what IS sex?

[SolEX01]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

[Quinault]

Ok, that doesn't make any sense to me. You pm-ed me that you have a child. You still haven't mentioned whether or not you are married. Are you married? Because if you have a child and aren't married, it would explain a great deal.

[Alive]

The Orthodox church doesn't have a distinction between venial and mortal sins

It is your personal invention.

[Quinault]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

[Quinault]

The Orthodox church doesn't have a distinction between venial and mortal sins

It is your personal invention.

Show me that the Orthodox church distinguished between venial and mortal sins in terms of theosis. All sin is a stumbling block on the path to theosis.

[SolEX01]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

Whoa, I'm looking at the Orthodox Study Bible and I don't see any reference to breasts.  I can cite from the Septuagint in ancient Greek if you don't believe me....

[Alive]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Precisely – prevent lust with another women….  So it basic prevention from deadly corruption.
Cor 7:9
Cor 7:5

There is deference between  perfect, allowed and prohibited.

[Quinault]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

Whoa, I'm looking at the Orthodox Study Bible and I don't see any reference to breasts.  I can cite from the Septuagint in ancient Greek if you don't believe me....

I didn't have an OSB on hand, verse 19 is translated as "breasts" in NIV, NASB, KJV and ESV, the only translations I had on hand when I posted.

[PeterTheAleut]

I do not differentiate monastic from no monastic life more then luck of sexual relation in first one.

So you are wrong. The most basic thing in monasticism is humility shown in an ultimate obedience to the Abbot. Fasting is just an addition.

If darkness in you, you call light, can imaging what is your darkness then….


And your point is for married couple do not need humility and  obedience….. are you Christian at all? Do you ever reed gospel and holy fathers to get familia with orthodoxy?

Do you have any patristic teaching with which you can refute Michał Kalina? (Heck, I wonder if you're even reading him correctly.)

refute what?


Can you make precise question what I need to present you?

What I would like to see from you is citations from patristic sources that support your claims and that refute the claims of those with whom you disagree. Right now you're resorting to allegations that those who disagree with you are not even Orthodox without explaining how they're wrong. No statements of "the Fathers say this"... No statements of "the Fathers never said that..." Just "You're not Orthodox..." If you cannot prove how your opponent is not Orthodox, then you're doing nothing but dismissing your opponents with ad hominems, the likes of which we don't tolerate on this forum.

[Justin Kissel]

Prov. 5:19 in the OSB is... "Let your loving deer and graceful colt keep company with you, And let her alone go before you and be with you at all times; For in living with her love, you will be great."

Perhaps the difference is in the translation from the Septuagint?

[Quinault]

Yes, I went and grabbed my OSB and looked up the passage. It would be interesting to see how the translators "got" that one. In any case, the argument for "enjoying" your wife can be made from scripture. I imagine that the exclusion of desire is not meant to be inferred from the passage.

[Alive]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

Whoa, I'm looking at the Orthodox Study Bible and I don't see any reference to breasts.  I can cite from the Septuagint in ancient Greek if you don't believe me....

I didn't have an OSB on hand, verse 19 is translated as "breasts" in NIV, NASB, KJV and ESV, the only translations I had on hand when I posted.

Then you would have great justification in judgment day “  I have no correct translation”… so roman…

[Quinault]

Ok, that doesn't make any sense to me. You pm-ed me that you have a child. You still haven't mentioned whether or not you are married. Are you married? Because if you have a child and aren't married, it would explain a great deal.

[Justin Kissel]

Yes, I went and grabbed my OSB and looked up the passage. It would be interesting to see how the translators "got" that one. In any case, the argument for "enjoying" your wife can be made from scripture. I imagine that the exclusion of desire is not meant to be inferred from the passage.

Fwiw, I looked up the translation of the Septuagint by Sir Lancelot Brenton, and Prov. 5:19 reads like this: "Let thy loving hart and thy graceful colt company with thee, and let her be considered thine own and be with thee at all times; for ravished with her love thou shalt be greatly increased." I agree with what you're saying, though.

[Quinault]

Alive; you still need to prove that the Orthodox church makes a distinction between venial and mortal sins. Rather than insulting how Orthodox I am, why don't you back up your ascertains with proof.

