jump to last post 1-50 of 61 discussions (2261 posts)

Why are so many christians so concerned with sexual matters?

  1. jonnycomelately profile image86
    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago

    Sexuality seems to be very high on the list of "sins" with many christians.   Why is this, when there are so many cruel and anti-social practices reported in news media across the world?   Such practices have very real and destructive effects upon the lives of so many people....yet they are ignored, by and large.

    1. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I think we can safely sat that both atheists and theists have these types of sins very high on their agenda. Both camps reserve severe censure for even the smallest indiscretions as can be seen in the tabloids.
      Atheists might want to believe they are more liberated but if we study the newspapers/societies constant obsession with this topic it is easy to see
      the "sin" aspect is still present in their analysis.

      1. jonnycomelately profile image86
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The newspapers and other media are full of reports about crimes, e.g., embezzlement, corruption, theft, murder, genocide, pillaging of natural forests, forcing communities out of their homelands for economic gain..... all these are very real crimes that cause hurt and suffering to so many people.   

        Yet the christian "lobby" is almost silent about it.   As though none of these things come anywhere near to the level of "sin" that sexuality does.

        Please don't sidestep the question by bringing in the old football game of theist v. atheist.   Why do you regard sexual sin as warranting more attention than any other sin?

        1. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Dear JohnnyCumlately,
          The newspapers might be full of all that "other stuff" but the question in this hub is about why sex is regarded as sinful by Christians/religious people. All I have done is point out the Fact that both sides of the fence regard sex as sinful on some weird psychological level.
          I know the JWs are always talking about all the other stuff (I am not overly fond of JWs) and in my experience the Hindus are also concerned about ethics in general. Most churches I've been to don't focus on sex.
          As far as mainstream Christians "in the media" go I know they focus (many not all) on an anti gay agenda but this is more about their concept of marriage and tradition. Certainly in the distant past there was a fixation on sex by puritans and inquisitions say in the Middle Ages.
          I agree that Christians and many religious types (not all) have hang ups about sex; but I repeat in all sincerity that this seems to be a general feature of humanity.
          May I recommend two short books? (summary on wiki): Sigmund Freud's "Totem and Taboo' and "Moses and Monotheism"  where he goes into some of this. This is a psychological insight into all people's general hang ups about sex and the very real "Oedipus complex".
          Certainly early and late religions all had to deal with sexual issues. Prior to modern medicine in say the darkest Middle Ages example of Christian evolution the practice of sex was fraught with horrible diseases that could not be cured. Hence it seemed that both nature and/or God were not happy about sex.
          My personal view is that sex is a test no one completely passes; but it depends on how we fail that matters to the God . Its like a metal fatigue test! Certainly sex is one of the most difficult tests for people to deal with. My personal focus on personal inner tests is more concerned with ego and controlling pride/ego. Personally I think the focus on sex that both sides of the equation share (atheist/theist) is more about the Freudian tale of the inner primordial ape trying to get the better of the the others. Or in scientific parlance, trying to get their genes ahead of the pack.
          However JCLately I have to reinforce that the two sides of the coin have an identical equal focus on this concept of sexual "sin" regardless of football.

          1. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Ok, thank you for that explanation.... very helpful.

          2. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Oztinato, you are vulgar.   I take great exception to you mis-spelling my name in that way. 

            Give me an apology and I will let it rest here.  Otherwise, I will not let it rest.

            1. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              If he doesn't apologize, I will report him. That IS crude and vulgar. I have never reported anyone except for spam. This is crossing the line.

              1. Cgenaea profile image60
                Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Really Guys??? Success in offense comes simply by 2 letters? Report??? (Hi Janesix smile I remember you, we are becoming one...) I just KNOW...jonny... is not gonna fall for that one. I did notice a mis-spelling of oztinato by jonny not long ago...should he be reported? No... we are all adults. Vulgarity is the M.O. of most of us on some level. wink'We all give/take it.
                And as a further note... If I asked for apology from jonny----lately for each and every "offense" toward me, he'd STILL be apologizing...and...still. smile

            2. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              See, this proves my point!
              On a discussion about the alleged prudery of Christians we have extreme prudery being shown by atheists to a very mild sexual innuendo. Hypocrisy of the first order.
              Game set and match.

    2. fpherj48 profile image80
      fpherj48posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      jonny....Oh...hmmmm, let's see...how shall I put this?  They're nosy?  Peeping toms?  sensationalists?  VOYEURS?  Pick one or two.  Maybe they are the same group of individuals who make up the greatest number of smut magazine/celebrity gossip subscribers?......Wait....could be they're all elite members of the Sex Police Task Force.
      Whatever THEIR answer might be for their interest in "sex" (in general or specifically)....I'm honestly not concerned, but I would like to suggest to these busy body hypocrites:  Relax, back off, MYOB, first get a life, 2nd a useful hobby, stay out of my bedroom, I stay out of yours,  and thank you very much, but no thank you, I will make my own sexual choices, decisions and activities.....within the guidelines of morality and the law.
      Do we have a deal?  Good.
      Peace & Love to you, Ms & Mr. Christian (with a capital "C")

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        fpher
        do you have the same venom for internationally acclaimed atheist Professor of Ethics and leading atheist academic Peter Singer in his promotion of "Zoophilia"? Have a look at his "Zoophilia"  on Wiki on this good friend and cohort of Mr Dawkins.
        Do you swing that way as a modern atheist?

