Christian Teachings on Sex

  • Thread starter Thread starter searching04
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah not to mention when you add in that some couples have a very hard figuring out exactly when those fertile days are that is another problem. They may only have less then a week of actual fertility but it might as well be near 100% of time if you have nearly no idea when it is!
Which is the prupose of NFP, so that you do know “exactly when those fertile days are.” It is a daily thing and and if done correctly puts both the woman and the man very much in touch with exactly what is going on. This method has proven to be more effective than artificial contraception in preventing pregnancy and is incredibly useful for those that are seeking pregnancy. And guess what? No side effects.
 
Well, guess what? Some woman are a heck of a lot more fertile than that. And you, as others, automatcially assume it a lack of sex that is an issue, or that people who struggle with a lack of sexual intimacy don’t know there are all sorts of things that help with intimacy.
I can only assume how you arrived at this paragraph?

I believe what Steve stated was this…

“If one does not have the self control to deal with this in a loving relationship then I would say their problem is with themselves”

This would be the “usual” senerio. Since specifics are not mentioned this would be the first thought, sorry if we all assumed. You have created a couple different senerios above. For example…

1]“Some woman are a heck of a lot more fertile”

2]“lack of sex is an issue”

3]" lack of sexual intimacy"

So, how would you solve this?

Peace
 
Which is the prupose of NFP, so that you do know “exactly when those fertile days are.” It is a daily thing and and if done correctly puts both the woman and the man very much in touch with exactly what is going on. This method has proven to be more effective than artificial contraception in preventing pregnancy and is incredibly useful for those that are seeking pregnancy. And guess what? No side effects.
I would disagree actually that it is proven more effective but anyway you missed my point. My point was for some who use NFP no matter what method they use the results are iffy at best. I wasn;t refering to people who just casually take note of changes and guess whether they are fertile or not. I am talking about people who carefuly check signs and do whatever else the method or methods they have used or are using require of then and still come up with results that are iffy at best.
 
This method has proven to be more effective than artificial contraception in preventing pregnancy.
For those that have their cycle down pat, and whose cycle is both regular, and rhythmic, there is a four percent chance of getting pregnant, if one has sex.

For those whose cycle is irregular, there is a twenty percent chance of getting pregnant, if one has sex.

For those who have sex, and use no contraception, there is a twenty five percent chance of getting pregnant.
 
No man can honestly say that he is being completely loving and selfless while using artificial contraception. Why? Because he can say whatever he wants, he’s not going to get pregnant. And if the contraception fails, what’s left? “I thought you took you’re pill!”, or “I used a condom, what’s wrong with you?”. Then instead of a miracle, you have a “problem”. Because when a man uses artificial means he is left with a false sense of security, rather than using natural means where the man should be aware that a pregnancy could still occur because that is what intercourse is for, making offspring. That is thrown out with artificial means because even with the best intentions the goal is physical pleasure without the responsibility of the naturally intended outcome.
 
Ah… so the truth is narrowed here. Isn’t is something how reality always ends up in the drivers seat.

So then it also might a great idea to pick up a dictionary and read the definition of SEX. The word LOVE wouldn’t be in there. Also Love, btw does not depend on sex. Repoduction is all that depends on sex.

It would also be great to understand what the Bible has to say about this. Since in fact Christians is the topic concern here. Another passing thought is “The Kindom of God is within you” could easy be shortened to “The Kingdom of God is you” So the simple question then becomes , what would God do? I’m absolutely postive he wouldn’t act off selfish, destructive, ecocentric thinking. And then rationalize it with “Well I have needs” which is incorrectly confused with “wants”. And those wants you created in your mind one thought at a time. However far this illusion has escalated one can only assume, but it is ego. The fact you find this fustrating is simply because you allowed this illusion to grow.

How your ego is reconciled with “The Kingdom of God is within us” I would just love to hear explained by any Christian. I’ll be waiting.

Peace
Brilliant Gary. Simply Brilliant! :clapping::tiphat:👍
 
Prior to 1930, no single christian denomination had EVER endorsed nor even accepted any form of contraception. But the various strands of christianity (catholic, orthodox, Lutheran and Calvinists) all had a consistent track record of stating the purposeful defeating of the procreative nature of sex was sinful. Luther and Calvin were both (characteristically) vociferous about it.

It wasn’t until about a generation before the “sexual revolution” that contraception became socially acceptable. No coincidence, that!

You can even SEE it in some early films of the period. Netflix the original “Cheaper By the Dozen” movie someday and be AMAZED at the difference in how Hollywood saw Planned Parenthood in those days versus today.
Yes, moving the goal post. If that can be done to contraception, then abortion is a natural consequence, euthanasia and really, just about every other evil.

If we can move the goal post, on this, why not on that.
 
No man can honestly say that he is being completely loving and selfless while using artificial contraception. Why? Because he can say whatever he wants, he’s not going to get pregnant. And if the contraception fails, what’s left? “I thought you took you’re pill!”, or “I used a condom, what’s wrong with you?”. Then instead of a miracle, you have a “problem”. Because when a man uses artificial means he is left with a false sense of security, rather than using natural means where the man should be aware that a pregnancy could still occur because that is what intercourse is for, making offspring. That is thrown out with artificial means because even with the best intentions the goal is physical pleasure without the responsibility of the naturally intended outcome.
Well actually I think it depends on the attitude the man has before having sex at all. A man could have a similarly bad attitude with NFP. Of course instead of saying your on the pill! or I wore a condom! It would be the chart said you were infertile! Or you said the method would work for sure! Really though just because someone uses NFP doesn;t mean they are going to welcome every baby as a blessing.
Really with NFP often times the goal is physical pleasure and bonding with ones spouse as well with artifical contraception. I mean one can use either kind of method and still be open to the possibly or not be open to the possiblity of children.
 
Ah… so the truth is narrowed here. Isn’t is something how reality always ends up in the drivers seat.

So then it also might a great idea to pick up a dictionary and read the definition of SEX. The word LOVE wouldn’t be in there. Also Love, btw does not depend on sex. Repoduction is all that depends on sex.

It would also be great to understand what the Bible has to say about this. Since in fact Christians is the topic concern here. Another passing thought is “The Kindom of God is within you” could easy be shortened to “The Kingdom of God is you” So the simple question then becomes , what would God do? I’m absolutely postive he wouldn’t act off selfish, destructive, ecocentric thinking. And then rationalize it with “Well I have needs” which is incorrectly confused with “wants”. And those wants you created in your mind one thought at a time. However far this illusion has escalated one can only assume, but it is ego. The fact you find this fustrating is simply because you allowed this illusion to grow.

How your ego is reconciled with “The Kingdom of God is within us” I would just love to hear explained by any Christian. I’ll be waiting.

Peace
Well actually sex is something that many couples use to express their love to eachother. In marriage sexual intimacy is a very important thing. Though of course everyone is different. Yes some people absolutely do not need sexual intimacy with their spouse but for some it is definately a need. Not in that you would literally die without it but in the sense that the marriage could die without it. You could end up with a marriage of two people that are little more then roommates not husband and wife. Even the bible makes it clear that sex in a marriage is very important. Anyway though I disagree that reproduction is all there is to sex.
 
Well actually sex is something that many couples use to express their love to eachother. In marriage sexual intimacy is a very important thing. Though of course everyone is different. Yes some people absolutely do not need sexual intimacy with their spouse but for some it is definately a need. Not in that you would literally die without it but in the sense that the marriage could die without it. You could end up with a marriage of two people that are little more then roommates not husband and wife. Even the bible makes it clear that sex in a marriage is very important. Anyway though I disagree that reproduction is all there is to sex.
But Gary makes a very good point. One can have love without sex but one can’t have babies without sex. So if you look at what sex is for, then it is primarily for pro-creation. It so happens that it can also be a means of bonding and a means of expressing love, but sex is not necessary for bonding and for expressing love but it is necessary for pro-creation.
 
But Gary makes a very good point. One can have love without sex but one can’t have babies without sex. So if you look at what sex is for, then it is primarily for pro-creation. It so happens that it can also be a means of bonding and a means of expressing love, but sex is not necessary for bonding and for expressing love but it is necessary for pro-creation.
Well yes I agree one can have love without sex but not babies. Of course like I said though it also depends on the couple. Everyone is different. It may not be the ONLY method of bonding a couple has but I guess getting to the point here for some it is the most important. To the point where even though yes there are other things the couple could do that donlt involve sexual intimacy, that it still has a very negative impact.
 