As a side note; I am about as "American" as one can be in the North American Continent sense. In terms of culture, you are a bit off.

[Alive]

Alive; you still need to prove that the Orthodox church makes a distinction between venial and mortal sins. Rather than insulting how Orthodox I am, why don't you back up your ascertains with proof.

1John 5:16-19

[Justin Kissel]

This hurts me to say, really it does, but I actually agree with Alive on this one. Not that I think the Orthodox Church has a venial/mortal sin thing, but certainly the Fathers (and even the Scripture) speak of different degrees of sin*. Of course, that can't be divorced from what sin actually is, missing the mark and separation from God.


*EDIT--edited to say that I can provide references for this if desired...

[Quinault]

To quote the OSB in reference to the "sin leading to death";

Verse 16 speaks of the "willful continual disbelief in the Grace of the Holy Spirit towards us" Matt 12:28, 31, 32; Heb 6:4-6; 10:26-31

[Quinault]

Varying degrees of sins are not an issue to my mind. The issue is that all sin separates us from God. The earthly ramifications for sins are all different, some more severe than others. But the result for a sin either "big" or "small" in terms of our path of salvation is the same.

[Justin Kissel]

Varying degrees of sins are not an issue to my mind. The issue is that all sin separates us from God. The earthly ramifications for sins are all different, some more severe than others. But the result for a sin either "big" or "small" in terms of our path of salvation is the same.

Well, tell me what you think of this passage in St. Gregory the Theologian, perhaps I am understanding it incorrectly:

"It is better both to attain the good and to keep the purification. But if it be impossible to do both it is surely better to be a little stained with your public affairs than to fall altogether short of grace; just as I think it better to undergo a slight punishment from father or master than to be put out of doors; and to be a little beamed upon than to be left in total darkness. And it is the part of wise men to choose, as in good things the greater and more perfect, so in evils the lesser and lighter. Wherefore do not overmuch dread the purification. For our success is always judged by comparison with our place in life by our just and merciful Judge; and often one who is in public life and has had small success has had a greater reward than one who in the enjoyment of liberty has not completely succeeded; as I think it more marvellous for a man to advance a little in fetters, than for one to run who is not carrying any weight; or to be only a little spattered in walking through mud, than to be perfectly clean when the road is clean." - Oration 40, 19

When St. Gregory speaks of "lesser and lighter" (as distinguished from greater and heavier) sins, and being judged according to our place in life, does this not sound like we will be judged more harshly if we could have chosen a lighter sin but didn't, and instead chose a greater sin? Or another passage, this one from St. Jerome:

"Some members we can dispense with and yet live: without others life is an impossibility. Some offences are light, some heavy. It is one thing to owe ten thousand talents, another to owe a farthing. We shall have to give account of the idle word no less than of adultery; but it is not the same thing to be put to the blush, and to be put upon the rack, to grow red in the face and to ensure lasting torment. Do you think I am merely expressing my own views? Hear what the Apostle John says: 'He who knows that his brother sinneth a sin not unto death, let him ask, and he shall give him life, even to him that sinneth not unto death. But he that hath sinned unto death, who shall pray for him?' You observe that if we entreat for smaller offences, we obtain pardon: if for greater ones, it is difficult to obtain our request: and that there is a great difference between sins." - Against Jovinianus, 2, 30

[SolEX01]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

Whoa, I'm looking at the Orthodox Study Bible and I don't see any reference to breasts.  I can cite from the Septuagint in ancient Greek if you don't believe me....

I didn't have an OSB on hand, verse 19 is translated as "breasts" in NIV, NASB, KJV and ESV, the only translations I had on hand when I posted.

From the Septuagint, Proverbs 5:19 and we're looking for the pattern, μαστοὶ, which translates to breast (root for the word, mastectomy):

19. ἔλαφος φιλίας καὶ πῶλος σῶν χαρίτων ὁμιλείτω σοι ἡ δὲ ἰδία ἡγείσθω σου καὶ συνέστω σοι ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ ἐν γὰρ τῇ ταύτης φιλίᾳ συμπεριφερόμενος πολλοστὸς ἔσῃ

Pattern not found.

