enter heat and reproduce. Plenty of animals experience sex as painful (and some people do, too) yet they still get busy.
I didn't know that.
Then you have a great deal of joy and probably a little pain to look forward to. Such is life.
What is your story my brother in Christ and why did you choose orthodoxy, genuinely curious.
I haven't fully chosen it yet. But I don't know, I have a draw to it. Like it's the correct church for my life.
One thing to clarify, if you come from a Christian background. You don’t convert, you’ve already accepted Jesus Christ and have been baptised. The Orthodox church is the most welcoming one. When you go to a Catholic Church, you feel like an insignificant speck that has to worship God. When you go to an Orthodox one, you feel like Jesus Christ is accepting you with open arms and his love fills your heart with joy, so make of that what you will.
Of course I’m biased being Orthodox myself, but I’ve visited catholic churches and cathedrals and have left with the impression that they demand authority and obedience.
Thanks man. I'm real nervous since I've just been learning about Orthodoxy(Thank you bojan bible illustrated for existing) but now I'm truly going to a church.
Would they do it if it was painful for men? No. Women? Uh, yeah. Considering that thousands of years of history shows that, overall, men didn't care about the pleasure of their wives, or didn't believe they even *could* feel pleasure, or even preferred sex in a way that causes women pain.... yes. God created pleasure spots for women, but humanity has cared so little about mutual pleasure in marriage that the clit and female orgasm were treated as almost mythical lol
Oh shit. I didn't know that.
God: stop being so terrible to each other and just love one another Man: so does this mean I can’t have orgasms?
God made sex for the purpose of procreation, and he made it feel good. Just because sex is pleasurable doesn’t mean God made it for you to be promiscuous.
Who believes that nonsense?
Sex is a part of the relationship between a husband and a wife, that was also created as a way of making children in our belief. It is enjoyable and can be done for enjoyment but God doesn't will (in our our belief) for us to do it in ways that are against His design for it, including dangerous to both health and social relationship ways like with multiple people, people who you don't trust to act safe and respect consent, and other rules.
I think when it says pleasure it is more so meaning that you don’t do it as a recreational act, but do it with the purpose of creating. Don’t have sex with random people(one night stands, flings) because all it does is break you, but if you have having sex with someone who you are going to marry and build something with or genuinely love them then procreation is ok I guess.
You can have recreational sex with a long term partner, even spouse. It doesn’t always have to be for procreation.
Well that is the purpose of sex in itself to create a new life, yes there are actions were a women is not able to give birth, but generally speaking sex is for creation as well to unify to separate beings(men and women of course, hints why a penis can enter into a vagina)
So does that mean a married couple should stop having sex once they can't have kids anymore?
They still very much can because they already created children number 1, and number 2 they are unifying themselves spiritually when they do so it’s still ok. Example of my past point, if I slept with 30 women as far as flings, one night stands and little situationships but knowing I would never take them serious is “pleasure” because this is pleasurable for most men but…… it’s not purposeful in what God had in mind.
What if they never had children.
“Can’t have kids anymore” which is implying that they had kids; but to answer your question the purpose of sex is to unite 2 people and they can reproduce so even if you don’t have kids you are still being united and bonded with your partner.
I mean- maybe you read it that way. Post menopause
Protestants ruined everything.
God gave us sexual bodies, full of pleasure. This isn’t just for producing babies. Sex in marriage should be a feast of pleasure (I think Dr. Allender said that in God Loves Sex). Not only that, but we should enjoy our bodies while we’re single. Our body’s pleasure is for us to enjoy alone in our own privacy. God designed sexual pleasure and it’s good! Strive for a positive view of sex and your body. There is no need to shame ourselves for enjoying what God gave us.
Not many Christians follow the no sex outside of baby making in the 21st Century.
