Strange absence of reporter’s name or, indeed, any citations. Par for the course at the Daily Hate.

Protestants have generally moved away from the view that married sex involves sin in the way sex involves the body’s motions and reactions apart from the control of the reason, and sees that as generally good.

Whoever invented the Daily Mail
Ought to be cut down to size.
Pulped and reduced
To a nauseous juice
Then dried out and flattened ’till ready for use,
Then covered in newsprint and lies.

Because who’d do that to a tree?
Raising its head to the sky
Rooted in centuries, telling tall tales,
Breathing a green lullaby?

>That old line again? I would encourage you to apply more thoughtful study to your understanding of the issue rather than just blindly believing anything you hear. The original sin was willfull disobedience to God. That was the issue – fundamental breech of trust and responsibility in the relationship. It was not about any prohibition of sex. Perhaps you missed the “be fruitful and multiply” part earlier? That means sex is not only _not_ forbidden, but expected as one of the things that is very good.

“You don’t have to be a theologian to “interpret” it this way. I mean: If concupiscence is the end of innocence, and if the original sin marks the end of walking around naked in paradise on earth, what does that tell you about lust and sexuality?”

>Sounds like you’ve read more gnostic Golden Compass than The Bible… Regardless of whether or not you think the story more or less parabolic or literal, to get to the meaning let’s break down the facts of the story: the end of chapter two points out that they were naked and felt no shame. Why? Because they were innocent of sin. They didn’t know (among other things) how to apply exploitative means to coerce other people to do things aginst their better judgement. Now two things are used here, the promise of at least absolute knowledge with possibly the implication of absolute power (you will be like God). That was the temptation given Eve. Adam was also there, so we can readily assume that the bait was meant for him as well. The rest is considerably less clear, though we can make some inductive guesses. What we have to work with is the fact that Adam didn’t take the bait until Eve offered it vs. the serpent. Also, we know that previously, they were “naked and knew no shame” but subsequently knew they were naked and were ashamed. And also, we know that Adam passed the buck of responsibility by blaming Eve for his taking the bait – that she coerced him. The third point can’t be construed as having misled or lied to him about the fruit since he was there and knew what she knew. So it’s not unreasonable to suggest that something unique to Eve was used as an additional bait. Since sex in the garden was explicitly NOT a bad thing and was explicitly commanded as a good thing, then it’s not unreasonable to suggest that sex was the added inducement. However, even the hardcore atheist hater should agree that sex (or any other very good appatite like eating, drinking, sleeping etc.) can be warped by using it unethically as a means to coerce another to do something bad. Like committing the Original sin of _disobeying God_. Good things do not cease to be good in and of themselves, but only when used in the wrong way, or the wrong degree, or at the wrong time to in some way do harm.

Sex is not in the least evil by Biblical or Christian standards. Quite the opposite. And for the record – I was gobsmacked at the sheer preposterousness of the claim of the article since my experience has been exactly the opposite. I have had more and more satisfactory sex as a married Christian than I ever did as an unmarried agnostic.

“If atheists are so glib about committing crimes, why are all the prisons filled with self-professed Christians?”

> Again… just the facts please. Are ALL the prisons FILLED with self-professed Christians? Really? And just to indulge your propositions, just because I claim to be a duck doesn’t make me one if I don’t quack. Furthermore, that some or even most prisons (you would really need some better data to confirm which) are likely to have some self-professed Christians, is not the rational thing to do to understand the phenomenon, to first ask some questions like – how many became Christians because of prison ministries?

“I always pull out before ejaculating. Doesn’t everyone?”

This is a perfectly accurate restatement of the results. But it comes across more like a creepy personal ad. LOL!

Come on people… this study (or at least the headline) singles out Christians, and doesn’t mention whether the guilty feelings arise from unmarried sexual relations or not. Why hide that?! Christians are taught that unmarried sex is a sin. Wouldn’t a better headline then be: “Christians feel guilty when they sin”.

Clap. Clap. Well done.

The whole concept of the original sin is based on the notion that lust and sex are evil things

Actually, the whole concept of the Fall is that undifferentiated consciousness became aware of itself, creating differentiated consciousness, ultimately devolving to a material universe. The expulsion from the Garden shouldn’t have any negative connotations, simply that it’s not possible to have universal consciousness while embodied as an individual. If it’s been interpreted as sin, that’s just the socio-political agenda of the interpreter.

The way the article is worded, it seems like masturbating to porn and adultery were included.

I’ll bet Christians feel more guilty about shoplifting or parking illegally than atheists do, too.

Love the conflation of religious sin with petty (but still illegal) crime.

Yes, I understand that adultery is an ethical crime too, not just a sin.

If atheists are so glib about committing crimes, why are all the prisons filled with self-professed Christians?

“I always pull out before ejaculating. Doesn’t everyone?”

Yeah, but christians don’t call it a “Money Shot” they call it “Seminal Tithing”! ;-P

the whole concept of the Fall is that undifferentiated consciousness became aware of itself, creating differentiated consciousness, ultimately devolving to a material universe.

True, except the very first consequence is that they were ashamed of their nakedness. Naked Human Bodies = Bad, ergo human sexuality is bad because the only shameful parts are chests and crotches apparently, since those are all they covered up with the fig leaves.

Nevermind that God supposedly created them in his image!

I’ll bet they don’t.

Interestingly enough though, no Christian has ever condemned the act of eating a fruit…

“Protestants have generally moved away from the view that married sex involves sin”

Christians in general have moved away from what their predecessors believed. Nonetheless there’s no denying that the book of genesis condemns sexuality. You don’t have to be a theologian to “interpret” it this way. I mean: If concupiscence is the end of innocence, and if the original sin marks the end of walking around naked in paradise on earth, what does that tell you about lust and sexuality? Not only that, sex becomes the essential mechanism of reproducing depraved and sinful humans. Modern protestants can ignore the book of genesis if that’s what they want to do. But they can’t tell me that it doesn’t depict a very negative view of sexuality.

Christians feel guilty after a lot of things. Most everything it would seem. How is this news?

The whole concept of the original sin is based on the notion that lust and sex are evil things; so I don’t see why it matters whether these Christians were married or not.

False. Lust, while consistently condemned in scripture, plays no part in the fall of Adam and Eve nor in the book of Genesis as a whole. And sex between a married couple is celebrated and encouraged in Scripture.

In other words, it makes a world of difference as to whether the polled Christians were married or not.

They’re not crazy about masturbation, or sex before marriage, so that’s a ton of incentive to marry someone _way_ before you’re mature enough to do so. There are many aspects of that faith that actually kind of suck, IMO, but generalized guilt about sex isn’t one of them.