[Alive]

This hurts me to say, really it does, but I actually agree with Alive on this one. Not that I think the Orthodox Church has a venial/mortal sin thing, but certainly the Fathers (and even the Scripture) speak of different degrees of sin*. Of course, that can't be divorced from what sin actually is, missing the mark and separation from God.


*EDIT--edited to say that I can provide references for this if desired...

So now we need to define what is mortal and what is not .

For most people think about in roman way – what is way of antichrist.




....and about separating from God – there is lot of speculation to. It is roman kind perception.

[Justin Kissel]

Nevermind, lol 

[Quinault]

Varying degrees of sins are not an issue to my mind. The issue is that all sin separates us from God. The earthly ramifications for sins are all different, some more severe than others. But the result for a sin either "big" or "small" in terms of our path of salvation is the same.

Well, tell me what you think of this passage in St. Gregory the Theologian, perhaps I am understanding it incorrectly:

"It is better both to attain the good and to keep the purification. But if it be impossible to do both it is surely better to be a little stained with your public affairs than to fall altogether short of grace; just as I think it better to undergo a slight punishment from father or master than to be put out of doors; and to be a little beamed upon than to be left in total darkness. And it is the part of wise men to choose, as in good things the greater and more perfect, so in evils the lesser and lighter. Wherefore do not overmuch dread the purification. For our success is always judged by comparison with our place in life by our just and merciful Judge; and often one who is in public life and has had small success has had a greater reward than one who in the enjoyment of liberty has not completely succeeded; as I think it more marvellous for a man to advance a little in fetters, than for one to run who is not carrying any weight; or to be only a little spattered in walking through mud, than to be perfectly clean when the road is clean." - Oration 40, 19

I am no theologian. I can't claim to be one. It seems to me that most of what is being spoken about is earthly issues. Like the lesser of two evils paradox. The ramifications for speeding in your car on icy roads could be death. The ramifications of jaywalking could be death as well. Speeding on a crowded icy road endangers not only your life, but the lives of all the other people on the road. Jaywalking, though still just as illegal would only really bodily harm yourself as an individual, most likely you will just end up with a ticket. But sin is seen as corporate in the Orthodox church, that is why we seek forgiveness on Forgiveness Sunday. Both sins are the same, but they are entirely different. Both effect everyone, but only one physically endangers an individual. Jaywalking will harm your pocketbook, speeding could kill numerous people.

To be honest, I have spoken about the issue of sin numerous times with our priest. The Orthodox understanding of sin is both very constrictive and very freeing. All sin is equal, so we must maintain humility. All sins have different earthly ramifications, so we must be vigilant.

If you start to think about the levels of sin it allows too much room for judgemet. I knew a couple men that had issues with pornography. One thought he was better than the other because he looked at "softcore" porn whereas the other man looked had "hardcore." That distinction can't exist. Whether you are looking at a catalogue or penthouse, if you are looking at it for sexual gratification you are in sin.


(Sorry for the lengthy time in replying. I was in the middle of a rowdy game of "Sorry" with my eldest...I won   )

[Fr. George]

Proverbs 5 is clearly speaking about enjoying your wife sexually. In fact the passage speaks about how enjoying your wife can prevent you from lusting after another woman.

Not the entire chapter ... only verses 15-19.  The rest of the chapter warns about the perils of fornication.

Fornication and adultery, not just fornication. It clearly speaks about "enjoying" your wife's breasts in particular. How a man can "enjoy" his wife's breasts without desiring them is beyond me. And don't tell me that a man should enjoy that his wife can breastfeed, that is too funny to even fathom.

Whoa, I'm looking at the Orthodox Study Bible and I don't see any reference to breasts.  I can cite from the Septuagint in ancient Greek if you don't believe me....

I didn't have an OSB on hand, verse 19 is translated as "breasts" in NIV, NASB, KJV and ESV, the only translations I had on hand when I posted.

