A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
That would strongly suggest that he never felt sexual desire at all.
- Status
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
C
centurionguard
Guest
How so? Please Explain!
Jesus did feel temptations but He also possessed a Divine quality in nature even though He was human in every way but sin.
Surely Jesus had gained the insight and inspiration from His Heavenly Father how to mortify the lower nature and temptations of His own human flesh.
H
Hakathriel
Guest
Thanks for confirming the stereotype, AngryAtheist. You fit the personality profile I expected almost exactly–plastic empty iconoclasm, wannabe-hipsterism, etc., etc…
I know your type, and the internal motivation impelling you.
Your corrupt “civilization” of metaphysical materialism and nihilistic moral anomie and subhumanity, and the wasted, debauched ape-husks of humanity vegetating in its putrescence, is nearing its end, partner.
The Hindus call this age the Kali Yuga, the last world-age of Darkness and Evil.
The internal entropy of your counterfeit of civilization is consumptive, and terminal.
I need not defend myself, because Time shall unfold the karmic retribution due. The Divine Being is the one who shall have the last laugh, sorry to say.
I know your type, and the internal motivation impelling you.
Your corrupt “civilization” of metaphysical materialism and nihilistic moral anomie and subhumanity, and the wasted, debauched ape-husks of humanity vegetating in its putrescence, is nearing its end, partner.
The Hindus call this age the Kali Yuga, the last world-age of Darkness and Evil.
The internal entropy of your counterfeit of civilization is consumptive, and terminal.
I need not defend myself, because Time shall unfold the karmic retribution due. The Divine Being is the one who shall have the last laugh, sorry to say.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Whether he did or did not, he chose not to act on it. He had bigger fish to fry while he had is ministry on earth.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Your argument consists of nothing but elaborate insults and threats.
Willingly admitting that you feel no need to defend or explain your position.
Okay your just trolling:shrug:
Good to know.
But you’re going to have to do better than that if you want a reaction out of me, my dear troll
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
The thing is, if Jesus never felt sexual desire, if the Virgin Mary never felt sexual desire, then they are useless as role models for those of us who do (at least in this area of life).
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
You wrote:
Originally Posted by centurionguard
Just making a supposition here but Jesus being human in every way but sin obviously mortified His senses and didn’t subject His Will to the temptations of His lower human nature.
If Jesus Christ never engaged in any sexual activities, and he never felt tempted to, then the logical assumption is that he had no sexual desire at all.
R
Rock_Happy
Guest
Where does the Bible refer to His sexual orientation, or are you making this up? What makes you think that he was a sexual being? And, if he was, what makes you think he was attracted to any particular gender over another, or attracted to any human?
Just wondering how you come to make this assertion, which you seem very confident to make.
R
Rock_Happy
Guest
I don’t really think of any form of God as being sexual. In scanning the posts here, it just looks like a lot of human projection of a personal vision of God, which varies from person to person.
Mine is that Jesus was not sexual. I just don’t see the young man Jesus struggling with masturbation and lust, or being tempted by a prostitute. But I can’t say where I got that impression. Maybe it is just in my head.
H
Hakathriel
Guest
There are no threats, my dear “pale criminal” and no desire on my part for a reaction from you…Your argument consists of nothing but elaborate insults and threats.
Willingly admitting that you feel no need to defend or explain your position.
Okay your just trolling:shrug:
Good to know.
But you’re going to have to do better than that if you want a reaction out of me, my dear troll
There is only stating the existent and the inevitable.
I know your personality-type, and know pursuing truth is least uppermost in your mind.
So rational argumentation and reasoning is pointless.
Every counter-modern, seemingly absurd metaphysical, philosophical and metapolitical claim and proposition I have stated in my purposely “colorful” way, I could rigorously and flawlessly substantiate and validate through either empirical documentation, or stark, bare philosophical logic.