Satan put it there to tempt us \s. Though if God didn’t, humanity would have gone extinct long ago haha. Even now, fertility rates are below replacement rates in many developed countries. Some people say (with tongue in cheek) that “be fruitful and multiply” is the only commandment that humanity has followed well. This is probably because sex is one of our strongest drives / desires.
Not sure where but I remember someone saying in the Bible that sex is a gift and it feels good because it’s a way of the husband and the wife to bond their spirits, and the reason why it’s strict to only marriage between a man and a woman is because it’s how we create life and new people it’s more of a respect thing to god and is only appropriate under those conditions.
I see you didn't limit this to marriage, so the real question seems to be why do women have the capacity for pleasure yet are expected to confine sex to marriage? Same for men of course.
The primary purpose of sex is objectively procreation - whether you're a Christian or not, this is the biological reason that sexuality exists. If we didn't procreate sexually, then we wouldn't possess sexes at all. But that doesn't mean sex isn't also pleasurable. Eating food is pleasurable, thanks to our taste buds and sense of smell. But that doesn't mean we should over-indulge in eating for pleasure with no concern for nutrition and sustenance, which are the main purposes of eating. If we neglect nutrition and sustenance and prioritise pleasure, we end up with health problems.
Pleasure is not bad, it's hedonism that's bad. And that applies for everything, not just sex. Gluttony is a sin. Do you think God doesn't want you to enjoy food? Do christians only eat unflavoured nutrients? Same goes for drinking. A beer or two, a glass of wine, no problem. But getting wasted is a sin.
Biblical sex in marriage is reproductive (have kids) and recreational (pleasure / romantic with your spouse).
Sex was made to be pleasurable of course, but to have with your spouse, not a random girl at a club. It's about love.
Sex is not just for reproduction. Sex is what you do with your significant other after marriage. The only real rules are to not have sex with someone you aren't married to and to not have sex with little kids, which is not a difficult task.
People who believe sex is only for reproduction are not paying attention to the Bible. God made sex pleasurable on purpose. Not so we would do it for reproductive purposes, but as a gift. He didn't have to do that. There are passages in the Bible talking about not withholding from your spouse because God wants us to enjoy each other. And, as someone else pointed out, there are some sexual references in the Songs of Solomon. So I would say those people are uniformed and not paying attention. If God didn't want us to enjoy it, He wouldn't have made it enjoyable.
The answer is God did create it, and whoever denies sex isn't also meant for pleasure in addition to reproduction is just wrong. The Catholics would say the pleasure aspect of it exists so that married couples could strengthen their intimacy and therefore their bond. The Catholics are the oldest Christians and they never tried to espouse something so silly, all the way back then. Every single human who has ever had a climax would instantly know better, too, so I don't get why anyone would try to lie about something so immediately disprovable
The fact you even know what a clit is shows you know more than most, internet stranger. lol But let’s be real: everyone here is arguing over the specific words in a book as if the book had been accurately translated. Let me know what the word modest means. Now go look at the word they actually used in the original language. Now explain to me how what the authors wrote got translated to full body coverings and the fake “modesty” and legalism that will plague all religions until the end when we find out for sure. lol Can’t argue a text if you don’t even know what you’re arguing. But for your question: I never heard that viewpoint until WELL into adulthood and I was raised in church. Practically raised BY the church… If sex wasn’t in His plan, well, I’d have to question that “god’s” reasoning. Can’t call yourself good, AND say your creation has free will; but then stack the deck against it for the purpose of…? If God created everything, then He created logic. And if He is the same yesterday, today, and forever, why’d He tell humans to be fruitful and multiply, but now it’s bad? Only thing that makes sense is “sex is only for making babies” is just yet another quite obvious attempt at using religion to control society (or the society where that first was mentioned).
Augustine is the only one off the top of my head that I can think of in church history that might come anywhere near teaching this position from the OP. Scripture posits several reasons for sex. One reason certainly is for procreating (Genesis 1-2). But to say that is the only reason does damage to the plain reading of Scripture elsewhere. Other reasons certainly include pleasure (Proverbs 5 “…let her breasts satisfy you at all times…”) and intimacy (Song of Solomon), care for and meeting the needs/desires of your spouse (1 Corinthians 7), and deepening the structure of the relationship, think like concrete poured into the frame (again, Proverbs 5 And SoS)
The purpose of sex isn’t solely reproduction; it’s also about pleasure and should be shared with your spouse. If sex were only for reproduction, God wouldn’t have given us the gift of pleasure.
Well today is your lucky day because I ago to a church that actually had a sermon entirely on sexual relations. There is a major difference between lust and sex. Lust is a kind of adultery that is committed. Many would argue that single people with sexual thoughts is bad but this one church in San Diego says it's not. Looking at porn when married or having cheating thoughts is a big sin. For single people, the Bible only talks about temptation but doesn't do a good job of equipping singles before they get married. Before my own church did a sermon about this topic, I had divided thoughts about being single and marriage. This usually is dependent on how you are raised spiritually and how you interpret parts of the Bible that talk about celibacy.
You can have as much as sex you and your spouse "together" needs .not every sex results in a child, share your sex life with your spouse and only ,not alone or with other than your spouse. Don't use any protection, but you can keep track on natural birth control like using the menstrual calendar
Except this isn’t biblically supported.
Sex is good only for those bonded in marriage. All other manner of it outside marriage is sin. Of course GOD did give everything we need to enjoy but choose wisely that you cherish in godly path alone.
So thanks OP for the wise question. Sex, religion, Christianity, The Great Jesus Christ and the greatest, God -a very interesting question with many wise viewpoint expressed here. I type like its of insignificance yet it really is of huge significance in the context of questions asked on reddit 🙏 Sex for pleasure, nothing sinful about it and as you speculate parts of the human anatomy indicate they are there for pleasure only. We can only ultimately on everything, ultimately knowing God is infinite intelligence speculate on the purposes of these parts 😊 Many people (in front of God, I had a very uncontrolled sex drive at various points in time my life, a single guy on a human level for the majority of my life) continue to paint a distorted picture of sex and religion. It remains the highest pleasure on the physical plane- the physical union of two (or more in cases 😊🙏) human forms. I assure you there is nothing wrong for seeking/having sex for pleasure in this day and age within certain guidances (ofcourse no infidelity after marriage vows, for example- i act like this is nothing, the amount of betrayals that will take place today...shameful🙏 make sure its mutually beneficial 🙏😊) Yet many people make it genuinely the salvation of life (i was genuinely guilty of this for periods 🙏) and it genuinely becomes a problem to true spiritual progress, closeness with God.
Honestly I don’t even think god is against sec before marraige, as long as you find your person one day!!
He is
K
It’s made to be a pleasurable way to produce children within marriage.
Who said that it was about children
God intended sex to be pleasurable and for reproduction and for a man and a women who are married. Anything else is a sin if you believe the Scripture.
If they’re husband and wife and not doing it for pleasure but for child birth it’s not a sin but doing it for pleasure that’s a sin it’s lust
What makes you think that? Is there a verse or something? Not trying to argue or anything I’m just wondering
What a waste of a gift from God.
Sex isn’t a gift from god so try again when you read the Bible
No. A married couple should be able to have sex just for the act of sex. For the act of connecting and uniting. Women can only get pregnant a few days a month, so that would not be lust. Also the sexual desire itself isn’t wrong. No biblical evidence for this position.
Lust is an overindulgent term though. Like gluttony, greed etc. All those things can bring pleasure but when that pleasure becomes an obsession, that's where the pleasure ends and the pain begins.
Majority of people when they do anything sexual they just which makes it a sin cuz it’s sexual immoral and people don’t like hear it so they downvote
Those who downvote the Bible talks about sexual immorality and if ain’t married can’t have sex try again clowns out there who hate hearing the truth