From the Septuagint, Proverbs 5:19 and we're looking for the pattern, μαστοὶ, which translates to breast (root for the word, mastectomy):

19. ἔλαφος φιλίας καὶ πῶλος σῶν χαρίτων ὁμιλείτω σοι ἡ δὲ ἰδία ἡγείσθω σου καὶ συνέστω σοι ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ ἐν γὰρ τῇ ταύτης φιλίᾳ συμπεριφερόμενος πολλοστὸς ἔσῃ

Pattern not found.

Agreed.  OSB (you know, the new one) translation of the above (since Asteriktos already provided the Brenton):
"Let your loving deer and graceful colt keep company with you.  And let her alone go before you and be with you at all times; For in living with her love, you will be great."  It's about monogamy, and about what that relationship does for you.

[Alive]

If you start to think about the levels of sin it allows too much room for judgemet.

Our nature corrupt and defected , and it not about to change till resurrection.

Deadly sin is to present corruption as goodness.
Deadly is present emotional state as God Grace and Holy spirit work.

If I eat food and my flesh like it is corrupting not grace. So should I not eat and die?

Same with sex and other flesh needs. Some we need to provide and remember it could get you in bigger trouble if you not control it. … or you may turn into maniac extremist with “pro biblical presentation” or gospel speculation lust promoter.

[SolEX01]

If you start to think about the levels of sin it allows too much room for judgemet.

Our nature corrupt and defected , and it not about to change till resurrection.

Deadly sin is to present corruption as goodness.
Deadly is present emotional state as God Grace and Holy spirit work.

If I eat food and my flesh like it is corrupting not grace. So should I not eat and die?

Same with sex and other flesh needs. Some we need to provide and remember it could get you in bigger trouble if you not control it. … or you may turn into maniac extremist with “pro biblical presentation” or gospel speculation lust promoter.

Do you have a child to raise or have you given up your child for your vocation?

If you choose to keep your child private (which is perfectly fine), why do you expect us to respond to you in likewise?  Maybe you had a child out of wedlock ... in Orthodox theology, repent, do what you can for your child and it's not the end of the world, you know that; you choose to teach differently....

[Alive]

One thought he was better than the other because he looked at "softcore" porn whereas the other man looked had "hardcore." That distinction can't exist. Whether you are looking at a catalogue or penthouse, if you are looking at it for sexual gratification you are in sin.

erotic, Softcore, hardcore what other class is there more and more??
Do not worry. Enjoy art – lust, sun set, sun rise etc – is lust to.
…. So in big picture we screw ….

Only salvation is to realise it and keep asking God to fix it, ant limiting our pleasure as much each can handle.

[authio]

Only salvation is to realise it and keep asking God to fix it, ant limiting our pleasure as much each can handle.

Alive, you make me think this form is your lust.

[Quinault]

You can lust for a sunset? The language barrier is much larger than I thought. I don't mean to sound insulting, really I don't intend to insult you, but you need to learn a bit more about the modern English language before you try to be the authority on what words mean. I have never heard of anyone lusting for a sunset. Maybe there is some sort of sexual fetish I am unaware of, even if there is, "lust" for a sunset would be far from the norm.

[Alive]

You can lust for a sunset? The language barrier is much larger than I thought. I don't mean to sound insulting, really I don't intend to insult you, but you need to learn a bit more about the modern English language before you try to be the authority on what words mean. I have never heard of anyone lusting for a sunset. Maybe there is some sort of sexual fetish I am unaware of, even if there is, "lust" for a sunset would be far from the norm.

Music, poetry and art often are products of lust.

Modern English is twisting human nature to insure every one enjoying beast condition.
It is you right to accepting and enjoy this deception, same as may right do not.

[Alive]

Modern English is twisting human nature to insure every one enjoying beast condition.
It is you right to accepting and enjoy this deception, same as may right do not.

[PeterTheAleut]

You can lust for a sunset? The language barrier is much larger than I thought. I don't mean to sound insulting, really I don't intend to insult you, but you need to learn a bit more about the modern English language before you try to be the authority on what words mean. I have never heard of anyone lusting for a sunset. Maybe there is some sort of sexual fetish I am unaware of, even if there is, "lust" for a sunset would be far from the norm.

Music, poetry and art often are products of lust.

Modern English is twisting human nature to insure every one enjoying beast condition.
It is you right to accepting and enjoy this deception, same as may right do not.

