All Sex Is Unclean

Under Mosaic Law sexual relations are unclean. Paul was especially against the sex act, “…it is good for a man not to touch a woman … I say therefore to the unmarried and widows; It is good for them, if they abide even as I … Now, concerning virgins … I say it is good for a man so to be … Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife..” I Cor. 7

It’s Understandable why he would think that sex was unclean, just think about how rarely anyone bathed back then. Yuk! I agree with Paul.

One Response to “All Sex Is Unclean”

  1. Paul is still on my list of questionable authorities. So much of his teachings seem to me to be contrary to the words of Jesus in the four major gospels. Also, Paul was a highly trained rhetorician. He argues so much of his points with human reason that it’s hard for me to accept a great deal of it, especially when it seems to me contradictory to what Jesus said on the Mount and during other sermons. Christ didn’t go around condemning people on a personal level – he had a lot of nasty things to say in general to and about the state of society and especially a religeous institution that bickered nonstop about the meaning of the Letter of the Law while simultaneously violating the Spirit of that same law.
    As for some of your questions here under the “sex” heading, I believe they are historical context for the gospel. Jesus of Galilee had an austere lineage – one full of murderers, adulterers, prostitutes, and other such sinners. And yet, God saw fit to save them for services rendered in the name of faith and obedience. King David was a womanizing superstar in his own court; Don Juan had nothing on him. He committed murder to lie about his own sin with Bathsheba – and then denied (another lie) his guilt to . . . whatever his court prohpet’s name. Finally, though, he repented and got back into God’s good graces.
    Much of the ‘good news’ of salvation is that even such as David and Solomon and others as heinous and sinful were held in high enough esteem and grace that God chose to birth Jesus through David’s line.
    Go back and look at Leviticus. There are like ninety different ways outlined there to commit incest – it pretty much gives a list of “sleep not with your father’s widow . . .” and all sorts of interesting things most of us wouldn’t bother to consider.
    For my money, I think people are far too caught up in the idea of all sexual intercourse being sinful and dirty. God’s first command was “Go forth and multiply”. Since he created us for sexual reproduction, it follows that He is saying to go out and make babies and populate the world. He *required* us to have sexual intercourse. Later, the Law is outlined to regulate intercourse – to put courtly rules on it. Much of the reasons outlined are for the sake of “purity”. But I don’t think that’s refering to any kind of chastity or abstinance, etc. I believe it was a very rationally calculated guideline to prevent inbreeding and the inherent dangers thereof.
    Also, sex has NOTHING whatsoever to do with “Original Sin”. It baffles me that so many people have this ridiculous belief. The original sin is very clearly shown to be *disobedience* and has nothing to do with sex.
    As for the views outlined above from Corinthians . . . I believe that Paul is giving his personal opinion and not his opinion as a Prophet of the Almighty.
    The first page I ever ripped out of a book (deliberately, anyway) was a page from the apocrypha – I think the Gospel of Thomas or the Acts of Thomas – in which the author claims to see a spectral Jesus in the marriage chamber telling the bride and groom that they are about to commit the vilest sin by consummating thier marriage. It’s horsehsit! Sex is a gift! It is something we should honor and approach with great gratitude.
    A great deal more harm has been done in the name of chastity than was ever done in the name of wanton lasciviousness. Repressing the sexual urge is the same as repressing any natural force: the more you repress it, the more likely it is to erupt with great violence in a harmful and unnatural direction.
    Also, I believe that a great many religious institutions – especially the most prominent – use such scripture out of context with one fell purpose: to *control* their flocks. There are three major means to control populations of human beings: control their minds (via doctrine, withholding of education, propaganda campaigns, etc), control their hearts (charismatic leadership, terrorism, patriotism, etc.), and control their reproduction (via law, shame, guilt, doctrine, religion, etc.). Religious institutions tend to use all three very well. The question from there becomes one of whether they are doing it according to their own Doctrine, or if they are doing it merely to perpetuate the institution itself.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: