the christian approach to sex
The human approach to sex is indeed fascinating and the effect that these love chemicals have on our life choices is extraordinary. The physical sensations associated with sex are so desirable that many people make quite illogical decisions in order to experience them.
Christians particularly recognise the ridiculous nature of our attachment to these chemicals, and have concocted a number of useful rules to help people better understand and control these urges.
rule 1 – we the men must not become loafs of bread to prostitutes and wayward wives
Say to wisdom, “You are my sister,” and call understanding your kinsman; they will keep you from the adulteress, from the wayward wife with her seductive words. Proverbs 7:4-5
The main problem with sex is women. According to Proverbs Chapter 6, women are immoral and wayward, they have smooth tongues, captivating eyes, can reduce you to a loaf of bread and prey upon your very life. If you keep your father’s commands (not specified) and your mother’s teaching (not specified) you will be spared the indignity of the baker’s oven.
rule 2 – we the wives must succumb to sex on demand
Lots of wives have become experts at making up excuses to avoid something that’s extremely important to their husband. Don’t be one of them.
Excuses, Excuses, to keep your man at bay—
The devil will supply them if you can’t think what to say.
When wives won’t give their husbands sex, then everybody loses,
But Heaven’s floodgates open when we stop making excuses!
According to lovinglifeathome, headaches, exhaustion or sheer lack of interest need to be overcome by good Christian wives in order to sexually satisfy randy Christian husbands. Because otherwise, their randy Christian husbands will have no option but to lust after the beauty of a smooth tongued adulteress. Over 8,000 people on Facebook liked this post. Odd that the first two comments are from sex-giving Christian wives confused about how the devil Devil found their unfaithful husbands.
rule 3 – we the Christians should behave like 1st century Jews and bring back the death penalty for sex outside heterosexual marriage
Homosexual behavior was nearly non-existent within first-century Judaism because it was outlawed in their culture. Sexual behavior of all kind outside of the marriage covenant was punishable by death. If someone was caught molesting a child—death. Adultery—death. Prostitution—death. As astounding as it may be for our twenty-first century American mindset, within that culture men and women would have sex only with their spouse.
Askthebigot brings up some excellent points here and shows a stunning grasp of the history of mankind. The death penalty is clearly what’s required to help people see beyond the sex chemicals and behave appropriately. Undoubtedly we’re fools if we think there were gay or adulterous Jews in the first century. Men and women would only have had sex with their spouse.
summary
The Christian approach to sex is a guiding light for today’s animalistic, sex-obsessed society. In order to see beyond the chemicals, our friends in Christian-land give us three clear and god God godly rules, which I shall summarise for your lusty benefit:
- women are evil sluts, men are victims
- wives should have sex on demand
- death penalty for anyone who has sex with a not heterosexual spouse
That about sums it up. Those sex-giving wives whose husband’s still had a wandering eye were obviously not giving the right kind of sex, you know, not putting everything he wanted on the menu. Certainly there weren’t adulterers in first century Judaism. Explains the preoccupation with it and also the “ordeal of the bitter water”. That’s also why there were rules about homosexuality. God was just headin’ things off at the curb.
LikeLike
If only we lived back then, sounds idyllic! All those law abiding citizens having sex with their marital heterosexual spouses.
LikeLike
I have an interesting fact for you… The classical legal definition of adultery was very different from what we know as adultery today.
The early definition was one related to the woman as property. A man committed adultery if he had sex with a woman that ‘belonged’ to another man. In practice that meant a virgin (who belonged to her father), or a married woman (who belonged to her husband). If a married man had sex with a prostitute that did not constitute adultery!
Don’t worry, I’ll stop- I know all my history stuff bores people 🙂
LikeLike
That is interesting. You should pop over to Bigot’s post and correct her. I’m sure she’d be delighted. 🙂
LikeLike
Have you been following her latest post? I’ve got all of them cornered!!! All on my own. And it was SO EASY! 🙂
LikeLike
Have you? I rather thought they’d torn into you and I was upholding reason on my own. 🙂
LikeLike
Take that back. I forgot about the bacon point. Smooth.
LikeLike
Link please
LikeLike
I’ll have to look for the that- but I guarantee it’s correct!