What makes you the authority on lust?

[Quinault]

Show me patristic or biblical evidence that one can lust after a sunset specifically.

[Quinault]

Some art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. That doesn't mean that all art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. In any case, how do you bring a sunset into that list? Other than pollution, we have nothing to do with the beauty of a sunset. A sunset is beautiful because it was made that way, just like flowers are beautiful. God created beauty, there is no sin in enjoying beauty. As an Orthodox Christian you venerate works of art; icons. Yes, they are windows to heaven and are used for prayer. But there is no sin in enjoying the beauty of the iconostasis is there? We have beautiful altars and exquisite vestments, if the enjoyment of beauty was evil, why would we adorn our churches with such beautiful things?

Christ lived in human flesh, being human doesn't mean that everything we do is corrupt automatically.

[Alive]

Some art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. That doesn't mean that all art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. In any case, how do you bring a sunset into that list? Other than pollution, we have nothing to do with the beauty of a sunset. A sunset is beautiful because it was made that way, just like flowers are beautiful. God created beauty, there is no sin in enjoying beauty. As an Orthodox Christian you venerate works of art; icons. Yes, they are windows to heaven and are used for prayer. But there is no sin in enjoying the beauty of the iconostasis is there? We have beautiful altars and exquisite vestments, if the enjoyment of beauty was evil, why would we adorn our churches with such beautiful things?

Christ lived in human flesh, being human doesn't mean that everything we do is corrupt automatically.

No thing it self is lust.
1. It could be product of just,
2. created for lust
3. or perceived in lust.

Sun is just sours of light and radiation , but some people enjoy so much so it be came idol.

same with icons, and with other art form it even worse.
Enjoy iconostas could be lust too.
By the way I heard as one shi-monk say it.

God create every thing in best manner for He can’t create any thing waning, for it serve to man , not to man enjoy it.  We mean to enjoy only God.
So your point is that God need create thing waning to prevent man have no chance to fall in lust?

[Alive]

Some art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. That doesn't mean that all art, music, and poetry is the product of lust. In any case, how do you bring a sunset into that list? Other than pollution, we have nothing to do with the beauty of a sunset. A sunset is beautiful because it was made that way, just like flowers are beautiful. God created beauty, there is no sin in enjoying beauty.

God creat sun and female, so
-  enjoy watch “beauty of a sunset” for pleasure – not lust.
-  enjoy watch “beauty of a naked female” for pleasure – porno lust and sin.

Is it your point?

[Alive]

Show me patristic or biblical evidence that one can lust after a sunset specifically.

Am I have dejavu?


Would Isaak Sirin good enough for you?

Man can’t see inside hidden beauty(Gods Kingdom), before he abolish any out side beauty and scorn it.

[Fabio Leite]

bla, bla, bla, bla, bla......….. so, yet you never define lust still, romans......
.....….and song of song is not about male and female any way.

St. John Climacus and Song of Songs is bla bla bla. That settles it them. I'll now spend five times more to get tasteless food and enjoy how spiritual and detached I am for not caring for food.

[Alive]

bla, bla, bla, bla, bla......….. so, yet you never define lust still, romans......
.....….and song of song is not about male and female any way.

St. John Climacus and Song of Songs is bla bla bla. That settles it them. I'll now spend five times more to get tasteless food and enjoy how spiritual and detached I am for not caring for food.

your St. John qout:

A victim of sensuality who had overcome his weakness told me once that within people of this kind there flourishes a yearning for bodies, a shameless, and terrible spirit that asserts itself at the very heart’s core.  Sheer physical pain burns so fiercely in the heart that it is like being scorched by an open fire.  The sufferer finds that because of this he has no fear of God, he spurns the thought of punishment, turns away from prayer, and the sight of a corpse moves him no more that if it were a stone.  He is like someone out of his mind, in a daze and he is perpetually drunk with desire for man or beast.  And if a limit were not placed on the activities of this demon, no one would be saved, no one who is made of clay mingled with blood and foul moisture.


