If God doesn't want us to have sex, why does it feel so good?

[drnihili]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
Neither are better off. The point was, church marriages are under the eyes of God, so the believers may be more likly to honor their wedding under God, then a couple who was wed by a judge. Does anyone know any statistics for this?

Well first you'd have to define "honor their wedding". I assume you have in mind something like divorce rates. But then you'd also have to separate out marriages for tax purposes that were done by a minister. I was married by a minister because it was cheaper than getting married by a judge. Which side of the statistics do I go on? And you'll also need to factor in all the people who just never bother getting married despite living together for a long time.

Even if you could find statisitcs, I don't think you could infer anything useful about this debate from them. Still, if someone has em, feel free to share.

 

[DefSkeptic]

Sex gives the sensation of pleasure because it motivates an organism to procreate and thus pass on its DNA.

"God" doesnt have anything to do with it, sexually repressed religious folks are the ones with the hangup and the misunderstanding of sexuality.

 

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by DefSkeptic
"God" doesnt have anything to do with it, sexually repressed religious folks are the ones with the hangup and the misunderstanding of sexuality.

You fail to see both sides of the issue. While you personally don't believe in a god, there are others that beleive in one. You can't just flat out dismiss their viewpoint, and tell them it's all biological. To them, God created us for a reason, and each of our bodily functions as well. A debate on the issue of why and entity such as he would make it pleasurable is what is occuring here. Not wether or not a god created humnity, or whether one exists. But we can not as humans pretend to begin to understand why a God would do what they have done. Maybe sexual pleasure was meant as a gift, to give us a reason to live. Isn't most of our worlds economy based on men seeking power to provide stability to a woman?

 

[Balerion]

You fail to see both sides of the issue. While you personally don't believe in a god, there are others that beleive in one. You can't just flat out dismiss their viewpoint, and tell them it's all biological. To them, God created us for a reason, and each of our bodily functions as well.

You fail to see that there AREN'T two sides to this issue.

Becuase people believe in God doesn't make them right. Evidence: The tooth fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus.

However, there is evidence that the way our bodies work is completely biological. How about the fact that the function, the main one, of life on any level of the food chain, is survival and the passing on of the DNA line? The most basic life forms still have a purpose to life, and that is to reproduce. In some species, the male spider gives up his own life as a food offering to the female, and the only thing the male gets in return is to procreate with the her. That's it. He fucks, and dies.

This binding clue pops up in every living organism alive on earth. From sexual to asexual, the purpose of life is surviving long enough to pass on your seed. (The only variation in this is that the lifespan of an individual in a species might not allow the parent to ensure personally that the child would survive, while others do) From the insect (Can't recall what it's called) species that bears the lifespan of a whole 3 hours, to Man, the common bond is sex, and the survival of one's line.

JD

 

[Jenyar]

Don't underestimate the value of ideals. An ideal marriage is one that works till the end. The ideal situation is one partner. Anything else is less than perfect, prone to failure. Since the Bible teaches "holiness", i.e. being perfect before God - it also teaches ideals.

Some ideals are not viable anymore, because of our cultural differences. Take for instance homosexality. From the point that JDawg makes, homosexuality is hardly ideal for procreation purposes. Since the Bible is based on the idea that procreation as the persistance of life (ruled by love, I should add) is a command from God and a natural result of His coupling a male and a female, homosexuality is contrary to God's purpose. (Wait, don't flame me yet...) But our society has changed, and love has (supposedly) become more important than sexual orientation. Which is quite Biblical IMOP. Unfortuanely, continued love is a higher ideal than continued procreation, and harder to exercise. So marriages fall apart, children are born with AIDS and ideals in general go out the window.

I'm reminded of the poem by WB Yeats (aptly named 'the Second Coming'):
Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

The Bible tries hard to hold on to the centre. Sometimes this means overemphasizing politically incorrect idea(l)s, because letting go of them is the beginning of of a 'widening gyre'...

 

[Mitch1984]

Originally posted by DefSkeptic
Sex gives the sensation of pleasure because it motivates an organism to procreate and thus pass on its DNA.

"God" doesnt have anything to do with it, sexually repressed religious folks are the ones with the hangup and the misunderstanding of sexuality.

That's what I think too. But I'm interested in others views on this.

 

[Mitch1984]

Originally posted by JDawg
However, there is evidence that the way our bodies work is completely biological. How about the fact that the function, the main one, of life on any level of the food chain, is survival and the passing on of the DNA line? The most basic life forms still have a purpose to life, and that is to reproduce. In some species, the male spider gives up his own life as a food offering to the female, and the only thing the male gets in return is to procreate with the her. That's it. He fucks, and dies.

