modern christian view of sexuality not realistic

[Hidden In Him]

You do realize, I hope, that Paul's Rom 7:24 plait was answered in Rom 6:6 .

You realize, I hope, that I have my own opinions, yes?

Got a scripture for that ?

Why would I have a scripture for what would be going on in the church for the next 300-400 years plus? I'm referring to church history.

 

[Hopeful 2]

You realize, I hope, that I have my own opinions, yes?

I hope you are not saying that Paul's Tom 7:24 complaint wasn't answered in Rom 6:6.

Why would I have a scripture for what would be going on in the church for the next 300-400 years plus? I'm referring to church history.

You did say "early church", and most of their issues were addressed in the epistles.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I hope you are not saying that Paul's Tom 7:24 complaint wasn't answered in Rom 6:6.

And I hope you will excuse me if I'm not all that interested in debating the issue if I think it's going to be little more than a long, drawn out waste of time. No offense and certainly nothing personal in any of the instances, but I've declined it a few times already, not just with you.

You did say "early church", and most of their issues were addressed in the epistles.

The term "Early church" refers to the ante-Nicean period.

Early Christianity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Blessings,
Off to work,
- H

 

[Hopeful 2]

And I hope you will excuse me if I'm not all that interested in debating the issue if I think it's going to be little more than a long, drawn out waste of time. No offense and certainly nothing personal in any of the instances, but I've declined it a few times already, not just with you.

I hate to see you building on sand.

The term "Early church" refers to the ante-Nicean period.

Early Christianity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early church to me is just what is written in the bible.
Anything after that is suspect.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Early church to me is just what is written in the bible.
Anything after that is suspect.

The early church in the next generation took their cues and their theology from a proper understanding of the apostles and their teachings. See, there are some who come under the strange notion that the church was receiving instruction from the Holy Spirit up until the time John passed away, and then all of a sudden the lights went out, and the church descended immediately into darkness and heresy. This is a deeply illogical assumption to make, and is based on a faulty interpretation of New Testament teachings, IMO, not because there is any real truth in it. I've read the writings of the early fathers, and they are much more powerful and much more consistent with New Testament teaching than most of what you will hear today. It reads much more like scripture because their teachings were much more grounded in scripture. Granted, they began to diverge in various ways, a little here, a little there, until things started getting increasingly corrupted by around 250 to 300 A.D. But the notion that they went from total light into total darkness in the blink of an eye is just an incredibly illogical conclusion to make, and it doesn't bear out when reading the writings of the early church, especially the first 200 years of it.

That said, fasting was universally understood to be the answer for bringing the sex drive under submission. They didn't make it up. It was passed down.

I'm presuming you will ask for scriptures at this point, and maybe we can cover several of the passages that teach it some day, but for now I know how it will go, and I'd rather wait. Just answering your direct comment. It's a common position, but it's highly flawed IMO.

 

[Hopeful 2]

The early church in the next generation took their cues and their theology from a proper understanding of the apostles and their teachings.

I agree, but with the Holy Ghost's help.

See, there are some who come under the strange notion that the church was receiving instruction from the Holy Spirit up until the time John passed away, and then all of a sudden the lights went out, and the church descended immediately into darkness and heresy.

I think the break-aways started well before John died.
The real church is still pure.

This is a deeply illogical assumption to make, and is based on a faulty interpretation of New Testament teachings, IMO, not because there is any real truth in it. I've read the writings of the early fathers, and they are much more powerful and much more consistent with New Testament teaching than most of what you will hear today.

My early church dads all had their writings published in the bible.
The things that followed seem to be dilutions of holiness and accommodations for sin.

It reads much more like scripture because their teachings were much more grounded in scripture. Granted, they began to diverge in various ways, a little here, a little there, until things started getting increasingly corrupted by around 250 to 300 A.D. But the notion that they went from total light into total darkness in the blink of an eye is just an incredibly illogical conclusion to make, and it doesn't bear out when reading the writings of the early church, especially the first 200 years of it.

One drop of darkness taints the entire mixture.

That said, fasting was universally understood to be the answer for bringing the sex drive under submission. They didn't make it up. It was passed down.

Walking in the Spirit after the destruction of the "flesh" accomplishes the same thing.
And Paul wrote of that earlier than the late comers.

I'm presuming you will ask for scriptures at this point, and maybe we can cover several of the passages that teach it some day, but for now I know how it will go, and I'd rather wait. Just answering your direct comment. It's a common position, but it's highly flawed IMO.

Whom do you cite on the fasting methodology ?

 

[Hidden In Him]

I agree, but with the Holy Ghost's help.

Correct.

I think the break-aways started well before John died.
The real church is still pure.