My St. John qout:

Lust loving people posses high level attraction and love to flesh(body). Them also posses shameless and unhuman spirit living in they heart.  During opposition (to this spirit), those who attacked  by this spirit ,  feel  fire like burning lust. Hi no longer afraid of God nor everlasting suffering, ignoring prays. Almost like he commit such sin in real. He looks on corps as on dead rocks.
Any who suffer this became like mad and dumb and have non stop and high level degree animal/human desire.
If such opposition have not time limit – no one would have any chance to survive.



..... so it is why Ap. say : "better get wife, rather get yourself in such fire".

So you have fire extinguisher any time you need it….




so what is your point?
and what your problems are?

[Fabio Leite]

bla, bla, bla, bla, bla......….. so, yet you never define lust still, romans......
.....….and song of song is not about male and female any way.

St. John Climacus and Song of Songs is bla bla bla. That settles it them. I'll now spend five times more to get tasteless food and enjoy how spiritual and detached I am for not caring for food.

your St. John qout:

A victim of sensuality who had overcome his weakness told me once that within people of this kind there flourishes a yearning for bodies, a shameless, and terrible spirit that asserts itself at the very heart’s core.  Sheer physical pain burns so fiercely in the heart that it is like being scorched by an open fire.  The sufferer finds that because of this he has no fear of God, he spurns the thought of punishment, turns away from prayer, and the sight of a corpse moves him no more that if it were a stone.  He is like someone out of his mind, in a daze and he is perpetually drunk with desire for man or beast.  And if a limit were not placed on the activities of this demon, no one would be saved, no one who is made of clay mingled with blood and foul moisture.


My St. John qout:

Lust loving people posses high level attraction and love to flesh(body). Them also posses shameless and unhuman spirit living in they heart.  During opposition (to this spirit), those who attacked  by this spirit ,  feel  fire like burning lust. Hi no longer afraid of God nor everlasting suffering, ignoring prays. Almost like he commit such sin in real. He looks on corps as on dead rocks.
Any who suffer this became like mad and dumb and have non stop and high level degree animal/human desire.
If such opposition have not time limit – no one would have any chance to survive.



..... so it is why Ap. say : "better get wife, rather get yourself in such fire".

So you have fire extinguisher any time you need it….




so what is your point?
and what your problems are?

Alive, the first quote says and the second only emphasys:

1) The sin of lust is a craving like an addiction;

What we are pointing out is:

2) Enjoyment is not craving.

Now, it is very important before we continue.

Do you see the difference between a craving or a compulsiong for something and the enjoyment of this thing?

[Alive]

bla, bla, bla, bla, bla......….. so, yet you never define lust still, romans......
.....….and song of song is not about male and female any way.

St. John Climacus and Song of Songs is bla bla bla. That settles it them. I'll now spend five times more to get tasteless food and enjoy how spiritual and detached I am for not caring for food.

your St. John qout:

A victim of sensuality who had overcome his weakness told me once that within people of this kind there flourishes a yearning for bodies, a shameless, and terrible spirit that asserts itself at the very heart’s core.  Sheer physical pain burns so fiercely in the heart that it is like being scorched by an open fire.  The sufferer finds that because of this he has no fear of God, he spurns the thought of punishment, turns away from prayer, and the sight of a corpse moves him no more that if it were a stone.  He is like someone out of his mind, in a daze and he is perpetually drunk with desire for man or beast.  And if a limit were not placed on the activities of this demon, no one would be saved, no one who is made of clay mingled with blood and foul moisture.


My St. John qout:

Lust loving people posses high level attraction and love to flesh(body). Them also posses shameless and unhuman spirit living in they heart.  During opposition (to this spirit), those who attacked  by this spirit ,  feel  fire like burning lust. Hi no longer afraid of God nor everlasting suffering, ignoring prays. Almost like he commit such sin in real. He looks on corps as on dead rocks.
Any who suffer this became like mad and dumb and have non stop and high level degree animal/human desire.
If such opposition have not time limit – no one would have any chance to survive.



..... so it is why Ap. say : "better get wife, rather get yourself in such fire".

So you have fire extinguisher any time you need it….




so what is your point?
and what your problems are?

Alive, the first quote says and the second only emphasys:

1) The sin of lust is a craving like an addiction;

What we are pointing out is:

2) Enjoyment is not craving.