        1. jonnycomelately profile image86
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          If you consider the label "Atheist" as applying to a group calling themselves that, fair enough.... I presume there is such a group, masquerading as some sort of new "religion."

          I am not a "member" of any such group, but I am atheist (adjective) in my thinking.  I would not align myself with anything that an ethicist claims to be the correct way of thinking.  Who are they to claim a monopoly on ethics?   

          As far as bestiality is concerned, have you ever heard of a horse giving written consent to such abuse upon itself?

          Neigh!

        2. fpherj48 profile image80
          fpherj48posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Oztinato.....You "presume" FAR too much, which of course, is always a huge mistake.  #!. I am not an atheist, nor did I allude to such in any way. #2 Never heard of Singer, nor am I interested in his "Zoophilia." Thank you anyway. Simply, 90% of Christians are a group of judgmental, ignorant hypocrites..MY Opinion.  Focus on your OWN comments.  #3 I am not your "good friend" nor would I wish to be. I do not appreciate unsolicited critiques of my constitutional rights. What shall the rest of us assume by your OBSESSION with Zoophilia?  Never mind, I'm not interested in what you think.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks for not answering my question.
            You have proved my point to all objective observers. Most online atheists are willing to criticize but not to be criticized or to answer logical questions.

    3. kess profile image60
      kessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't sexuality highest of list of human interest.
      Plus homosexuality is highest on the list of abominations.
      I am surprise that you seem surprised?

      1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
        EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Really? More than rape and murder? Wow, you Christians really have your moral priorities straight. lol

        1. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          encehpalio
          lets not forget about you either: what are your views on the current atheist fashion for "Zoophilia" as proposed by "Professor of Ethics" Peter Singer?
          No condemnation there I bet.
          Do you swing it that way too?

          1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
            EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You once again bring up Singer, for what reason? What does he have to do with this discussion?

            1. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I am bringing it up so anyone with some intelligence can realize there might be very good reason for some groups of Christians to be concerned about the new atheist sexual fashions that can potentially create new diseases and nightmarish scenarios.
              If you actually stop and think about it instead of rushing to criticize Christians all the time you might learn something.
              In a nut shell: do you have any venom for the SInger/Dawkins populist style style bestiality? No of course you don't you only criticize Christians and religions.

              1. jonnycomelately profile image86
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                "Atheist types..."    You are being very (trying to think of one word that might describe you, obstinato) obtuse maybe?   Apparently you have a group calling themselves the Atheists..... but I don't claim to fit into any such category.   

                Just because I do not accept the existence of a judgmental god, that does not mean I necessarily approve of any sexual activity which does not involve the full and free agreement of both parties.

                Any person who uses another person or animal for his/her own gratification, without the approval of that other person/animal, is guilty of a gross assault.   Obviously no animal is able to give consent to an assault upon it's body.... therefore I feel that no reasonable person should engage in such a thing.

                As far as humans are concerned, any person who, for whatever reason, cannot defend him/herself from assault, and/or cannot reasonably be expected to give his/her consent to a sexual act, must be protected and defended by the community at large.  Where a law has been broken it of course must be dealt with in a court of law.  I am thinking of women or men who are of a weaker disposition; a child; a person who is disabled physically or mentally or intellectually; a person who cannot be addressed in their own language.   

                Are you suggesting that one needs to be "a christian" in order to have and live up to such moral standards?  Are you suggesting that "a christian" would never be guilty of immorality in such matters.

                1. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I believe true ethical atheism has its place: however this kind of Real atheism would be actively opposing beastialtiy and open slather infanticide. As current atheist trends are not opposing these unethical and dangerous practices I am quite correct in pointing out this failing.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image86
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    One does not need to be of a theist or atheist persuation to be against such practices.

                    You seem to be "muddying the waters" with irrelevant nonsense in order to direct attention away from the subject of this Discussion.  Are you?

                  2. Cgenaea profile image60
                    Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    See??? When you believe in my God; NO atheism has it's place anywhere. That is called a NO in the Kingdom of God. We gotta believe that he at least IS before we may ever hope to receive anything from him.

                  3. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "Open slather infanticide".  This is a bit of jargon I've not seen before; can you describe what it is supposed to mean? 

                    Because I've never heard anyone promoting infanticide, let alone something has horrible sounding as "open slather" infanticide.

      2. jonnycomelately profile image86
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks, Kess.  I am not surprised, just trying to highlight the irrational exaggeration in the minds of some people.

        1. kess profile image60
          kessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Come on johnny why such harsh judgement?
          Maybe that is why it will remain there....

          1. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, that harsh judgment.....determining the at because something is thoroughly enjoyable "God" will not like it.   You can tax it.  You can ban it.  You can use it to exploit people.  You can secretly engage in it.   Yet never acknowledge it as healthy and able to be spoken about in respectable company.

            Yes, sexual relationships are some of the most powerful connections we make with other individuals, fraught with difficulties in conveying our true feelings, our honest selves.   Thus such relationships have the makings of deep divide as well as higher unions.   Do those who regard sexual sin as one of the greatest "abominations" ever look into the reasons for their understanding?

            I share the skepticism of EncephaloiDead

            1. kess profile image60
              kessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              By aligning with mr dead it becomes understandable why you would initiate this rant.

              1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
                EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Johnny is just showing he has morals and ethics that have reasonable and logical priorities, something amiss in your posts.

                1. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Hi Em!!! smile
                  Morals and ethics vary from person to person. What rings ethically in my ear today; could very well sound differently tomorrow. We evolve in thought. We change. We get angry and or ecstatically enthusiastic and changes in thought occur.
                  Shades of gray need a moderator. smile
                  Who moderates for you? What solid standard sets you so far in advance of the moralities of Kess? I jist gotta know if you don't mind...

        2. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          JCLately
          and last but not least JCL: let us hear your views about Peter Singer's atheist philosophy on "Zoophilia"?
          Do you swing it that way as a new atheist type?

          1. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            There is  no logical or rational connection between the two.... how could you make such an error?

            There are many heterosexual males who regularly get involved in grossly disgusting pornographic activity.   Do you presume ALL heterosexual men are thus inclined?    Stereotyping any group is inappropriate.   Maybe my opening statement in this thread is similarly in error.

      3. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Kess
        and what of your thoughts about leading atheist professor of ethics Peter Singer and his atheist promotion of "Zoophilia"?
        No criticsim there? Do you swing it that way?

        1. kess profile image60
          kessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          That kind of lifestyle goes with the thinking of this age.
          I just did not realize that it was so open and out there.
          Where I live, he would be facing a prison sentence.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Well stop and think about it before you go and criticize Christians views of sex.

    4. Cgenaea profile image60
      Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Hi All!!! smile
      I like Kess and Mo's responses.
      Sex is not the christian problem. Not only are we constantly bombarded by t-n-a; we are under obligation to agree with God on the matter. In christian cases, the bible is what God says.
      As for sexuality; the abomination part is the clincher. And alternative sexuality is OUT OF THE CLOSET (as never before.) smile I remember how gay was a word that people did not say when I was a kid. Elton John and Liberace were the ONLY two in the 70's! wink that's why all the fuss these days. That closet flew open and out poured a multitude!!! Lol...
      I, as one of "them" (christians) today, am not bothered by any of it. I got my own sexual junk to continue in prayer about. To turn my nose up in the direction of the gay man is in another sense, abominable. We got NO rights to direct the paths of others. Or oust/mistreat.
      It is better that a millstone be tied about one's neck and he be cast into the sea; than for him to offend the very least of God's own. (Bible script paraphrase) homosexuality is not any more death sentence than my stuff. Or their stuff... we just gotta have the mind of Christ about it. Humble, meek, not puffed up, remorse, ability for self scrutiny, and determination for truth are all good places to start.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Cgenea,
        do you think there is any hope for "us"? wink

        1. Cgenaea profile image60
          Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Hi Oztinato. smile Yes, our hope springs eternal. Without doubt, there is hope for us all. Fret not smile the battle is the Lord's.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I mean "you and me"........
            I am an older George Clooney look alike type ; artistic; musical.

            1. Cgenaea profile image60
              Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Now see...just got all "bothered" lol!!! George is a little too sexy for this conversation. wink
              Was that a flirt??? Hmmm... im a younger "type" 41 y/o artistically inclined car/shower singer... smile we've got a lot in common. But hope? I doubt it. Internet love strikes me the wrong way. Plus im kinda taken.

              1. 0
                Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Genaea, you never know!  I met my husband online.  We're working on six years married now.  wink

                1. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Nice smile
                  In the America of skyrocketing divorce rates, it seems that you have cake that you get to eat too. I'm glad for your success in that area (a lil jealous too, lol). Congratulations on making IT work. I shall have my day.

                  1. 0
                    Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Never doubt it.  smile We often joke that the only way either of us is leaving this marriage is in a pine box.  We're both committed.  And I knew the instant I met him that he was the one who'd been made for me.  I believe you'll know too.

              2. Castlepaloma profile image21
                Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I resemble that!!!
                Some people tell me I look like Clooney, yet never too sexy to talk to anyone. I want everyone to enjoy the sex energy to the max without quilt or regret or feel they will go to hell for it. Maybe hell will have hotter sex..