Ok... curious statement. I'm assuming you are saying John was pure, so are you talking about Gnostic documents that were being published that early or ones attributable to early church leaders?

My early church dads all had their writings published in the bible.
The things that followed seem to be dilutions of holiness and accommodations for sin.

Fine by me. I'm easy. But for the sake of discussing this issue without getting bogged down in semantics, what term do you wish to use to define Christian leaders between the late 1st century and the early 4th?

One drop of darkness taints the entire mixture.

One drop of darkness....

One drop of darkness can occur very easily in the teachings of a Christian, even a strong one. Peter was allowing the Gentile Christians to be marginalized when Jewish leaders came to visit Christian congregations where Gentiles were present. He drew back from them and had to be corrected for it by Paul. You are saying you have not a single drop of darkness in any of your teachings, Hopeful? Because if you have a drop of darkness, the above statement kinda makes you liable. By your own standards your teachings would disqualify you from being read, yes?

Walking in the Spirit after the destruction of the "flesh" accomplishes the same thing.
And Paul wrote of that earlier than the late comers.

I like many others in this community disagree with you on the doctrine of sinless perfection, if that's what you are ultimately alluding to. Not gonna get into it with you, but no it does not accomplish the same thing.

Whom do you cite on the fasting methodology ?

Several New Testament passages, several Old Testament passages, several early "dad" sources, some from the Medieval period, and several modern sources, including those who have done lab studies on the effects of decreased diet on the sex drive.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Ok... curious statement. I'm assuming you are saying John was pure,

Yep.

so are you talking about Gnostic documents that were being published that early or ones attributable to early church leaders?

Gnostic, and whatever else was coming down the pike that differed from the apostles writings.

Fine by me. I'm easy. But for the sake of discussing this issue without getting bogged down in semantics, what term do you wish to use to define Christian leaders between the late 1st century and the early 4th?

If they are indeed Christian leaders, their writings will mirror the apostles' writings.
So the writings themselves can tell us if the writers were Christian at all.
I use the term "non-Christian writers" for post apostolic writings that I know of.

One drop of darkness....
One drop of darkness can occur very easily in the teachings of a Christian, even a strong one. Peter was allowing the Gentile Christians to be marginalized when Jewish leaders came to visit Christian congregations where Gentiles were present. He drew back from them and had to be corrected for it by Paul. under the undue influence of the Law

Peter was in the unenviable position of hosting Jewish visitors who were still under the undue influence of the Law.
He decided to cater to the visitors, at the cost of showing the visitors the equity of any man in Christ.

You are saying you have not a single drop of darkness in any of your teachings, Hopeful? Because if you have a drop of darkness, the above statement kinda makes you liable.

That is correct.

By your own standards your teachings would disqualify you from being read, yes?

As I have no writings, per se, I don't know what writings you are referring to.

I like many others in this community disagree with you on the doctrine of sinless perfection, if that's what you are ultimately alluding to. Not gonna get into it with you, but no it does not accomplish the same thing.

Will God accept any sinner on the day of judgement ? (Matt 7:21-23)
Perfect obedience is the way to go, and God has provided all we need to do so.

Several New Testament passages, several Old Testament passages, several early "dad" sources, some from the Medieval period, and several modern sources, including those who have done lab studies on the effects of decreased diet on the sex drive.

Would you kindly provide one of your NT verses that deal with fasting to decrease anything ?

 

[Hidden In Him]

As I have no writings, per se, I don't know what writings you are referring to.

Everything you post at Cf.Net and other forums.

 

[Christian Saboteur]

Just use this as your search engine;'Early Christians Fasted To Decrease Sex Drive',there is some interesting reading.The one article stated that fasting to decrease libido was used by Monks.Some articles said that fasting increases libido,so who knows?.Well,Time for breakfast.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Some articles said that fasting increases libido,so who knows?.

Probably referring to short intermittent fasting simply to lose a little weight.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Everything you post at Cf.Net and other forums.

Yeah, I guess we could consider my forum entries as writings.
That being said, I haven't written anything that nullifies God's grace to mankind.
I have written nothing that accommodates sin or sinning.

I hope my writings last as long as Paul's and James' etc. writings.

Would you kindly provide one of your NT verses that deal with fasting to decrease anything ?
I do think fasting is a great way to remind the body that the mind is in control !

 

[Hidden In Him]

Would you kindly provide one of your NT verses that deal with fasting to decrease anything ?
I do think fasting is a great way to remind the body that the mind is in control !

I can try later. There are several passages that advise and recommend it which either go almost completely under the radar or are misinterpreted to say the opposite. If I have time and the Lord leads me, I'd certainly like to discuss it. I don't agree with your theology in some areas, but I do like the fact that you usually have a positive attitude about you, so we'll see.