LikeLike
Silly man-child… Link to the post. I want to read the thread 🙂
LikeLike
If you go to the Askthebigot link above, it’s her most recent post. Another one on loving gay people while telling them they’re evil sinners if they touch anyone they’re attracted to.
LikeLike
Her most recent is something Jesus never mentioning gays
LikeLike
You are a dinosaur. That’s the one I link to in the post. You get to her most recent post by clicking ‘Home’. Here: http://askthebigot.com/2014/03/13/living-in-the-tension/
LikeLike
You’re a treasure
LikeLike
This almost sounds true. He has been around for too long 😛
LikeLike
You bored of him? Don’t worry, I won’t say. 😉
LikeLike
Don’t tell him.
LikeLike
This gives you an overview: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Adulterium.html
LikeLike
Thanks, but no, no, no no…. I want the link to the post you’re having fun on. I want to read it and have a giggle.
LikeLike
Oops.. sorry! 🙂 I worked all day and my work basically consists of throwing references in people’s faces to support my analysis of one item or another 🙂
LikeLike
🙂
LikeLike
Don’t worry, Wisp gave it to me.
LikeLike
A bit more detail on Lex Iulia here: http://books.google.es/books?id=IPU8ZAcrOtIC&pg=PA445&lpg=PA445&dq=constantine+definition+adultery&source=bl&ots=KLMVrenJQf&sig=mfjBO08f7B6uMpxK1Ez6Sr8a6Cw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pXAjU8zsC7CQ0QWVjYG4Bw&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=constantine%20definition%20adultery&f=false
LikeLike
If you read the passages where all the Christians point to Jesus saying all that a man may divorce for adultery with that knowledge in mind you can clearly see this is exactly what he’s referencing. Also, a woman had no grounds to divorce based on adultery because she was the property of the man, not the other way around. In those days a man could have as many wives and concubines as he wanted and it wasn’t considered adultery.
LikeLike
I was confused. I thought we the wives must have sex on demand, meant that I got sex whenever I wanted it, I think that is really we the wives must give sex on demand, yes?
LikeLike
Awwwh, now you’ve just gone and confused everything! 🙂
LikeLike
Even worse, I’ve got distracted and gone onto ask the bigot, so not a good idea 😀
LikeLike
Cocktails please…. this could be a long flight 😉
LikeLike
Got bored with bigot. No cocktails but have opened a tinny to go with sandwich before I fall into bed.
I made a totally irrelevant ie not related to religion (except it was in terms of patriarchy) comment about referring to Christian girls. Are we dealing with a bunch of schoolgirls there?
LikeLike
I did go back this morning. Ms Bigot didn’t answer my question but instead asked if Pink had called for back-up? I mean I ask you. What sort of reply is that? Apart from anything else, if Pink told me to do something, I would do the exact opposite 😉
And, I’d read her terms of engagement which talk about intelligent debate (or some attempt at it) so I was most insulted and offended and suggested she should abide by her own rules and possibly consider replying to my question.
LikeLike
That’s odd, she usually publishes and answers all comments. Maybe it’ll appear at some point later today.
LikeLike
She published the comment but didn’t answer it. Just with a snide comment about Pink. I thought it was insulting to both of us. She could have answered my perfectly simple question instead.
LikeLike
You’re braver than I am. I dipped my toe into that nonsense some time ago and i swear my brain vomited.
LikeLike
Partner had fallen asleep in the chair, so I was finding something to do in the dark that didn’t wake him up. I couldn’t read, well, I could have read online books I suppose but I didn’t think of that at the time, so I tried to find somewhere to create a small amount of havoc. Failed miserably. Shame really, after the appearance of one of my photos on a god-fearing site, I have been all out for these hypocrites. I successfully filed an MDCA notice before you ask – it’s the last post on my blog as I told the world about it 😀
LikeLike
I saw that question. Instead of answering your challenge, she goes to attack pink and she gets support from her minions.
I asked one Tisha her understanding of freewill and maybe askbigot is doing a background check on me before my comment is approved.