Now, it is very important before we continue.

Do you see the difference between a craving or a compulsiong for something and the enjoyment of this thing?

Different degree lust corruption.

[HabteSelassie]

I had an interesting debate with my mother about what sex is.  I know I'm just 15, but I know enough from TV, school, and my four pregnant friends.  you see, my mother and I have DRASTICALLY different views of sex.  I believe that sex is how two devoted people consumate their marriage, sortof "sealing the deal".  this means that their together, they've become one.  I also believe that the reason sex feels good, and we want to do it, is so that we want to reproduce.  it's basic science. 

my mother feels that casual sex should be like "going to dinner".  it doesn't matter if people just do it to do it.  she also says people want to have sex to have sex, and it stops there (whereas I believe people want to to have children).  my mother also believes that you shouldn't have to marry to have sex a/o live together. and that people shouldn't be stuck with just one lover for the rest of their lives.  I ask her if she condones polygamy, and she does not.  she believes that people can just casually have sex with anyone they care about, and not have to own up to any commitment.

who is correct?!  am I to conservative when it comes to this?  is my mother too liberal? 

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

No, your are not being too conservative, but relent from nearing finger pointing at your mother (as others on this thread have wrongfully done) as she is being realistic, and quite miraculously honest to discuss this so practically with you.  Her advice is based on reality, and the Church deals with reality above all else.  I was raised in a staunchly conservative environment, and I have always been surprised to see how diverse sexuality is even amongst other conservative cultures/communities/traditions.  Sexuality is so mysterious and pervasive that it defies easy definitions.  Further, it is a taboo in many cultures and so open and honest dialogue is hard to find, but it crucial and necessary!



The trouble for you is that you are young, and inexperienced, and while I am by no means suggesting you should suddenly pursue experience, I would say you should reserve any absolute judgment or opinions on the matter, and take your mother's sincere words to heart. It doesn't sound like she is promoting hedonism or promiscuity as much as just being honest with you and also letting you know she is not prepared to judge or condemn you in the future of your life.  That is a dear mother, and you are blessed to have her.


Science does not explain sex by the way, it only deals with the mechanics, not the psychology or the spirituality or especially the theological interpretations you have sparked and witnessed on this thread.  Some of the ideas you have suggested, you might see in the future of your own and others experiences does not quite adequately deal with the matter.  There is no easy or simple way to explain or understand sexuality, and you will witness in this world a wide range of diversity in this matter.  A limited perspective will only become confused at the prospects of differences, but God operates in a real world, flaws and all, and we as Christians have to continually reevaluate the Will of God as it operates within out lives and the world, and make sense to each experience as it comes.

My own testimony is that in the context of love, sexuality is an expression of altruism, and that it is the way to convert the physical sensations of sexuality from the potential for mere lust into the joy of selfless giving in pleasuring another person and also receiving such pleasure.  This may be what the Apostle Paul was suggesting or what Saint John Chrystostum was hinting at.  While many folks are able to express their bodies sexuality in self controlled ways, to easily maintain virginity, or celibacy, or abstinence or various things, this is a Gift from God as Christ explained regarding Eunuchs.  For others, marriage and other appropriate sexual activities are condoned and approved expressions of the language of sexuality which in the human experience is complex, compelling and mysterious. But we see from experience that sexual expression defies such concepts and boxes, and is quite honestly a baffling phenomenon.  Further remember not all marriage is love, and not all love is married, so even by my own definitions there arise divergences.

I have no advice for you other then to follow your heart, be careful never to condemn anyone, especially your own mother (not to suggest you were by the way) and I applaud your honesty and ability to ask the right questions, continue in it and God will reveal His Will and understanding to you.  As a high school teacher, I see kids your age dealing with a lot of important life changes, including expressions of sexuality, and my only hope and ambition, is that in all things, is that kids (and adults) learn to express all their experiences in a healthy way, for the emotional, physical and spiritual body.  In Orthodox, we teach a different Gospel of health then the textbooks, but the focus is the same, health.


stay blessed,
habte selassie

[orthonorm]

