-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Believe Jesus Never Had Sex?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
I cannot speak for anyone else, but I was raised with the notion of "original sin" and that "sin" was sex.
Sad, yes, and I think that's a very silly, if not abusive way to look at the world, but there you go.
The people who created these myths were a repressed lot, and generally unhappy-- I expect they frowned on joy, happiness and thelike, and wanted others to be as miserable as they were. But that's just a guess.
On the flip side, some of the very oldest, non-cannon stories about the Jesus character? Fully included him having a very wholesome life, getting married, having lots of fat, healthy babies-- exactly as you'd expect of a Hebrew Rabbi in that time and place.
Besides, how could you have a Scion of Christ, unless he had children?
Some Christian view of sex is incredibly strange even beyond the obvious. Paul, contrary to the call to be fruitful and multiply, saw marriage and sex as something you did out of human weakness. As in, leading a celibate life fully devoted to God with no pesky familiar ties is better. But if you, like Adam, become lonely and want a companion, it's better that you marry to avoid sexual immorality (such as 'wasted seed').
With that mindframe set, it's easy to see viewing a sexually active or even family life of Jesus as being a product of human weakness. Sin.
The absurdity of this idea has always amazed me. Ask yourself how many of your 30+ friends haven't had sexual contact once.
This wasn't even a norm in the early days of the church with many Popes having wives and children. It's sort of a "new thing".
If you believe that Jesus was the son of God, (as I do) then as a sinless human he had no overpowering physical need to break his Father's law on sexual immorality. His flesh was not "fallen" so he was not subject to the same 'inclinations' as we are. He promoted God's laws and lived by them.
He castigated the hypocrisy of the Pharisees so how could he break God's law and be a hypocrite himself?
A firstborn Jewish male was bound to his mother until the age of 30, the age at which Jesus began his ministry. He was not sent to earth to marry or to have children; he was sent to redeem mankind and to give his life for them. This was his focus and sexual sin would not have even entered his mind. He was not a weak sinful human without self-control....he was what we will have the opportunity to become once sin has been eliminated from our physical being.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Why is it unthinkable for Jesus to have sex (a loving, passionate act) but it's ok for him have committed aggravated assault (a violent, hateful act)? Which one is really "lower?"
Ellen Brown
Well-Known Member
Skwim
Veteran Member
Question: Does sex include masturbation?
For that matter, would Jesus have ever be sexually attracted to anyone? Or was he an asexual?
"With regard to sexual activity in particular, the need or desire for masturbation is commonly referred to as sex drive by asexuals and they disassociate it from sexual attraction and being sexual; asexuals who masturbate generally consider it to be a normal product of the human body and not a sign of latent sexuality, and may not even find it pleasurable."
Source: Wikipedia
.
For that matter, would Jesus have ever be sexually attracted to anyone? Or was he an asexual?
"With regard to sexual activity in particular, the need or desire for masturbation is commonly referred to as sex drive by asexuals and they disassociate it from sexual attraction and being sexual; asexuals who masturbate generally consider it to be a normal product of the human body and not a sign of latent sexuality, and may not even find it pleasurable."
Source: Wikipedia
.
TheBannerofHomuraAkemi
Active Member
Maybe Jesus was afraid that we would worship his children as gods? Would they themselves use their 'divine' nature to make claims to kingdoms etc. So maybe that's why Jesus didn't have sex.
Or maybe it was just so that we could have conversations like this.
Or maybe it was just so that we could have conversations like this.
You don’t know that. What’s written about him is his ministry. Little to nothing about his personal life. Just because it’s not written about doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. His personal life would be of no interest, probably taken for granted.
Ellen Brown
Well-Known Member
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I don't understand what something that's totally natural, instinctual, and innate has to do with "fallen flesh". Considering that species would go extinct without such "inclinations", it sounds like being "fallen" is beneficial toward survival.
I would believe he never did because some people just don't want that.
Rather than taint him, it's more like a two-thumbs up.
Skwim
Veteran Member
But Jesus was far from being any ordinary observant Jew. Just look at all the non-observant Jewish things he did. (Google is our friend.)
.
That all depends on how you see things. If you are a Christian, you would understand that the transmission of life is a precious gift, not to be taken lightly. Sex is actually designed to produce children (shock horror!
) ......pregnancy should not be an unwanted side effect of someone's uncommitted sex life.There is nothing sinful about sex in marriage, which is why marriage was instituted in the first place. (its a pretty universal arrangement) God created a situation where a married couple could produce a family with two committed parents who would use the Bible's wisdom to make sure that the commitment they had for each other was based on something more than the bedroom performance. That is why sex was prohibited outside of marriage. Relationships had to be based on something much deeper than mere physical attraction. That way there were either no unwanted pregnancies, or the children that came along (sometimes unexpectedly) were born into a family unit to be raised by the people who brought them into the world, and with full siblings.....so many kids today are growing up without their fathers. All they have is a succession of Mom's boyfriends and a bunch of half brothers and sisters. They really don't know what a family is or what commitment to another human being actually means. We were meant to mate for life, like a lot of other creatures do. We are programmed to be monogamous, both physically and psychologically. Sexually transmitted disease occurs and is spread by having multiple sexual partners.
Having a monogamous relationship never results in STD's.
Think about it....when a relationship (which God designed to be permanent) is based on the more important spiritual aspects, and compatibility in other important areas, (goals, expectations, personality traits etc,) couples are more likely to stay together once the 'honeymoon' is over. When children come along, they are welcome, not something to be dreaded or seen as a limitation of their freedom.
"Inclinations" are fine as long as they are felt towards someone to whom you are married and plan to spend the rest of your life with.
In the Bible, the first thing humans felt once they had defected from their Creator, was shame at their nakedness.
That shame was something they did not feel until sin entered their world. Sexual sin forms a large part of God's law because abusing the gift is not fair to the children who are born unwanted or who today, are often aborted. Children deserve to be raised by parents who love each other.....and will stay together "for better or for worse".
Of course, if you have no belief in God or respect for his laws, you can pretty much join the world in its constant stream of broken relationships, and uncommitted sex. I know what makes more sense to me.
Of course, if you have no belief in God or respect for his laws, you can pretty much join the world in its constant stream of broken relationships, and uncommitted sex. I know what makes more sense to me.
There are other options besides these, also.
Other options for marriage? or for uncommitted sex?
I was speaking from the Christian perspective. Would you care to elaborate?
Other options for marriage? or for uncommitted sex?
I was speaking from the Christian perspective. Would you care to elaborate?
You seem to posit a dichotomy, with on one side following 'God and his laws' i.e. JW doctrine, and on the other having wanton sex and broken relationships.
I, and most of the planet's people, don't fit in either category.
Actually, I wasn't talking about just JW's, but the institution of marriage itself, practiced in most of the world's cultures (each with "laws" governing the arrangement). I assume that you accept the concept of marriage as preferable to just sleeping around without any commitment to a sexual partner?
As I said, children deserve to be raised by the people who created them and welcomed them as important members of that family unit. The whole idea of marriage was to create a secure environment for all of its members. Each have a role to play in the security of that arrangement. Insecurity in today's relationships does not contribute to the happiness of the individuals who often go from one unsuccessful relationship to another.
It is historically provable that the breakdown and destruction of the family unit, attacks the very foundation of society itself. We are seeing history repeat.....families are becoming more and more fragmented....it has altered the way people evaluate relationships, but not for the better....instability and insecurity spill over into many other areas of life as a result.....can't you see it? Depression and illnesses related to it, is epidemic now.