LikeLike
It wasn’t so much a challenge, merely a question regarding her use of language. Well, if she did a background check on me I don’t think I would have come out with top marks 😀
LikeLike
Of course you would! It was a waste of time. The level of ignorance is so gigantic, that sometimes one has to pause and think ‘what in the world…’
Now Kayla something joined in. You know how there’s Malibu Barbie? She’s Cretin Barbie.
LikeLike
I made the mistake of clicking on the computer to see what time it was and flitted back over there. You have stamina, I’ll give you that. I did end up snorting over the keyboard a few times. These people need to go on a refresher course for English, let alone logic/ethics/philosophy. What part of mind your own business do they not understand? And as for meeting any of them in heaven – I think we can safely assume that would certainly be hell. Give me a heaven with gay atheists any day, even if they would be unavailable for sex with me.
No I didn’t know there was a Malibu Barbie. But I take your point.
I’ve taken john zande’s approach and decided I didn’t feel like losing the will to live today. Especially as I’m now so frightened of meeting any of them in heaven expressing their love for me – which I really so do not want. It’s on a par with the thought of eating meat. They’d probably want me to do that as well. Creepy and disturbing were mild adjectives, delusional was more appropriate, I would have gone for lunatic. These people are worrying. I just do not get why they think I want to be a recipient of their love.
LikeLike
If you can stomach it, pop over to the next post “Why are Christians obsessed ..” and see what Motherhood has to say. I’ve abandoned ship. When it gets that crazy there’s just no point. It’s interesting that Bigot and her editor are excited by any form of support, and kind of shines light on just what sort of operation they’re running.
LikeLike
‘Operation’ is the right word. They should be more careful with the fake comments. When wordpress sends us a comment via email, the IP is included. Interestingly a number of regular commenters who aren’t wordpress members just ‘happen to have’ the same ip… And that of course clears the whole thing up.
It’s a sham, trying to attract attention with fabricated controversy.
LikeLike
Great detective work! I did suspect that Hewhoshallnotbenamed might be her husband, and a few other exchanges seemed odd. Can you forward it to me at violetwisps@gmail.com? I’d like to check that out in detail. I’ll have to remember to start ticking the email box in future, definitely worth it for that kind of info.
LikeLike
76.74.254.120
I had unchecked the email box, but decided to recheck it. One of her answers was a reply to something I’d said to Hewho… and her replies as I exposed the matter were very telling.
“My IP irrelevant, it doesn’t prove that anything I’ve said is untrue”.
Then today it got even better:
“You are the one adding traffic and controversy to this blog. Or was I also in a disingenuous way adding traffic to Violetwisp’s blog when our debate began there? Am I a sham traffic generator for both sides? Or maybe I’m a blog traffic generator for hire and both VW and Askme are paying me vast sums of money, that must be it.”
LikeLike
Oh, you’re right! Verb change in order. Provide, donate, succumb or give?
LikeLike
succumb and submission I think don’t you?
there is a really bad blog out there, the name of which I can’t remember, but it’s something on the line of the something hand, anyway it’s all about how women should submit boring blah blah, you get the idea, if I can find it I’ll add a link for everyone’s entertainment. Sad though it is 😦
LikeLike
Succumb looks good. Even I can’t be deluded now into thinking I get sex on demand.
LikeLike
Sorry to disappoint .. I’ll change it back if you like 🙂
LikeLike
This is all the result of tremendously unattractive people getting into seats of authority. If they can’t get any then they set their minds to making sure everyone else (the mildly good looking to the stunning) won’t get any, too.
LikeLike
Ha ha, this probably has a grain of truth. It’s the equivalent of today’s widely touted ‘good looking people don’t bother to develop much of a personality’ because they attract people anyway. In ye olden days, all the hotties were shagging, and ugly people were writing bitter laws about sex?
LikeLike
Occams Razor… It’s the most logical explanation. Even seen a beautiful dictator?
LikeLike
Click to access toward-a-quaker-view-of-sex.pdf
LikeLike
Aw, c’mon, that’s poor effort in comment land. At least a summary for people who can’t click?
LikeLike
Sex is OK.
Queer sex is OK
People are OK.
LikeLike
Guessed it might say something like that. But this selection is more entertaining and still based on real beliefs that should be publicly humiliated, no?
LikeLike
Yeah, yeah, go after the low hanging fruit.