JD

Yeah my beliefs are science based and on things like the evolution of the species and the MRS NERG seven life processes.

 

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by JDawg
You fail to see that there AREN'T two sides to this issue.

Becuase people believe in God doesn't make them right. Evidence: The tooth fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus

How is this evidence? Your "evidence" is nothing more then childhood characters, meant to amuse children, not deeply held spirtual beliefs. Your "evidence" is just trivializing peoples deepest held beliefs, comparing them to what is universaly known as fiction, at a certain age. That doesn't prove anything. The fact of the matter is, people believe in God. Even you honor one by capatolizing his name.

What is really confusing, is how other animals have any thing to do with man's procreation. Are other animals sentient? Are other animals as favored as we are in the eyes of God? We alone were given the tools to worship him, so why can't sex be something special for us? What evidence do you have that sex is pleasurable to species other then our own, and not just the instinct]/i] and purpose that you use as justification? It seems to me that no other species spends nearly as much of their time looking for recreational sex, as does ours. I think thats proof enough that it's something more. Maybe it's just that once a species is intelligent enough, it needs some extra incentive to allow procreation to take place, or maybe it's because we were blessed by God.

 

[drnihili]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
How is this evidence? Your "evidence" is nothing more then childhood characters, meant to amuse children, not deeply held spirtual beliefs. Your "evidence" is just trivializing peoples deepest held beliefs, comparing them to what is universaly known as fiction, at a certain age. That doesn't prove anything. The fact of the matter is, people believe in God. Even you honor one by capatolizing his name.

What is really confusing, is how other animals have any thing to do with man's procreation. Are other animals sentient? Are other animals as favored as we are in the eyes of God? We alone were given the tools to worship him, so why can't sex be something special for us? What evidence do you have that sex is pleasurable to species other then our own, and not just the instinct]/i] and purpose that you use as justification? It seems to me that no other species spends nearly as much of their time looking for recreational sex, as does ours. I think thats proof enough that it's something more. Maybe it's just that once a species is intelligent enough, it needs some extra incentive to allow procreation to take place, or maybe it's because we were blessed by God.

While you are right that JDawg was trivializing belief in God, his point still stands. There are a wide number of false beliefs that are widely and deeply held. Thus the mere existence of belief does not count as significant evidence for its truth.

Your second paragraph is wildly misguided. First it begs the question. Most of the evidence you offer for a difference between humans and other animals presupposes that there is a God and that God had decreed there is a difference. This is no argument. The other evidence you provide is simply wrong. There are other species that spend more of their time in recreational sex than we do, and we have nearly as much evidence that it is pleasurable for them as we do that it is pleasurable for humans. Take a look around for information on the sex lives of bonobo chimps. If a drive for recreational sex is evidence of special status with God, then bonobos outrank humans by a long ways.

 

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by drnihili
There are a wide number of false beliefs that are widely and deeply held. Thus the mere existence of belief does not count as significant evidence for its truth.

Such as? I havn't seen one example that isn't a childhood belief, that most shed once they learn the truth. Maybe God is a species childhood belief, and we're just waiting to see the real truth, though the real truth must not be "there isn't a god", otherwise, more peoples eyes would have been opened, isn't the truth in more cases self evident? Yes, the mere exitense is not evidence, but who determines what is truth? The person whose belief it is does. Thats why theological debates are so pointless, every believes in a different truth, and argues it until the end, while nobodies ideas bend or change.

To your second paragraph, I stand corrected on the recretional sex point.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Mitch1984
Comments please.

This title sucks. First off, god never said that he doesn't want us to have sex. You can have 24 hour 7 days a week sex under the right umbrella and have fun and not hurt anyone. Second, sex doesn't feel good. Achievement feels good, accomplishments feel good, security feels good, peace of mind feels good, love feels good. Sex is a temporary satisfaction of the sexual urge, it has no long term good feeling associated with it neither does it provide happiness, security, ect..

 

[New Life]

There's another reason that I hold to for it that I didnt put up before....I think I'll add it now

Assume you believe in the christian God and the Bible (i know its a strech, just do it)

In the old testament people offered sacrifices to atone for their sins in the temple. When moses was leading the Israelites around the desert they constructed the Tabernacle and God literally dwelt in part of the Tabernacle (described as a cloud by day and fire by night (Exodus 40:38)) and when the people were supposed to move the Cloud lifted and they moved. When they were'nt to move the Cloud didnt lift (Exodus 40:36-37). After the Israelites were out of the desert, the presence of God moved to the temple that King Solomon built (at God's command). During the final serige of the Babylonians against Jerusalem in 586BC, the Cloud of God's presence left Solomon's temple, never to return (Ezekiel 10-11) and the temple was destroyed.

