Original Sin and Fornication

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ashira
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ashira

Guest
Hi there. A family member of mine and his spouse are part of a gnostic sect of Christianity that asserts that the forbidden fruit/ apple in the Garden of Eden represents what they refer to as ‘the fall’ or ‘sexual spasm’ - commonly referred to as orgasm. They claim that the true essence of the fall was concealed in the symbolism of the apple because it was too profane to speak of candidly. They claim that the meaning of fornication is orgasm, or any sexual activity that involves orgasm - either alone, in partnership with another - inside or outside of marriage. They also claim that releasing the sexual fluids is what causes people to age, suffer all kinds of maladies and ultimately die, making them akin to beasts and ultimately candidates for the abyss - hell.
They claim that the essene Jews (the line of Jews that Anna & Joachim, Mary descended from) practiced a form of sexual practice known as Alchemy, referred to as the sacred bridal chamber in the Bible, and white tantra in Eastern religions, whereby the sexual seed is not only withheld, but ‘transmuted’ to give life and energy to the spirit and develop the spiritual faculties.
They claim that children born with original sin are any that are conceived via the sexual spasm, and that others such as Issac (son of Abraham and Sarah) and Mary, having parents who practiced the sacred alchemy, were ‘conceived without original sin’ - without orgasm. They claim that because only one sperm is required to fertilise an egg, and several millions are lost in one ejaculation, that orgasm is wasteful, indulgent and anti-life, and that with sexual alchemy fertilisation occurs via the will of the Father, with accompanying prayer and self control. They claim the parts in Leviticus where it refers to God’s law and spilling the seed relates to any spilling of the seed, and that the early church, apostles and saints knew this, but it was covered up and concealed from the masses and the teachings on how to transmute the sexual energies have been lost over time.
A lot to take in - eh? I wondered if any of you had ever come across this info?? I could only find these links…
https://gnosticteachings.org/faqs/sex/1666-what-is-fornication.html
https://gnosticteachings.org/faqs/sex/1671-what-is-orgasm.html
and here…


and lastly;
https://www.reuniting.info/wisdom/what_is_karezza
 
And to think that all God needed to say was, “Thou Shalt Not Orgasm”. He was too bashful even though He created the capacity for it. Poor God.
 
They sound nuts. How much energy do you really want to devote to untangling that?
 
The things you describe they believe are full of heresy. It seems like people want to make up theirs own teachings to get maximum pleasure as a heathen. What they don’t understand is that the greatest sexual love is that of husband and wife. Every sexual act has to be marital, open to procreation, and unitive, otherwise it’s a sin. Both the husband and the wife in Catholic marriage give to each other themselves in the act and the love and tenderness they give to each other throughout the day result in better marital intimacy.
 
Last edited:
All of that is complete baloney. God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and fill the earth. There was no sin in fulfilling that command. The Fall had nothing to do with marital intimacy.

Sorry, but your family member’s ideas are bananas. :crazy_face:
 
Whoa! Convoluted and unnecessary. Sounds like a Soap Opera plot.
 
Much of what the OP cited is clearly bizarre of course. That said, in the early 1960’s, I was definitely taught by sisters of a major teaching order, in the setting of a large Catholic high school, that the sin of Adam and Eve was in fact sexual in nature. I suspect I wasn’t alone in this experience. Would this have been an example of “nun theology?”
 
Ashira said:
They claim the parts in Leviticus where it refers to God’s law and spilling the seed relates to any spilling of the seed, and that the early church, apostles and saints knew this, but it was covered up and concealed from the masses
Click to expand...
My first response: why? Why would the Apostles and early saints conceal such an important and even vital truth from all the other believers? What possible reason could they have?
fhansen said:
And to think that all God needed to say was, “Thou Shalt Not Orgasm”. He was too bashful even though He created the capacity for it. Poor God.
Click to expand...
😆
 
Last edited:
Ashira said:
They claim that because only one sperm is required to fertilise an egg, and several millions are lost in one ejaculation, that orgasm is wasteful, indulgent and anti-life, and that with sexual alchemy fertilisation occurs via the will of the Father, with accompanying prayer and self control.
Click to expand...
On a purely medical level, of course, I would love to see their evidence that their children were the product of one and only one sperm. 🤔

That sure sounds like the rebirth, no pun intended, of the gnostic heresy.

Don’t even waste your time, that is unless you want to get me that evidence.

God Bless
 
I recall hearing that when I was growing up, too. I don’t believe it was actually taught as a fact in CCD classes (I don’t recall the subject of “sex” being brought up at all, but my memory is a bit like swiss cheese these days… lol), but I think it was a popular “opinion” of the time. I would certainly consider it to be “nun theology”, that was probably the opinion of some people, but I don’t think it should have been taught to kids. The sin of Adam & Eve was disobedience to God’s command.
 
I have heard many in the earlier generatiom were either taught this, or it was heavily implied, by those who took a purely puritanical view of sex and reproduction.

Thus the sterotype of why many Catholics grew up feeling that even holy married intimacy was dirty and wrong.
 
Firstly, Gnosticism died 2000 years ago, so the body of doctrine your relatives are following is technically known as “making stuff up”.

Secondly, the Tree represents obedience to God. God did not make a cursed tree that would damn anyone who ate of its fruit. God instead created a blessed couple fully capable of loving and obeying their Lord. They ate the fruit out of envy of God’s nature and omniscience, and felt deep crippling shame when they realized the tree did not magically make them equal to God.

By their free and unforced choice to sin, they destroyed their state of perfect grace, and their innate trust in God turned to fear. Rather than humble themselves and ask forgiveness, their wounded pride caused them to hide when the Lord came by. Because they were both created in God’s image, they could no longer bear to look at each other, and covered their naked bodies. This fear of God wounded their nature and prevented perfect Grace from being passed to their children. (Not until Mary was another born with perfect grace).

Claiming that the tree represented discovering orgasm is thus ridiculous - it implies that God created man with a built in curse that doomed man to fail. God created no such curse! The tree represents the exact opposite, that man was created for grace, but for the free choice to sin.
 
Ashira said:
A lot to take in - eh? I wondered if any of you had ever come across this info??
Click to expand...
Sure. It’s well known that there are religions in which seminal retention plays an important role.

Anyway, are you offering this information for the benefit of others, or because you’re not sure what to do with it? It’s best to just put these teachings into practice. There’s no need to join a sect over it, nor to try and figure out beforehand why it might work or why not. Try it – not easy in the beginning – and you’ll discover for yourself if it makes a difference, and whether that difference is beneficial to you. If you don’t like it, or can’t do it, just leave it alone.

P.S. Note that the mainstream religions, including the RCC, do not have any injunctions against these practices, so you wouldn’t be going against Catholicism; nor would you being going against medical science (a point well made in one of the articles you linked).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top