LikeLike
I’m so pleased you approve. 🙂
LikeLike
You sure have some powerful biases about Christians. Honestly, I’ve never been subjected to any of these things as a Christian:
1.women are evil sluts, men are victims
2.wives should have sex on demand
3.death penalty for anyone who has sex with a not heterosexual spouse
1.As far as I know, I am not a slut.
2. What’s wrong with having lots of married sex?
3. When was the last time Christianity executed anybody for adultery?
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment. I’m simply quoting the Bible and other Christians, although I suppose there is something biased in my choice of quotes.
“What’s wrong with having lots of married sex?” Absolutely nothing. There is something wrong with pressurising women into having sex when they’re not in mood by threatening that an evil spirit will make their husbands will commit adultery if they don’t.
“When was the last time Christianity executed anybody for adultery?” Interesting question, I’m not sure, do you know?
LikeLike
“I’m simply quoting the Bible and other Christians..”
You may indeed be quoting other Christians but you are taking the bible out of context and reading something into it that is not there.
“There is something wrong with pressurising women into having sex when they’re not in mood…”
This is more of a problem with men in general and cultural influences than religious beliefs. Men have been pressuring women into sex for centuries. To claim that Christian men use the threat of an evil spirit forcing them into adultery is a bit of an exaggeration. I’m not sure if you’re married, but people who have been married for a long time often do have sex even when they’re “not in the mood.” It has to do with love, affection, compromise, not fear of evil spirits.
I have no record of any Christians executing anybody for adultery. Back in the days of the early church, most Christians were under Roman rule and somewhat opposed to the death penalty. You of course, are familiar with Christ and His teaching about “let he who is without sin cast the first stone?”
LikeLike
I’m not convinced I took the Bible out of context, I quoted a huge chunk of it. If there’s something in the text you didn’t like, you can’t blame me. As for Christian wives and sex, read the whole post I link to – the author is very clear and I have exaggerated nothing.
Thanks for bringing up the point about whether any Christians have been executed for adultery, it’s certainly worth further investigation. I suppose the second wife of King Henry VIII was executed under a pretext of adultery charges, but they also included incest and treason.
LikeLike
“If there’s something in the text you didn’t like..”
Actually I like the text very much and the rather woman friendly concept of treating us like sisters rather than as potential sexual prey. Rather than feeling persecuted as a woman by biblical teachings, I feel protected.
As to executing women for adultery, many cultures all through history have done that, from ancient Greece to Native Americans here in North America. It had a lot to do with control, paternity and family lineage. In the case of Henry the 8th, it had a lot to do with politics and power, and his desire for a son. It’s a bit of stretch to attempt to hold Henry the 8th up as an example of Christianity and Christian teachings. You may recall that Christians actually fled to America to escape the control of another king who believed he was entitled to hold moral authority over them.
LikeLike
Being put to death for adultery happened in Christianity (or with its blessing) until not very long ago. The thing is the laws were modified with the times and re-named Crimes of Passion. In those cases a husband was basically excused for killing his (cheating) wife.
If you go through the statistics you’ll note that over 90% of men charged were cleared versus only 5% of women. A shocking difference and a very clear picture of patriarchal Christian culture.
If you want more proper history you can check the Theodosian code and then Lex Iulia which was created to protect women from false allegations of adultery (which were obviously too common if the law had to be changed).
LikeLike
“Being put to death for adultery happened in Christianity (or with its blessing)”
You’ll have to give me a country and a date of the last Christian execution for adultery because I sure can’t find any examples.
Crimes of passion are still on the books today in several countries with a variety of different faiths. Christians did not invent those laws.
As to patriarchal systems, they have their problems, but let me tell you, the matriarchy is no picnic for women either. There is a Christian patriarchal order, but there is also a patriarchal feudal order, a patriarchal Muslim order, etc, etc. I’ve found patriarchy under Christianity to be the most women friendly of them all.
LikeLike
On women are evil sluts, men are victims, see this post: Modesty. I am taking the piss, of course, but quoting real opinions.