                1. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You are somewhat visually Clooneyesque. smile but hell, from what I hear aint fun (though hot).
                  Sex is to be enjoyed by Mo and her man ONLY smile We got rules...they are not there to take the "freaky-sneaky fun" from your life. But in place to protect your member and keep you from all kinds of ugly leakages. God knew what casual sex could do. Bastard babies who grow up fatherless; chlamydia; and using/hurting vulnerable women and children (damaging them for life) all for 3squirts of the hot sticky drip. Those 3 seconds of Heaven are rarely worth the damage done to self and others. Screw given consents. It just aint good for you to lay the pipe everywhere your feet trod. As hot and as lovely as sex can become, it is best done with your one wife.
                  Homosexuality has its dangers as well. It cannot be a good thing when someone can fit two fists... anal fissures... AIDS... toxic wastes and blood in bed with you... no way to shut off the sphincter...
                  Safety first. smile we can always find ways to have fun without incorporating dangers. Uh...wanna play grocery store??? smile

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image86
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Sorry, Cgenaea, but those things you mention are not characteristic of all (or necessarily many) homosexual people.  HIV/AIDS is a disease.  It can be experienced by hetero- and homosexual people alike.  In Africa it is principally a disease of heterosexual people.  Just like syphilis and gonorrhea, herpes, which occur regardless of orientation. 

                    Part of the reason for my original question in this Discussion was the previous hub exchange about homosexuality and the bible.  I am putting up the premise that sexuality per see is a stumbling block for many christians, disproportionately compared with other crimes and "sins."

              3. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Cgenea
                yes I was flirting to blow the minds on the atheist types here.
                Also I was trying to "read your mind" online.
                See we are not so different even though I take a more holistic approach to religion.
                I play a mean boogie piano for a white guy.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  What's that supposed to mean? Would you suck for an asian? White people are people too.

                  1. janesix profile image59
                    janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Don't you realize the only thing white people can do is make money and war?

                    (I will have to put my /sarcasm disclaimer in here, before I get accused of being racist again.)

                2. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Mission accomplished. All minds were blown smile maybe one day we can all boogie together. I'd like that.

      2. jonnycomelately profile image86
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        For once I have no criticism of what you have written, Cgenaea.   big_smile

        1. Cgenaea profile image60
          Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          wink

    5. Chris Neal profile image83
      Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Because God has given us a list of things to be concerned with and many Christians are concerned with all these things, including sexuality, poverty, starvation and genocide.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Seems to me that according to the bible God gave the Jews a list of things he was concerned about for them, but Jesus is said to have not been so concerned. I've been told Christians are allowed to work on Sundays, but yet people pick certain practices that they don't like or understand and use the bible to attack them.

        Christians should be more like Christ rather than simply fans of Christ.

        1. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Okay.

          Which practices that Christians don't like or understand but that Jesus was totally okay with should we choose to be more Christ-like about?

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Prostitution, homosexuality. Why can they work on Sunday, but still think homosexuality is a sin?

            1. Cgenaea profile image60
              Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Christ himself gave a specific answer to one of those questions. Hmmm. I wonder why he never said anything about homosexuality... oh!!! He told the woman, sin no more... I guess he knew that she knew what he meant for her. It MAY not be sin for some... though I dont know anyone who is totally unconvicted about it without first saying no to the inner promptings.

            2. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Explain prostitution and sexuality to me. How was Jesus so laissez-faire about those? What did He do that I should emulate?

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Did he stone or tell others to stone prostitutes, homosexuals or those who work on Sundays?

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Let's think about that. When the woman was caught in adultery, what did He actually say to her? And when the subject of marriage was brought up, what did He actually say about that?

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Last I checked there are no laws against adultery or working on Sundays in more nations that are predominately Christian, however there are against prostitution and homosexuality. We have people protesting the funerals of US soldiers with "GOD HATES FAGS" signs. While most Christians may think that adultery is a sin, few think working on Sunday is a sin. Christians do both equally anyway, but for some reason some think we need laws against prostitution and homosexuality.

                    What would be the purpose of any God making 10% of people attracted only to their own sex and then telling them not to do it. It would be like you or I being told to never act on our own sexuality, never get married or have a relationship or fall in love. I would call the cruel and unjust punishment.

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Odd how Christians make a huge deal out of the first one and literally ignore the rest.

        Well, except for the genocide one, in which Christians have actually participated.

        1. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          It is odd how you continue to say things so patently untrue with a straight face and actually believe them. Nevertheless, there you are.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            "No event in recent history has challenged Christian reflection on Africa more than the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.Within a period of less than one hundred days, more than 800,000 Rwandans were killed by fellow Rwandans, as the rest of the world stood by and watched. The majority of the killings were carried out by ordinary Rwandans against their neighbors using machetes, sticks, and clubs with nails, making the Rwandan genocide one of the most inexplicable tragedies of our time. What makes the Rwandan genocide a particularly chilling and challenging event for Christian reflection, however, is thatRwanda has been, and perhaps remains, one of the most Christianized nations in Africa."

            http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/log/summar … ngole.html

            Once again, you seem to conveniently forget facts. smile

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I'm sorry, did you actually cherry-pick one fact, out of context, and use it as your entire basis for making a sweeping statement that would cover far more than you seem to be trying to prove?

              How very, very....you...of you.

              Come back when you're serious.

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                No, I presented a fact in context, after you said to me...

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Even if it was in context (and with you, sometimes it's hard to tell) the fact is you cherry-picked one factoid as the entire proof basis for a sweeping statement that covered far more than that.

                  So yeah, I stand by what I wrote.

                  No to mention that you grossly over-simplified a situation that is actually very well-documented in order to 'prove' your point...