I had an interesting debate with my mother about what sex is.  I know I'm just 15, but I know enough from TV, school, and my four pregnant friends.  you see, my mother and I have DRASTICALLY different views of sex.  I believe that sex is how two devoted people consumate their marriage, sortof "sealing the deal".  this means that their together, they've become one.  I also believe that the reason sex feels good, and we want to do it, is so that we want to reproduce.  it's basic science. 

my mother feels that casual sex should be like "going to dinner".  it doesn't matter if people just do it to do it.  she also says people want to have sex to have sex, and it stops there (whereas I believe people want to to have children).  my mother also believes that you shouldn't have to marry to have sex a/o live together. and that people shouldn't be stuck with just one lover for the rest of their lives.  I ask her if she condones polygamy, and she does not.  she believes that people can just casually have sex with anyone they care about, and not have to own up to any commitment.

who is correct?!  am I to conservative when it comes to this?  is my mother too liberal? 

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

No, your are not being too conservative, but relent from nearing finger pointing at your mother (as others on this thread have wrongfully done) as she is being realistic, and quite miraculously honest to discuss this so practically with you.  Her advice is based on reality, and the Church deals with reality above all else.  I was raised in a staunchly conservative environment, and I have always been surprised to see how diverse sexuality is even amongst other conservative cultures/communities/traditions.  Sexuality is so mysterious and pervasive that it defies easy definitions.  Further, it is a taboo in many cultures and so open and honest dialogue is hard to find, but it crucial and necessary!



The trouble for you is that you are young, and inexperienced, and while I am by no means suggesting you should suddenly pursue experience, I would say you should reserve any absolute judgment or opinions on the matter, and take your mother's sincere words to heart. It doesn't sound like she is promoting hedonism or promiscuity as much as just being honest with you and also letting you know she is not prepared to judge or condemn you in the future of your life.  That is a dear mother, and you are blessed to have her.


Science does not explain sex by the way, it only deals with the mechanics, not the psychology or the spirituality or especially the theological interpretations you have sparked and witnessed on this thread.  Some of the ideas you have suggested, you might see in the future of your own and others experiences does not quite adequately deal with the matter.  There is no easy or simple way to explain or understand sexuality, and you will witness in this world a wide range of diversity in this matter.  A limited perspective will only become confused at the prospects of differences, but God operates in a real world, flaws and all, and we as Christians have to continually reevaluate the Will of God as it operates within out lives and the world, and make sense to each experience as it comes.

My own testimony is that in the context of love, sexuality is an expression of altruism, and that it is the way to convert the physical sensations of sexuality from the potential for mere lust into the joy of selfless giving in pleasuring another person and also receiving such pleasure.  This may be what the Apostle Paul was suggesting or what Saint John Chrystostum was hinting at.  While many folks are able to express their bodies sexuality in self controlled ways, to easily maintain virginity, or celibacy, or abstinence or various things, this is a Gift from God as Christ explained regarding Eunuchs.  For others, marriage and other appropriate sexual activities are condoned and approved expressions of the language of sexuality which in the human experience is complex, compelling and mysterious. But we see from experience that sexual expression defies such concepts and boxes, and is quite honestly a baffling phenomenon.  Further remember not all marriage is love, and not all love is married, so even by my own definitions there arise divergences.

I have no advice for you other then to follow your heart, be careful never to condemn anyone, especially your own mother (not to suggest you were by the way) and I applaud your honesty and ability to ask the right questions, continue in it and God will reveal His Will and understanding to you.  As a high school teacher, I see kids your age dealing with a lot of important life changes, including expressions of sexuality, and my only hope and ambition, is that in all things, is that kids (and adults) learn to express all their experiences in a healthy way, for the emotional, physical and spiritual body.  In Orthodox, we teach a different Gospel of health then the textbooks, but the focus is the same, health.


stay blessed,
habte selassie

This thread before this post was beginning to border on shear madness.

Great reply Habte. Every post I've read by you is incredibly thoughtful and generous.

Thank you for your considerate words.

[Justin Kissel]

Quinault,

I sort of dropped out of the thread after my last post, but upon going back over the thread I did want to thank you for your response to me above.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox Family Forum (Moderator: Arachne) > Topic: what IS sex?