LikeLike
The problem I have with Violet is that she attacks the very stupidest Christian opinions here, but they do exist:
http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/index.php/britain-in-sin-2/ on why your husband should have sex on demand;
Not apparently a satire site- “No wife should ever go behind closed doors with any man except for those who are responsible for keeping her safe, namely, her own close relatives as defined by the incest laws of Leviticus.” http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=125
LikeLike
You’ve got a ‘problem’ with me? How rude! 😉
LikeLike
😀 Had you come across christianmarriage.com? How many posts can you get out of that one? 😀
LikeLike
You’ve got a problem with me and you just keep feeding me …
LikeLike
Darling, you have once gone on about deluded Quakers. At least this way it is deluded Evangelicals in your sights…
He is fun, though, isn’t he? Look up Complementarianism to see how widespread his views are.
LikeLike
What are you doing to me??
“Read my Christian Romance Novel, The Prince of Sumba right here online. This End Times Christian Novel takes place in THE PHILIPPINES!”
LikeLike
If you have lost your virginity and have not had any man other than the one who took your virginity, it is still not too late to make it right. The Bible says that the man who takes an unengaged woman’s virginity must declare her to be his wife and upon his public declaration, she shall indeed be his wife.
LikeLike
“it is fornication if she even associates with another man without the permission of her husband not to mention that the man who permits his wife to have friendships with other men is a fool. A man is head of the woman and this should not be taken lightly.”
LikeLike
ancient Chinese idea: it was so improper for a man to touch his sister-in-law’s hand, that it would be better to let her drown than pull her out of a lake.
LikeLike
I am self-banned from saying anything religious at the moment but i will say this.
What a frigging amazing photo.
The wing detail is stunning.
Miss V, this one gets the Best Dragonfly Photo So Far award..
You must blow it up and frame.
Needless to say I shall nick it.
LikeLike
*tickled pink*
(Ssshhh, have a look at this post but don’t tell roughseas I sent you because she’ll shout at me again http://roughseasinthemed.wordpress.com/2014/03/13/seeing-red/)
LikeLike
Well you did leave yourself wide open for that one. 🙂
I have used photographs from other bloggers, as I am sure you know, but I always ask.
Ravi Patel for one. I have had one of his super shots on my desktop all week.
Until your Dragonfly took centre stage.
But I know how you feel regard your pics and my,
” I am going to nick it” was, believe it or not, a tacit request.
I would never use another bloggers material without permission, and always credit when I am given permission to do so.
I reckon you should use a different blog theme so as to do a bit more justice to some of your better shots.
And stick a copyright notice on them too.
LikeLike
Quite. Meanwhile I must reply to your comment dear Violet, and give you a link to my copyright post where I explain at boring length why it is not acceptable to have one’s photos stolen by every Tom, Dick and Harry. Or in my case, the god-fearing Jonathan.
LikeLike
too right!
LikeLike
Pingback: Pious Piety: Speaking the Truth in Love | Out From Under the Umbrella
The Christian approach to sex is to keep it within the bounds of marriage. Considering the fact, proven time and again, (like here: http://www.nber.org/papers/w10499.pdf) that married monogamous couples have the most, and the most fulfilling sex, I would say that we’ve got it right. But you are much more interested in parody than in truth, aren’t you.
LikeLike
Hi BJ, thanks for taking time out of your busy spam liking schedule to check out one of my posts. Where’s this parody you speak of? I’ve quoted the Bible and other Christians – none of it is made up.
“married monogamous couples have the most, and the most fulfilling sex, I would say that we’ve got it right.” Okay, if that’s what’s important to you …
LikeLike
Not the first post I’ve read, simply the first I’ve commented on. You’ve been blogging for a while now… if I were to pull one sentence from one of your blogs out of context and then envelope it into my own claiming it was yours… would you think that was just? Just because you quote something doesn’t mean you are representing it in truth.
LikeLike
If you could point to me where anything I’ve stated above is out of context, I’d be interested. Are you denying you’re a spam liker? Do you read every post you ‘like’? You’ve ‘liked’ loads of my posts, and a lot of them are more critical of Christianity than this; and I also see your chirpy little picture at the bottom of many Christian-themed posts I read. I doubt anyone would have the time to read them all – and I’m quite no sure no-one would genuinely ‘like’ them all.
LikeLike