Then Jesus comes along in the New Testament and lives His life and is about to be crusified. At the last supper He tells the disciples that He's going back to His Father to prepare a place for them, but He wouldn't leave them alone. After He got to Heaven, He would send the Holy Spirit. In John 14:23 Jesus says "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him." So, God (the Holy Spirit aspect) would come to live within each believer. He therefore is dwelling in each believer just like He dwelt in the Temple..........this makes us the living Temple of God.

SO... this means (among other things) that when we sin we are defacing the Temple of God, especially when we have sex when we're not supposed to because thats like physically "vandalizing" the Temple that God now dwells in.

 

[drnihili]

Originally posted by New Life
There's another reason that I hold to for it that I didnt put up before....I think I'll add it now

Assume you believe in the christian God and the Bible (i know its a strech, just do it)

[...]

SO... this means (among other things) that when we sin we are defacing the Temple of God, especially when we have sex when we're not supposed to because thats like physically "vandalizing" the Temple that God now dwells in.

Your reasoning is circular. At best you've explained why extramarital sex is a serious sin based on the assumption that it is some kind of sin. But even then you're on shaky ground. You say that all sin defaces the temple, but offer no explanation of why sex counts as physically vandalizing the temple when, say, shoplifting a candy bar does not. Without such an explanation there's no reason to think extramarital sex is anything more than a pecadillo.

But all of this rests on the assumption that extramarital sex is a sin in the first place, and that's precisely what's at issue here. You can't explain why sex is a sin by showing why it would be a serious sin if it were a sin at all. You still need to say why it's a sin in the first place.

 

[okinrus]

"That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body." So you are effectivly becoming one with your spouse. If you do not have commitment in the relationship then it will be a sin.

 

[drnihili]

Originally posted by okinrus
"That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body." So you are effectivly becoming one with your spouse. If you do not have commitment in the relationship then it will be a sin.

Ok. So extramarital sex is wrong because it's becoming one with someone to whom you don't have a lifetime commitment. So far so good. The piece I'm missing is why it's wrong to become one with someone to whom you don't have a lifetime commitment. Can you fill that in for me?

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by New Life
There's another reason that I hold to for it that I didnt put up before....I think I'll add it now

Assume you believe in the christian God and the Bible (i know its a strech, just do it)

I was about to read your entire post, but I was turned off by your first statement.....The Christian GOD.....So is this Christian god not the god and creator of all people, is he only a christian god. I guess you and me must be created by a different entity, one is a Muslim god, and the other is the christian god, and in judgement day, they'll stand us up in lines based on the god to judge us....How utterly absurd.

 

[drnihili]

Originally posted by Flores
I was about to read your entire post, but I was turned off by your first statement.....The Christian GOD.....So is this Christian god not the god and creator of all people, is he only a christian god. I guess you and me must be created by a different entity, one is a Muslim god, and the other is the christian god, and in judgement day, they'll stand us up in lines based on the god to judge us....How utterly absurd.

Does that mean all of us atheists get to judge ourselves? How cool is that?!? Now I'm for sure getting an A.

 

[Quigly]

Does that mean all of us atheists get to judge ourselves? How cool is that?!? Now I'm for sure getting an A.

Yeah, I think all the atheists will get to judge themselves, but then that beckons the question, to whom? Would an atheist proclaim to all the other atheist, I am my own god and I am the judge of me, and I am getting into .... Oh wait atheists wouldn't have a place to go... I guess even the dirt in the ground could be considered a haven. So yes they would judge themselves and climb into the dirt to rot way. I know, I know, Your comment was in jest.

 

[fadingCaptain]

I for one think it feels good because my wife is soooo hot. God is jealous and this spites him.

On a side note, why does food taste good? Doesn't god want us to fast or something like that?

 

[okinrus]

Ok. So extramarital sex is wrong because it's becoming one with someone to whom you don't have a lifetime commitment. So far so good. The piece I'm missing is why it's wrong to become one with someone to whom you don't have a lifetime commitment. Can you fill that in for me?

It would be like seperating your own flesh if you broke the commitment. Also at a certain point all moral law could be questioned and you would find no absolute answer without God.