But I know your state of mind. The modernist psychic etiology. The emotional element predominates. And I don’t have all day to cleanse your psyche, but I wish you good luck in such a process, in any case. Only consciously choose to reopen and unseal the sewn-shut eye of the soul.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
It’s not THAT hard to get one’s mind out of the gutter! Especially if you are centering on spiritual matters. Actually, in this day in age, most people are centering on sexual matters. There are other things one can direct one’s attentions to.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I’ve never been called a pale criminal before.
You seem much more entertaining than Betterave was.
I may have found a new favorite
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I agree, trying to engage in rational debate with a troll would be pointless.
But I’m rather laid back about the whole thing at this point, so feel free to troll away:thumbsup:
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
So in your view experiencing sexual desire is ‘having one’s mind in the gutter’ then?
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
When people resort to porn and masturbation, yes, I would say their minds are “in the gutter”.
When one is with his or her soulmate, and experiences sexual desire (along with love), then no.
B
Benadam
Guest
Jesus is straight. It’s just that His purposes weren’t earthly. None of those anoying urges to reproduce and such. The natural powers were at His service externally and internally. His body didn’t move involuntarily like ours. He wouldn’t have to cover Himself like Adam because His body would never shame Him.
So He never had a desire to give Himself in marriage mostly because He wasn’t bound by death. The profoundly sublime need to survive wasn’t in Him because He wasn’t destined to die like we are , He chose it. Without this need that drives fallen man there is no involuntary urge to reproduce. Jesus didn’t have to subject His body to dicipline because it had never rebelled.
If it had been good for Jesus to give Himself in that kind of earthly way, if Jesus ’ purposes were earthly, He could have.
So He never had a desire to give Himself in marriage mostly because He wasn’t bound by death. The profoundly sublime need to survive wasn’t in Him because He wasn’t destined to die like we are , He chose it. Without this need that drives fallen man there is no involuntary urge to reproduce. Jesus didn’t have to subject His body to dicipline because it had never rebelled.
If it had been good for Jesus to give Himself in that kind of earthly way, if Jesus ’ purposes were earthly, He could have.
C
centurionguard
Guest
As others and I in this thread have tried to explain Jesus (being human) was tempted by sexual desires, He made the choice not to act on them.
What is so hard for you to believe this?
Your basing your logic strictly on a thesis believing Jesus acted on His temptations.
Jesus did NOT act on His temptations.
We possess the same power as Jesus (“not”) to act on our inordinate sexual desires of the flesh, as with any other Sin.
The Power is Freedom of Choice. This Power comes from Prayer
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
Why are people afraid of Jesus being a perfectly chaste and celibate heterosexual?
Isn’t this what God created Adam to be before the fall and before the creation of Eve? Isn’t Christ supposed to be like that in His humanity?
And do people think that the attraction that Adam had for Eve BEFORE the fall was bad? At that time they did not suffer from the concupiscence that we do now after the fall.
Shouldn’t Jesus’ humanity be like Adam and Eve’s before the fall–in other words shouldn’t that humanity be able to VALUE the attractiveness of the opposite sex but be able to do that WITHOUT sin?!
Shouldn’t Jesus be capable of having that type humanity?
I’ll tell you why people don’t really want to explore this. If they admit that Jesus was heterosexual and was able to VALUE the attractiveness of the opposite sex WITHOUT sin then they would also have to conclude that His followers should EMULATE His sexuality in that regard.
And if they do that then you wouldn’t just have some chaste Catholic Christians who suffer from same sex attraction–you SHOULD have some chaste Catholic Christians who suffer from same sex attraction who WOLUD ALSO try to LEARN the language of heterosexuality and BE that way as He was that way!
That is perfectly ORDERED by God and homosexuality IS DISORDERED!
And YES–heterosexuality CAN be learned just like another language can be learned!
People are called not to USE the language of homosexuality EVEN if that is the sexual language they first learned–but they should use the language of heterosexuality EVEN if they have to learn it.
And YES the language of heterosexuality can be used in dealing with the opposite sex in a CHASTE non sinful way. That’s what Jesus did. That’s the way that Adam and Eve related to one another before the fall–and that is what all of us are called to–some to marriage–others to chastity–and others to celibacy!
Now I’ll sit back and hear those who are apologists for Catholics who suffer from same sex attraction say that they are only called to chastity and that chaste heterosexuality cannot be learned or that Jesus’ heterosxuality should not be emulated. They are WRONG!!!
John Paul II wrote Theology of the Body. What would John Paul II say about Jesus’ sexuality in regards to His humanity? Would John Paul II say that Jesus’ perfect sexuality be emulated or not? would Jon Payul II say that Jesus was a heterosxual or not?
What would Benedict XVI say?
I ask because I could be wrong and if I am I humbly bow to the teaching of the Catholic Church though I suspect that some of these questions might not or maybe cannot be definitively answered and it may be possible to have differing theological opinions where the Catholic Church has not spoken.
In any even we should all pray for those with same sex attraction–it is a Cross they bear–and hopefully they can chastely bear it and enter into heaven one day.
We aren’t all called to be celibate–but we are all called to be chaste.
Isn’t this what God created Adam to be before the fall and before the creation of Eve? Isn’t Christ supposed to be like that in His humanity?
And do people think that the attraction that Adam had for Eve BEFORE the fall was bad? At that time they did not suffer from the concupiscence that we do now after the fall.
Shouldn’t Jesus’ humanity be like Adam and Eve’s before the fall–in other words shouldn’t that humanity be able to VALUE the attractiveness of the opposite sex but be able to do that WITHOUT sin?!
Shouldn’t Jesus be capable of having that type humanity?
I’ll tell you why people don’t really want to explore this. If they admit that Jesus was heterosexual and was able to VALUE the attractiveness of the opposite sex WITHOUT sin then they would also have to conclude that His followers should EMULATE His sexuality in that regard.
And if they do that then you wouldn’t just have some chaste Catholic Christians who suffer from same sex attraction–you SHOULD have some chaste Catholic Christians who suffer from same sex attraction who WOLUD ALSO try to LEARN the language of heterosexuality and BE that way as He was that way!
That is perfectly ORDERED by God and homosexuality IS DISORDERED!
And YES–heterosexuality CAN be learned just like another language can be learned!
People are called not to USE the language of homosexuality EVEN if that is the sexual language they first learned–but they should use the language of heterosexuality EVEN if they have to learn it.
And YES the language of heterosexuality can be used in dealing with the opposite sex in a CHASTE non sinful way. That’s what Jesus did. That’s the way that Adam and Eve related to one another before the fall–and that is what all of us are called to–some to marriage–others to chastity–and others to celibacy!
Now I’ll sit back and hear those who are apologists for Catholics who suffer from same sex attraction say that they are only called to chastity and that chaste heterosexuality cannot be learned or that Jesus’ heterosxuality should not be emulated. They are WRONG!!!
John Paul II wrote Theology of the Body. What would John Paul II say about Jesus’ sexuality in regards to His humanity? Would John Paul II say that Jesus’ perfect sexuality be emulated or not? would Jon Payul II say that Jesus was a heterosxual or not?
What would Benedict XVI say?
I ask because I could be wrong and if I am I humbly bow to the teaching of the Catholic Church though I suspect that some of these questions might not or maybe cannot be definitively answered and it may be possible to have differing theological opinions where the Catholic Church has not spoken.
In any even we should all pray for those with same sex attraction–it is a Cross they bear–and hopefully they can chastely bear it and enter into heaven one day.
We aren’t all called to be celibate–but we are all called to be chaste.
T
TimothyH
Guest
Jesus did more than just “Resist” temptation or “Choose not to act on his desires.” You guys aren’t thinking like Catholics. You guys aren’t thinking Eucharistically.
Jesus’ view of each of us was fundamentally and radically different from the way in which most of us are able to view each other here, in this life. Jesus, as the divine second person of the trinity, saw each person as they really were. He saw each person with the divine eyes of God, who knows every detail of our life and our physical bodies. As God, he himself designed every one of those details both on purpose, and with a specific purpose. As the second person of the Trinity, we were in fact, created through him. He could percieve thoughts. He could see our hearts. He created our souls. He sees us exactly as we are. And if Jesus saw each person perfectly, he also loved each person perfectly.