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Again, I presented a fact in which you said I was saying untrue things, hence you were wrong, that is the bottom line.

            2. Cgenaea profile image60
              Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Machetes and mass killings are not Christian tools. Christians may only do so much if hardness of heart and coldly waxed love is the motivation. Stop trying to inject those turnips. Lol...

            3. 0
              Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I wasn't aware that Hutu and Tutsi were names of Christian sects.

              For some, I think it is true what Leland R. Beaumont said   “Blame is where we try to park our grief.” but sometimes it appears that the only purpose the blame game serves is to keep us from being positive influences for change.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                That was pretty good.

              2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                There is a great deal you have shown us that you're not aware. Par for the course.

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You're kidding, right?

                  Are we back to accusation as proof?

                2. 0
                  Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Since they are not Christian sects, you appear to be the one willfully floundering around in the dark.

                  1. Cgenaea profile image60
                    Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Shhhhhh...possible fragile ego...

    6. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      we need a "for instance…" !
      I have no idea what you are talking about either!

    7. 0
      SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      1Co 6:18  Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

      Other sins are not ignored.  The sin of fornication is not only against God but also against the person's own body.

      I also must point out that most threads about sex and the Bible are not started by believers but non-believer whether they are atheists or some other belief system.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Don't be ridiculous; sex between unmarried but consenting adults is not a sin against your body.

        1. Cgenaea profile image60
          Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Well now we have the "authority" on the matter??? Thanks.
          Someone probably ALMOST stopped fornicating for a few minutes. smile lol...
          America! We have Wilderness' blessing. Let the good times roll!!!

          Unless you have faith in God...

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You do have Wilderness' blessing to fornicate in private, given that both wish it so.  Whether your old book says to or not, you have my blessing.

            And judging from the frequency with which it happens, I'd have to say that the large majority will accept my blessing rather than the Christians condemnation as something real and true. smile

            1. Cgenaea profile image60
              Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              You are correct. Itching ears and hot bodies will follow you anywhere!!! wink

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You're right - people will always follow sex - God made sure of that when He installed a sex drive that overrides mental capabilities in most people.  Just look at advertisements everywhere to see that! big_smile

                1. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  NOTHING overrides GODLY mental capabilities wink I can do ALL things through Christ who gives me strength.
                  Now, Wilderness mental capabilities are very well represented by the sand in the hourglass... time's a wasting... wink

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You are apparently wrong.  God's creation, man's wants and emotions, overrides God's orders most of the time.  It's called "sin" and all men sin; man's wants overriding God's orders, whether Christ is giving strength or not. 

                    Or are you sinless?

          2. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            "America! We have Wilderness' blessing. Let the good times roll!!!

            Unless you have faith in God..."

            That is paraphrase for your Grandad  walking in to the bedroom just at the wrong moment!  Bah!  Just when things were getting hot and good!

      2. jonnycomelately profile image86
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        " The sin of fornication is not only against God but also against the person's own body. "

        If there was force, brutality, disregard for the "other" person, sure it would be against one's own body and the other.

        However, a bit of hanky-panky between to friends can be some of the best tonic pick-me-ups in the world.  Does your bogus god object to such enjoyment?

        1. Cgenaea profile image60
          Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Depends...is that friend your one and only wife???

          1. janesix profile image59
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Interesting. You think God wants us to go against our natural inclinations?

            It's possible He does. Maybe he wishes us to be sexually responsible (by not having sex outside of marriage). However, there is plenty of sex in even marriage that is not used for procreating. Does God want us to enjoy sex (why make it enjoyable when not used for procreation in the first place, etc.)?

            1. Cgenaea profile image60
              Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Aw come on! smile
              Our natural inclinations are against God. Right??? He said "don"t touch it." To the first people, according to the legend. And all they needed was one little suggestion. And they touched all over it. Lol... they passed the disobedience down.
              (Why make it so tasty looking God??????) Really???
              We must bring our thoughts under subjection. Otherwise, we'll get pedophiles who ask God why make those little legs so cute? Or the thief, why did he make me so poor. Or the embezzler, why Did God give me access to all those books with real money on them??? We are responsible for our own indulgences. We dont wanna believe that, but it's true. We must know how restraint works. We need to use it.

              1. janesix profile image59
                janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Why must we know? I know why, but I'm wondering what you are thinking.

                1. Cgenaea profile image60
                  Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  The way I see it, the bible says that we are to be disciplined. We are to die daily. Contain self so that the spirit of God is most evident. Give over the carnal nature for abundant life and optimal existence on Earth. It is of GREAT struggle. So if we say yes, we receive the extra help needed. It becomes easy and successful. wink

                  1. janesix profile image59
                    janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    That's ridiculous. We are forced into choosing to go against our own natures, so we can be disciplined? That sounds a bit sadistic to me. There must be something you're missing, girl. wink

                    It's like forcing someone with a high libido to live in a house filled with willing starlets, yet telling him to look the other way, and don't touch the goods (or else!). That seems pretty mean to me. There has to be some other explanation.

          2. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Nope, never had one.

        2. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Males are instructed not to play with a female spouse.  Are there any other restrictions from God?  Not the Catholic church, but God?

