Flutterby™! : A Christian view of amazing sex 2013-07-02 20:37:10.014005+00

A Christian view of amazing sex

2013-07-02 20:37:10.014005+00 by Dan Lyke 6 comments

Wow... Christians are not called to have amazing sex:

Sexual incompatibility, therefore, is a cross that some couples bear, and Christian communities could lighten this burden if we made an effort to put sex in its rightful place. If sex were viewed as a gift that, like everything else in this world, is marred by sin, it may be easier for couples to accept that bad sex is neither a reason for divorce nor an excuse to stop investing in a marriage. As with other trials, bad sex is an opportunity to rejoice in suffering (1 Peter 4:13) and to be further conformed to the image of Christ (Romans 8:29).

and some christians wonder why more and more people are leaving the flock. They need to learn from the pagans.

It varies by religion, church and person. I think it's important that Nancy does not feel he need to "repent in the morning" and neither do I. Her church has a fairly open minded healthy attitude about personal relationships. Wish more did.

Yeah, I think different sects have different sex, and stated like this, the view is a fairly fringe one. But I also think that it's one that's consistent with the underlying philosophy that many subscribe to, and that branches of Christianity that want to adapt and thrive are going to have to address this (and other) issues in order to attract new members.

Ya know, as a Christian I'm pretty much of the notion that sex, like anything, needs to be taken in moderation and with that I'm talking about frequency rather than quality. As a Christian I pretty much expect any gift from God to always be amazing and as a Christian I consider sex a gift from God. I have no idea where this lady got her ideas. Suffering for God is not a part of Christianity while eliminating suffering is.

Had a twitter exchange today about how there's no single point of success, just single points of failure. I don't know where the problem lies, but my reaction to that article was one of "this is consistent with many interpretations of Christian theology and philosophy, although many of those wouldn't explicitly point out that connection, and I've no idea if that's a majority or not".

I have, over the years, come to think that confirmation bias was the source of much of my earlier anti-religious fervor, and that the perils and flaws of religion are largely the perils and flaws of humanity, but I do think that the saner branches of modern Christianity could be doing a better job of presenting a positive view of the religion.

On the other hand, that could just be a flaw of modern mass media: It's way easier to get the insane people the mic and call it "news" than it is to actually present a nuanced view of reality.