Anyway slightly more on topic as a nondemonational I am pretty sure there is no official stance on contraception or birth control of any sort. I guess my other two direct experiences have been with the Baptist and Lutheran denominations and to be honest I never even heard the issue of sex and contraception be brought up. Actually it wasn;t until I began reading discussions on the internet that I basically stumbled upon the idea that contraception is considered a sin by some. I think the issue of sex and things related to it is awkward to bring up but I do think it is a subject that should be brought up more in Churches since it is a very important one. Of course within reason and within approriateness. I mean Church is not the place to talk about sexual techiques and the children should probably be out of the room. However issues like the sinfulness or not of contraception issues like sexual refusal and what the bible has to say on that I think those are important subjects that judging from all the reading I have done are rarely brought up in a Church setting. But err sheesh I am off topic again so much for me making a post on topic huh!? 😛
 
Well yes I agree one can have love without sex but not babies. Of course like I said though it also depends on the couple. Everyone is different. It may not be the ONLY method of bonding a couple has but I guess getting to the point here for some it is the most important. To the point where even though yes there are other things the couple could do that donlt involve sexual intimacy, that it still has a very negative impact.
So therefore the primary purpose of sex is procreation but God was really thoughtful of his creature, so He also made it pleasureable.

The problem is, couples now want only the pleasure without the primary purpose for which sex was created. That is turning the order of things (as God intended) on its head.

There is nothing wrong with wanting the pleasure, it is the abuse of it that is problematic and it becomes abuse when you desire pleasure for its sake while you eschew the purpose for which sex was created. That is hardly going with God’s intent.
 
A good example of relationship between husband and wife is mentioned in the bible
" She got up and they began to pray, asking that they be given life. Tobias began like this,
“May you be blessed, O Lord God of our fathers, and may your holy and glorious Name be blessed forever. May the heavens and all creatures bless you.
You created Adam and you gave him Eve, his wife, as a helper and companion, so that from these two the human race might be born.
You said: ‘It is not good that man should be alone, let us give him a companion who is like himself.’
**Now, Lord, I take my sister to myself in sincerity and love, not merely seeking pleasure. Have mercy on us and grant us a long life together.”
Together they said, “Amen,”
** and returned to bed for the night.

Tobit (8:5-9)
 
I disagree with the catholic church about birth control. I’ve seen so many marriages fail from them having babies too soon. I think if you get married and want to spend some alone time for a few years, even, just to grow as a married couple, that’s perfectly okay. Once you have a child your life isn’t yours anymore. Many young married couples are using methods of birth control so they dont have children before they’re married. I disagree about the fact it’s a sin.
 
I disagree with the catholic church about birth control. I’ve seen so many marriages fail from them having babies too soon. I think if you get married and want to spend some alone time for a few years, even, just to grow as a married couple, that’s perfectly okay. Once you have a child your life isn’t yours anymore. Many young married couples are using methods of birth control so they dont have children before they’re married. I disagree about the fact it’s a sin.
You are wrong. Children is a unifying factor in the family life. Most of the marriages in western countries collapses because it is based on dating marriage system. Everybody selects their life partner by dating. A person will see only positive elements in partner before marriage , also everybody hides their negative factors. So only after marriage they can understand their partner perfectly and if it is not as per their ambitions and imaginations then the relation starts collapsing slowly.

But in Asia (Eastern christians) you can find arranged marriages. There parents selects life partner for their children.All factors affecting married life such as educational background, family background,Spiritual backgrounds etc are concidered. All should be matching. Because by marriage not only two persons, but two families are also joining together. And the marriage proposal will be finalized only if proposed partners likes each other. You can see divorce rate among Asian christians is less than One percent. 99% of marriages are success. Co operation between relatives and brothers are also very strong. So that couples get support from relatives and siblings. Family ministries of church providing family counsellings to couples, family renewal retreats etc are very active.
God had chosen Eve for Adam and not Adam selected Eve. Like wise you can see marriage of Issac and Rabecca (selected by Abraham), Marraige of mary and joseph (selected by God). Always parents will give best things to their children.Parents have more experience in life, so their choice is better. So it is advisable to promote arranged marriages instead of dating marriages.
 
I disagree with the catholic church about birth control. I’ve seen so many marriages fail from them having babies too soon. I think if you get married and want to spend some alone time for a few years, even, just to grow as a married couple, that’s perfectly okay. Once you have a child your life isn’t yours anymore. Many young married couples are using methods of birth control so they dont have children before they’re married. I disagree about the fact it’s a sin.
The Catholic Church allows couples who must avoid having children for grave reasons to employ Natural Family Planning. Other posters should be able to fill you in.

And I’ve read that, up to 1930, all Christians agreed on the immoral nature of artificial birth control. First the Anglicans changed their stance that year, and then other Protestants and Orthodox, to varying degrees, have since followed suit. Is it really prudent and in keeping with God’s will to eliminate previously universal moral teachings?
 
None of the many Protestant churches I have attended regularly, nor Assemblies of God, of which I am currently a member, teaches anything at all with regard to what specific bedroom activities a married couple may engage in. If you’re married, anything consensual goes. Nor have I ever heard any teachings on contraception, one way or the other.
 