          1. 0
            Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Completely as an aside, but the Catholic Church places no restrictions on a married couple on sex for purposes other than procreation.  Sex is considered a bonding ritual as well as a procreative one.  In case anyone cares. wink

            1. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              According to what scripture is non-procreative sex in marriage a bonding ritual?

              1. 0
                Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I don't know if the teaching references a specific scripture, tbh.  The concept is that two people when they marry become one flesh, and there is no more intimate action between two people than sex.  So the sexual act brings two people to greater intimacy. smile

                1. janesix profile image59
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So it's just something they made up as an excuse to have non-procreative sex.

                  1. 0
                    Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Uh. Sure.  Kinda like the concept of sex only for procreation was made up? Not been a huge concern for me so not something I ever really looked into in depth.

        3. 0
          SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The OP asked why Christians are so hung up on the sin of sexuality.  I answered according to what Christians believe and follow, along with a bit of commentary. 

          You can hanky panky with whomever you wish to.  Doesn't make it right nor does it make it good. .

          1. jonnycomelately profile image86
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            It certainly can be good, very good!  Anyway, who's judging... not you of course.

        4. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I've heard of doggie style, but with a real dog???

    8. oceansnsunsets profile image89
      oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I have not kept up with this thread, so not sure of all the posts though I read some.  I agree with you there are some very horrible practices reported in the news and media and are truly are destructive to others.  I think all sin is sin, and that we all have committed sins or broken God's laws.  Do you take the fact that some people aren't weighing in or talking about the other stuff to mean they don't care as much?  For instance, I thought back to my last few months at my job, and the news stories that came up where people did anything "bad."  The stuff that came up had to do more with terrorist stuff, and some kidnapping stories (and attempted kidnappings) and a murder story, etc.  Not once did the Christians I work with in the last few months speak of "sexual sins."  I know by what was talked about that they do care about the other stuff.  Just sharing from my little corner of the world there.

      If  you are correct though about an almost fixation on particular sexual sins by the religious I can only speculate what the reasons would be. In this thread, has anyone brought up the idea that it could be considered one of the more "celebrated sins", compared to all the other sins? Depending on what part of the country and world you are in, you may see it or not, but you can for sure see it in media, and news stories, etc.

      There also is a big push to change the actual thinking of many people in regards to certain things.  People think one way, and some seem to not be at peace with that and are making it news themselves sometimes.  I don't recall seeing such a push for that before, so to see a possible push back wouldn't be crazy.  (I was thinking hard about the possible reasons that would be the case that you asked your question!  I know these are controversial, but I am being sincere in what I think SOME might be thinking.)

      Perhaps it is easy to focus on what they themselves are possibly struggling with?  So its a response to inner denials, etc?  They might fight hard against something they struggle with themselves perhaps, which would be a bit hypocritical. (Another sin, of course.)  Bottom line, I don't know for sure.  These are some ideas out there that I see floating about.  I do think that Jesus himself would encourage the most vocal against others crowd, to look inward first, and stop their own sin.  I say that based on my studies, but what do I know!

      1. janesix profile image59
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Maybe it's just that everyone sort-of already agrees that murder and stealing etc. are bad.

        But not everyone agrees whether certain sexual practices are bad.

        1. oceansnsunsets profile image89
          oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I think you are right.  If so, it would make sense what we see sometimes.  Its a "given" that those other things are horrifying.  That doesn't seem to be in question.  The other things do seem to be.

    9. Godsstreetsweeper profile image61
      Godsstreetsweeperposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Christians as a whole understand that sin is sin, and one isn't worse than another. Isiah chapter 1 in verse 18 describes sins that are scarlet and crimson, probably referring to murder and adultery, but states both can be cleansed. Biblically sex outside of a monogamous heterosexual marriage is sinful, but then so is stealing a paper clip from your work. Sin is not for Christians, myself included to judge, since judgement comes from God. But Christians are enabled to recognize sinful behaviors, both that they can avoid them, and teach a better way. On a side note, there are numerous articles online regarding the affect sex has on dopamine or other receptors in the brain. That might explain why society as a whole is fixated on sex.

    10. oceansnsunsets profile image89
      oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Hey all, Jonny gives his regards to everyone in the forums.  I got this message on my profile from him, I don't think he will mind me sharing some of it, considering what he says in it.

      "I have been banned from posting for 3 days, cannot think why, but will be back soon I hope.  Please give my regards to everyone in the forums, especially those who disagree with me yet continue their generous tolerance."

      I don't know what would have caused the ban either.  I don't get the opportunity to read everything due to time.  I don't find Jonny posting ban worthy stuff.  He seems very fair minded overall that I have seen, and not ever hateful.  He even lets me ask some tough questions, lol, and responds fairly all the times I have seen.  Anyway, was sorry to see that, and just wanted to share.  See you soon Jonny.

      1. Cgenaea profile image60
        Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        All I keep thinking is, what did I miss??? Banning should be banned. I hate that button.

        1. oceansnsunsets profile image89
          oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Haha, that is a good point.  What did we miss?  Was there some knock down drag out we missed?  I saw someone mentioning a gentle warning about something, but that was all I saw, and that seemed to be amended.