Blessings in Christ,
- H

 

[Riven]

Just use this as your search engine;'Early Christians Fasted To Decrease Sex Drive',there is some interesting reading.The one article stated that fasting to decrease libido was used by Monks.Some articles said that fasting increases libido,so who knows?.Well,Time for breakfast.

Fasting increases HGH within the body. Which could temporarily increase testosterone. It makes sense because if you're starving, you need that extra strength and energy to find a food source.

However, an extended period of starvation level fasting would result in the body slowly breaking down due to malnutrition. The body requires consumption of fat in order to continue to function properly. The essential fatty acids.

 

[Hopeful 2]

I can try later. There are several passages that advise and recommend it which either go almost completely under the radar or are misinterpreted to say the opposite. If I have time and the Lord leads me, I'd certainly like to discuss it. I don't agree with your theology in some areas, but I do like the fact that you usually have a positive attitude about you, so we'll see.

Blessings in Christ,
- H

OK, perhaps when you get some time you can start a thread.
I will, however, stand by...the mind controls the body, and not the other way around.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I will, however, stand by...the mind controls the body, and not the other way around.

Actually, my position here is that the Spirit controls the body, and without the Holy Spirit a man will simply gravitate towards the desires of the flesh even if his mind objects for some reason. It won't have all that much power to change things, unless an even greater fleshly or soulish objective is being sought, in which case, it's just trading one non-Spirit-led desire for another.

But that might be another interesting discussion for another time.

I appreciate the politeness, and blessings in Christ.
- H

 

[Hopeful 2]

Actually, my position here is that the Spirit controls the body,

I agree, with this verse from Paul in mind..."... but we have the mind of Christ."
The mind of the new creature has the mind of Christ !

...and without the Holy Spirit a man will simply gravitate towards the desires of the flesh even if his mind objects for some reason. It won't have all that much power to change things, unless an even greater fleshly or soulish objective is being sought, in which case, it's just trading one non-Spirit-led desire for another.

Agreed.

But that might be another interesting discussion for another time.
I appreciate the politeness, and blessings in Christ.
- H

Your welcome.

 

[D-D-W]

Is that something then, that God can't do ?

There is nothing that God can't do. Period.
But there are some things He WON'T do.

To keep it on topic, there is a passage in the gospels that deals with this:

Matthew 19:10
The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” 11 But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Now pair that up with what Paul said:

1 Corinthians 7:7
Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.

Note that both say marriage and sex in marriage is a gift. Paul uses the word charisma meaning a supernatural gift, not unlike his use of it in chapter 12 for healings and miracles. Our Lord said it was ONLY "to those to whom it has been given." Yes there is a supernatural gift of celibacy. But, like healings and miracles, it is rare.

IOW, if you have that gift you can go without.
If you do NOT have that gift but try to operate in it, you will have as much success as trying to heal someone on your own.

 

[Hopeful 2]

There is nothing that God can't do. Period.

Why then, do you postulate He can't take away a "human" drive ?

But there are some things He WON'T do.
To keep it on topic, there is a passage in the gospels that deals with this:
Matthew 19:10
The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” 11 But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

If one can't "contain", let him marry !
God can grant a wife for that man.

Now pair that up with what Paul said:
1 Corinthians 7:7
Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.
Note that both say marriage and sex in marriage is a gift. Paul uses the word charisma meaning a supernatural gift, not unlike his use of it in chapter 12 for healings and miracles. Our Lord said it was ONLY "to those to whom it has been given." Yes there is a supernatural gift of celibacy. But, like healings and miracles, it is rare.
IOW, if you have that gift you can go without.
If you do NOT have that gift but try to operate in it, you will have as much success as trying to heal someone on your own.

I will not defend a work of the "flesh".
Neither should you.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

In modern Christian view, sex - from kissing, fondling, undressing, shower, foreplay to intercourse, the whole shebang - is a foretaste of our spiritual union with Jesus in heaven, like a trailer of a movie. Sex by God's design is the consumation of a loving relationship, it's about losing yourself and merging with your partner, transcending physical boundaries and feeling the presence of God when you hit climax. In Christianity, modern or ancient, "two become one flesh" is often restricted to holy matrimony, but actually it applies to sex with anybody, Paul used it in that sense in his lecture on sexual immorality. Surely you're not legally married to a harlot just by having sex with her, but that still counts as a one-body union. If you move on and go have sex with somebody else, that'd be adultery. Maybe that sounds a bit too extreme, but that's the biblical view of sexuality.

Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.”But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.(1 Cor. 6:15-17)