I think that in the United States, it is extremely difficult for a couple to comprehend and practice sex the way the Catholic Church teaches.

I am not saying that we should abandon Catholic teaching–never!

What I’m saying is that many of us struggle. We may accept intellectually what the Catholic Church says, but because of our immersion in our U.S. culture, we find it virtually impossible to accept and practice Catholic teaching on an emotional level.

Simply put, our minds have been warped by our culture when it comes to sex.

**Our culture has completely separated the procreative aspect of sex from the unitive aspect of sex, and has basically eliminated the idea that sex has a procreative purpose. In other words, sex has been “broken” by our culture, and what many Catholics and other Christians understand and accept about sex is this “broken sex” model of sex. **

Almost every media source in the U.S. supports the “Broken Sex” model, that sex is for the pleasure of the couple, and has nothing to do with procreation unless the couple specifically desires to procreate.

All of our television shows, films, and plays, our novels and other literature, our music of all styles including classical, our artwork, our science–it all teaches us that frequent sex is the ideal, both between the married and the unmarried, and even between same sex couples and “multiples” (bigamy, promiscuity, etc.).

In fact, for those who have no partner, masturbation is presented as the healthy option.

At this point, we in the U.S. still have not accepted sex for children, but we are getting closer to acceptance. Many media sources present the idea of the “sexuality of children” and even the “sexuality of babies”. We are seeing more and more sexualization of very young children from the fashion industry. Our society views children as “miniature adults,” and this opens the door to encourage children to enjoy sex and practice it frequently. We are on the road to accepting child sex.

Many Protestant denominations, especially the evangelical denominations, have totally bought into the Broken Sex model for married couples. (Most evangelical denominations still utterly condemn the sexual perversions–same sex encounters and attractions, child sex, group sex, pre-marital sex, adultery, etc., although most evangelical denominations allow and even encourage masturbation as normal and healthy.).

There are quite a few “sex manuals” written by prominent Protestant teachers, and most of them do not even mention the procreative aspect of sex. In fact, many of the evangelical Protestant denominations even teach that it is OK for an infertile (married) couple to pursue other methods than sexual intercourse to achieve a pregnancy, e.g., in vitro fertilization, or surrogacy.

Again, I am NOT saying that Catholics should just roll over and accept the “broken sex” model.

What I’m saying is that in the United States, sex is a huge HUGE stumbling block for many many Catholics, especially those who are converts from various Protestant sects, including evangelical Protestantism.

I think that the Catholic Church needs to continue to teach the “Whole Sex” model, that sex is for unitive AND procreative purposes, and that frequent sex is NOT necessary for intimacy and love in a marriage. This teaching is absolutely so foreign to most people in the U.S.

So my practical suggestion is that the Catholic Church seek and find teachers, especially women, who can write well, and ask these teachers to write “popular books” that the public will buy and read, so that Catholic teaching can be disseminated and assimilated. In other words, we need to use the same method that the evangelical Protestants have used so very successfully to propogate the “Broken Sex” model–we need to write “sex manuals” to propogate the “Whole Sex” model.

I think that using the “popular book” method to spread correct Catholic teaching is a good one when it comes to sex, as it allows people to learn in private about sex from peers, not priests. (Of course, all of these “sex books” should be reviewed and approved by priests and bishops .

This method has already been used quite successfully by Christopher West in his “Theology of the Body” books. For many Catholics and non-Catholic Christians, , these books are their first encounter with the “Whole Sex” model. In fact, a recent issue of Christianity Today mentioned TOTB and urged Protestant Christians to READ Pope John Paul II’s works to gain a proper understanding of sex!

BTW, I have been harsh against evangelical Protestants in this post, but I will say that in the last ten years, there has been a definite turn-around in many evangelical sects when it comes to sex.

In conclusion, I think that Catholics who have a proper understanding and acceptance of sex need to recognize that acceptance of Catholic teachings about sex will not come easily to many Christians in the United States. Harsh condemnation of those of us who have been warped by our culture is not going to be helpful, but may instead cause people to actually turn away in disgust from Catholic teachings. Patience and more patience, and always with charity will win out in the end and restore a proper sexual culture in the United States, at least among Catholics.
 
Two purposes to sex: Unitive and Procreative. using pills and barrier methods block the 2nd purpose.
Point of clarification, how long has it been that the CC had the two-purpose teaching? It used to be primarily for reproduction with a secondary goal of being a remedy for concupiscence. When and how did the unitive purpose make it in there? And how do you sell it as development rather than innovation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top