Eros is love that takes and does not give. Erotic love is one way. Erotic love is lust. Lust appropriates the “Other” in order to satisfy the desires of “Self”. This is not the love of Jesus. Agape love however, is selfless. Agape love is self-sacrificing love. Agape love gives and does not expect or desire to receive. Agape love is willing to give up life for the other person. This is the love of Christ on the cross. This is the love of the Second Person of the Trinity for each of us. This is the love of Jesus, who sees us perfectly and loves us perfectly - a comple gift of self, even to the point of death…
Who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God something to be grasped.
Rather, he emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
coming in human likeness;
and found human in appearance,
he humbled himself,
becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.
(Phuillipians 2:6-8)
When Jesus looked at a beautiful woman, he did not lust. Eros - love which desires to satisfy itself - was not part of his nature. Jesus wanted more than sex. Jesus, who sees each of us perfectly - as we are and as we were meant to be - wants Koinonia.
And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him. … Jesus answered and said to him, “Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him. (John 14:21,23)
Jesus,wants something far more intimate than sex. Jesus wants something infinitely more fulfilling than sex. Jesus wants communion. He wants to make a gift of himself and give himself - all of himself - to us. And if God gives himself to us, what more could we want?
I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. (John 6:51)
Lust is something we, as ordinary humans experience. But the agape love of Jesus is different. It’s God’s complete gift of himself to us. It’s the whole reason behind the Eucharist. Jesus was not asexual or non-sexual. He was above-sexual. He was beyond-sexual. He was God, and he gave us all of himself. He did not experience erotic love, but agape love. And agape love is Eucharistic love. Its koinonia. Its communion.
-Tim-
Jesus’ view of each of us was fundamentally and radically different from the way in which most of us are able to view each other here, in this life. Jesus, as the divine second person of the trinity, saw each person as they really were. He saw each person with the divine eyes of God, who knows every detail of our life and our physical bodies. As God, he himself designed every one of those details both on purpose, and with a specific purpose. As the second person of the Trinity, we were in fact, created through him. He could percieve thoughts. He could see our hearts. He created our souls. He sees us exactly as we are. And if Jesus saw each person perfectly, he also loved each person perfectly.
Eros is love that takes and does not give. Erotic love is one way. Erotic love is lust. Lust appropriates the “Other” in order to satisfy the desires of “Self”. This is not the love of Jesus. Agape love however, is selfless. Agape love is self-sacrificing love. Agape love gives and does not expect or desire to receive. Agape love is willing to give up life for the other person. This is the love of Christ on the cross. This is the love of the Second Person of the Trinity for each of us. This is the love of Jesus, who sees us perfectly and loves us perfectly - a comple gift of self, even to the point of death…
Who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God something to be grasped.
Rather, he emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
coming in human likeness;
and found human in appearance,
he humbled himself,
becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.
(Phuillipians 2:6-8)
When Jesus looked at a beautiful woman, he did not lust. Eros - love which desires to satisfy itself - was not part of his nature. Jesus wanted more than sex. Jesus, who sees each of us perfectly - as we are and as we were meant to be - wants Koinonia.
And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him. … Jesus answered and said to him, “Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him. (John 14:21,23)
Jesus,wants something far more intimate than sex. Jesus wants something infinitely more fulfilling than sex. Jesus wants communion. He wants to make a gift of himself and give himself - all of himself - to us. And if God gives himself to us, what more could we want?
I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. (John 6:51)
Lust is something we, as ordinary humans experience. But the agape love of Jesus is different. It’s God’s complete gift of himself to us. It’s the whole reason behind the Eucharist. Jesus was not asexual or non-sexual. He was above-sexual. He was beyond-sexual. He was God, and he gave us all of himself. He did not experience erotic love, but agape love. And agape love is Eucharistic love. Its koinonia. Its communion.
-Tim-
- Status