Thoughts on St. Paul/sexuality

# 13 Jul, 2013 06:44
XtrialbyfireX	I just listened to the episode with the discussion on Christianity and St. Paul in regards to sex and I have a few thoughts. First St. Paul is arguably the 2nd most influential Christian in history, however most scholars consider some of the texts written in his name as proto-Catholic forgeries. From what I understand Marcion was the first Christian to canonize Paul's letters and the forgeries were likely written to counter the Marcionite church, which was very large at the time. I should point out the text where Paul writes it is better for a man to not marry is a genuine letter, however if we are going to argue about who “hijacked” Christianity, as was suggested on the episode, I think there a lot of groups you could point fingers at. However, during the first several centuries of the church there was a lot of heated and ugly argument about who was doing Christianity the “right” way. IMHO saying one group or individual hijacked it is just sour grapes, or projecting one's on version of what Christianity “should” be upon the entire religion. Secondly even without Paul, sexuality becoming about oppressive rules was a foregone conclusion. Sex is probably the single most complicated thing about our lives. It often drives people to do things they obviously don't want to do, and a person's first sexual feelings/experiences are bound to be humiliating regardless of how understanding the people around them are. It's only natural that people who want simple rules will pick a more puritanical approach. I'm not justifying any sexual oppression of forcing your standards on other people. I'm just saying it was going to happen regardless. Thirdly as a person who is a matter/spirit dualist myself, I can completely appreciate a person choosing to be celibate for religious reasons. I think that is something to be respected, as long as it isn't something that they are trying to put on another person. I read somewhere that one of the Platonic influences on Christianity was the idea that if a person died to their own desires/ego/whatever they could find the mind of God. There is a certain logic to this that makes sense to me, especially considering it seems like there is no revelation to be had in hedonism. (However I'd consider self-denial just another way to worship your own body, but I still think it is a respectable decision.) I think any belief in anything can lead to what seems like extreme decisions. A lot of earlier Christians believed Christ's return was right around the corner and it makes perfect sense that they would reject sex completely. Marcion believed Christians shouldn't have sex even within marriage, and Thomasine Christians believed they could hasten the apocalypse by not having children. I don't agree with them, but I can completely appreciate the sentiment. Finally when it comes to guilt and sex it seems like there is a certain amount of guilt in American culture when it comes to not having sex. Losing your virginity is a big deal for whatever reason. As someone who is a 33 y/o virgin myself I have friends that want me to feel guilty for not looking for sex or whatever. (Most of it happens to come from the friend who has no self control when it comes to sex). No matter who you are around there is always guilt heaped on people who refuse to conform. Although religion is the the most obvious perpetrator of this kind of triablistic nonsense, I don't think this is a religious issue as much as it is a fundamental human flaw. quote

# 13 Jul, 2013 06:44

I just listened to the episode with the discussion on Christianity and St. Paul in regards to sex and I have a few thoughts.

First St. Paul is arguably the 2nd most influential Christian in history, however most scholars consider some of the texts written in his name as proto-Catholic forgeries. From what I understand Marcion was the first Christian to canonize Paul's letters and the forgeries were likely written to counter the Marcionite church, which was very large at the time. I should point out the text where Paul writes it is better for a man to not marry is a genuine letter, however if we are going to argue about who “hijacked” Christianity, as was suggested on the episode, I think there a lot of groups you could point fingers at. However, during the first several centuries of the church there was a lot of heated and ugly argument about who was doing Christianity the “right” way. IMHO saying one group or individual hijacked it is just sour grapes, or projecting one's on version of what Christianity “should” be upon the entire religion.

Secondly even without Paul, sexuality becoming about oppressive rules was a foregone conclusion. Sex is probably the single most complicated thing about our lives. It often drives people to do things they obviously don't want to do, and a person's first sexual feelings/experiences are bound to be humiliating regardless of how understanding the people around them are. It's only natural that people who want simple rules will pick a more puritanical approach. I'm not justifying any sexual oppression of forcing your standards on other people. I'm just saying it was going to happen regardless.

Thirdly as a person who is a matter/spirit dualist myself, I can completely appreciate a person choosing to be celibate for religious reasons. I think that is something to be respected, as long as it isn't something that they are trying to put on another person. I read somewhere that one of the Platonic influences on Christianity was the idea that if a person died to their own desires/ego/whatever they could find the mind of God. There is a certain logic to this that makes sense to me, especially considering it seems like there is no revelation to be had in hedonism. (However I'd consider self-denial just another way to worship your own body, but I still think it is a respectable decision.)

I think any belief in anything can lead to what seems like extreme decisions. A lot of earlier Christians believed Christ's return was right around the corner and it makes perfect sense that they would reject sex completely. Marcion believed Christians shouldn't have sex even within marriage, and Thomasine Christians believed they could hasten the apocalypse by not having children. I don't agree with them, but I can completely appreciate the sentiment.

Finally when it comes to guilt and sex it seems like there is a certain amount of guilt in American culture when it comes to not having sex. Losing your virginity is a big deal for whatever reason. As someone who is a 33 y/o virgin myself I have friends that want me to feel guilty for not looking for sex or whatever. (Most of it happens to come from the friend who has no self control when it comes to sex). No matter who you are around there is always guilt heaped on people who refuse to conform. Although religion is the the most obvious perpetrator of this kind of triablistic nonsense, I don't think this is a religious issue as much as it is a fundamental human flaw.