          1. Cgenaea profile image60
            Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Oh yeah! I do remember a request to edit banable content.  Even then, I was at a loss but considered it not important enough to investigate.  People get so sensitive after spitting their fiery messages. I guess being mean DOES thin the skin.

            1. oceansnsunsets profile image89
              oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Here is the thing... If a post is edited like that at the suggestion of a friend that caught something (which is so nice, because we can all say things at times and not really have thought it fully through..), then could it still have been ban worthy?  If you delete it, or edit it, isn't that self moderation, so to speak?

              1. Cgenaea profile image60
                Cgenaeaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I have no idea. I need to read the rules. If when reported a copy of original content was flagged and/or sent. How else could the offense be known.
                Yes, we all have our moments. But I say if you throw discomfort; it may more than likely reverb. (One of my issues) the button is about bitterness or spite.  Neither are productive emotions.

    11. Rebel-PDF profile image62
      Rebel-PDFposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Deleted

      1. 0
        SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Spamming the forums is the fast track out of here.  You should reply to the discussions instead of posting a link to your forum.

        1. 0
          SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Thank you Moderator.  That was a fast response.

    12. micadeolu profile image66
      micadeoluposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      If you observe well you will realize that it takes two or more in agreement before a any meaningful achievement can take place. In every pair, one complements another, there by producing the third party. Look at the atom. The electron interacts with the proton and so produces the neutron. So in human level, whenever any sexual activity takes place there is a beautiful harvest being reaped. But due to the density and pollution in this part of creation, a big breach and conflict is not news. This conflict is the sexual immorality God (nature) is trying to resolve. Because before you can ever experience peace in any situation, there must be order and restoration.

      This is why our God warns us to abstain from all form of sexual immorality. To have sex is no sin. In fact, sex experience improves ones spiritual growth and well being. But the abuse brings one down to hell slowly or speedily.

    13. flpalermo profile image24
      flpalermoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      If they were true Christans, they wouldn't be.
      A true Christian is one in whom the Holy Spirit of God  dwells. (Romans 8:9)
      The Holy Spirit has absolutely no problem with this mentality.

      1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
        EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        And, you know that, how? Have you spoken with the Holy Spirit to confirm this?

    14. paradigmsearch profile image90
      paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I am not inclined to read the 1000+ previous posts. Sorry. big_smile

      The human species is preoccupied with sex, as are all other species for that matter. For whatever reason, that is the way this reality construct was designed.

      And so it goes...

      1. 60
        James Bonnyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        1 Thessalonians 4:3-5
        1 Corinthians 6:18
        Romans 12:1

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Okay, so I take it from those scriptures you feel your God made us the way he did (with desires and urges) however doesn't want us to act on those desires and urges? He made some of us with desires and urges that correspond to his wishes and some of us that have other desires and wishes? I guess that means he gave some an easy ride to heaven and others a more difficult or impossible ride to heaven. Seems rather unfair and unrealistic to me. It also seems to me that the more likely case is that men made these laws which persecute those who are unlike themselves.

          1. 60
            James Bonnyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            By your logic, if we have desires and urges then on those premises, the actions can be justified. Your logic is extremely flawed. Why does society try to bend our desires and urges? When a man has angered another man and his urge is to take that man's life is he justified through his angry desire? How about when a Man lusts after another mans wife and she lusts back, does that attraction justify their actions? Maybe we should just behave as the animals do. For us believers, we believe that there is a higher calling. That God has a higher standard for earthly behavior (Sermon on the mount, Fruits of the Spirit, Ten Commandments, etc.). I'm not bashing anyone here, you are the one trying to initiate debate. I am completely comfortable in my beliefs and it appears you are in yours. I don't think there is any persecution, just the sharing of a certain way of believing.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Society tries to bend our desires and urges because we have inappropriate ones, placed there by a god.  Not because society put them there and THEN said don't succumb to them.

              The illogic and stupidity lies in saying "See, I put a fine fruit tree in front of you; don't touch it or I will kill you".  Wouldn't it make more sense not to put the tree there in the first place?  Or is it just a case of sadism at work?

              1. 60
                James Bonnyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Considering that neither of us are going to dissuade the other on our viewpoints this will be my last response. My original goal was just to share a few Bible verses as to why we concern our selves with sexual sins. I was then challenged with a very illogical argument by which I responded. Now, perhaps a more daunting task; to explain Genesis. Many Christian Scholars today, including Francis Collins, the lead researcher on the Human Genome Project in 1999, believe the original account in Genesis of Adam and Eve to be a metaphor. The book was written by Moses long after creation took place and would have a hard time holding up in a historical analysis. Perhaps it is a story just to give the ancient people some time of backdrop for the race of men, maybe it is a completely accurate account. I do not claim to have the ability to answer this question. However, that story has absolutely no bearing on Christianity. What I believe is that there is a God. In God's attempt to bring man into what God intends us to become, he sent Jesus. Jesus, God incarnate on earth, was born of a virgin, died on a cross, and was raised in 3 days. Although they are not here to vouch for us today, somewhere around 500 people saw the risen Christ. It would be rather difficult to refute 500 eye witnesses in a court of law. This is the only thing that really matters. This is what I hang my faith on. The whole old testament can be partial truths, yet when Jesus steps out of the tomb...

                "Here's pardon for transgressions past,
                It matter not how black their cast,
                And O my soul, with wonder view,
                For sins to come, here's pardon too.
                Fully discharged by Christ I am,
                From Christ's tremendous curse and blame."
                REV. C. H. Spurgeon

                1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
                  EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Wow, that's pretty flimsy reasoning upon which to hang ones entire faith.

                  Yes, you could easily refute 500 eye witness accounts of people who claim they saw someone whom they believed were dead, no problem. That would never even get to trial.

                2. jonnycomelately profile image86
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  James, I have no problems with you believing what you believe in relation to Jesus, etc., although I do not believe them at all. 

                  The problem I have is when those beliefs are taken as absolute "truth," and used to judge anyone else.   Sure, let's have good codes of conduct for our living together in community.  Let the Code support us and guide us.

                  But there is one human tendency that so often comes in the way of success..... the desire to look out at others, try to deal with their "problems," in stead of our own.... the latter being the more difficult, so it's easier to point the finger.

                  I have indicated in previous post to you that those writings from which you quoted are directed at a community 2000 years ago, in a different culture, in different circumstances.   They can only be understood in that context, not brought forward and placed in front of us in a distorted fashion.  Using them in order to lay blame or judge others is not appropriate.

                3. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Sorry, I didn't get my point across very well.  It was not my intent to question Genesis in specific, but rather the idea that a god give us all these neat-o gifts and then forbid us their use. 

                  The obvious inference is that we are being tested, but that doesn't hold up; an omniscient god already knows what our response will be and doesn't NEED a test.  An alternative is that the Christian god is a sadist, but few will accept that, whether true or not.  Just like accepting that the god is NOT omniscient; a forbidden though not to be considered.

                4. Cat333 profile image82
                  Cat333posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Good points, James Bonny!

                  I have no revelation on the literal or symbolic nature of much of the OT. I know his Word is truth, whether that is truth that is often symbolic or literal. Also, we shouldn't demand that the Word read as if written by God's own hand since he used men (who then had to put it into limited words), yet we cannot dismiss any of the Word just because he used men, as we know the men were inspired by the Holy Spirit. I do know that God is the Creator of all things and the Ruler of all things; that he spoke and it was so. And I am content with that.

                  Just wanted to give an AMEN to this - "In God's attempt to bring man into what God intends us to become, he sent Jesus. Jesus, God incarnate on earth, was born of a virgin, died on a cross, and was raised in 3 days. Although they are not here to vouch for us today, somewhere around 500 people saw the risen Christ. It would be rather difficult to refute 500 eye witnesses in a court of law."

            2. oceansnsunsets profile image89
              oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Those are good points, James.

              1. 60
                James Bonnyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Thank you.

            3. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              No reason at all to debate, unless of course you try to implement your beliefs on others. For instance the bible says that homosexuals shall be put to death. You are welcome to believe that if you like as long as you don't act on that belief or as long as you don't intent to prevent same sex partners from having the same privileges as yourself.

              So, if two people of any sex decide to have consensual sex and or a relationship then their actions are justified. Murder is not consensual nor is rape.

              1. 60
                James Bonnyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                We can agree on the part about rap.

              2. Cat333 profile image82
                Cat333posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                The bible also says all liars will be put to death and from birth all are liars to greater or lesser degrees. So all deserve and will be put to death according to the righteous requirements of the holy and righteous God. BUT for Jesus Christ, the Lord and Savior, who has paid the price for all liars and all who sin in ANY manner. Because of Jesus' righteousness and sacrifice, you and I and everyone may receive the undeserved status of righteous and may forever live with the righteous Father. Not to any of us sinners by nature be any glory, but to him who loved us and gave himself for us be all glory both now and forevermore! Amen and amen!

                1. janesix profile image59
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Great! I get to do whatever I want then, with no consequences! Praise Jesus!

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image86
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    So glad to know that at least someone wants me, Jane.... lol

                  2. Cat333 profile image82
                    Cat333posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Romans 6:2)

                    1. jonnycomelately profile image86
                      jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                      cat333, this is one of the major reasons I have turned away from the christian religion.   Call me "fallen," whatever you like.   It is one of the biggest, most nonsensical, mental constructions I have ever come across.... and from people who in most other respects are sensible and intelligent.

                      But, your choice.  Who am I to argue?

                2. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh sure, sacrifice, human sacrifice. Nice God you've got. Goat killing he liked, but human/god killing did the trick. Do you ever listen to yourself?

                  1. Cat333 profile image82
                    Cat333posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    He sacrificed HIMSELF for you and me and all the world!

                    1. EncephaloiDead profile image62
                      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                      Sorry, that is not true, Jesus was tried and convicted by the Roman State to crucifixion, just like many, many, many other criminals of the Roman State, no difference whatsoever.

                      Jesus didn't jump up on a cross and nail himself to it, did he?