Evidence for God from Science

I don't see what business anyone 's private life is of anybody else other than the parties involved. Why is god so interested in what people do behind closed doors? Sexual urges and lust are natural and beneficial parts of human evolution. It is an evolutionary reward for mating and subsequently maintaining the existence of our species. It gives an incentive to procreate. It is illogical to surpress these urges, and it is illogical to say that lust is a sin. It is absolutely ludicrous to say that sexual lust is a sin. If we did not experience this lust, we would not have the same desire to have sexual intercourse, which would make the survival of the species a lot more difficult.

It is also illogical to explain dreams as true depictions of anything. There is an evolutionary reason for dreaming of sexual intercourse. Male humans, for example, do not stop producing semen. Dreaming about copulation in dreams is often apparent when going through a time void of sexual intercourse. It is a sign of evolutionary sexual frustration, and is not a sin or an abnormality and don't let anybody tell you otherwise. It is evolution's way of getting rid of the build-up of sexual urges which all humans get. I can't believe any parents could say otherwise. Don't be ashamed to be a human being, and don't surpress what is a beautiful and natural thing.

David

pdavid wrote:I don't see what business anyone 's private life is of anybody else other than the parties involved. Why is god so interested in what people do behind closed doors? Sexual urges and lust are natural and beneficial parts of human evolution. It is an evolutionary reward for mating and subsequently maintaining the existence of our species. It gives an incentive to procreate. It is illogical to surpress these urges, and it is illogical to say that lust is a sin. It is absolutely ludicrous to say that sexual lust is a sin. If we did not experience this lust, we would not have the same desire to have sexual intercourse, which would make the survival of the species a lot more difficult.

It is also illogical to explain dreams as true depictions of anything. There is an evolutionary reason for dreaming of sexual intercourse. Male humans, for example, do not stop producing semen. Dreaming about copulation in dreams is often apparent when going through a time void of sexual intercourse. It is a sign of evolutionary sexual frustration, and is not a sin or an abnormality and don't let anybody tell you otherwise. It is evolution's way of getting rid of the build-up of sexual urges which all humans get. I can't believe any parents could say otherwise. Don't be ashamed to be a human being, and don't surpress what is a beautiful and natural thing.

David

The bible says otherwise. Natural or not; lust is a sin. God says it in His word. This is a Christian site and I doubt you'll find many here who deny that the bible, God's inspired word, is our final standard.

The bible says otherwise. Natural or not; lust is a sin. God says it in His word. This is a Christian site and I doubt you'll find many here who deny that the bible, God's inspired word, is our final standard.

Well why would such feelings of lust be embedded in us as humans? Why would god be so misleading as to burden humans with functions they are not allowed to execute? Without using your "The devil did it!" get-out-clause, please explain why god would curse us with such feelings as lust if they are irrelevant and we can't use them.

This is just simply a backward way of thinking, and even the stubbornest of Christians know that lust is a primal instinct that no superior frontal love devlopment can entirely surpress. The reason - we are not supposed to surpress it.

David

pdavid wrote:

The bible says otherwise. Natural or not; lust is a sin. God says it in His word. This is a Christian site and I doubt you'll find many here who deny that the bible, God's inspired word, is our final standard.

Well why would such feelings of lust be embedded in us as humans? Why would god be so misleading as to burden humans with functions they are not allowed to execute? Without using your "The devil did it!" get-out-clause, please explain why god would curse us with such feelings as lust if they are irrelevant and we can't use them.

This is just simply a backward way of thinking, and even the stubbornest of Christians know that lust is a primal instinct that no superior frontal love devlopment can entirely surpress. The reason - we are not supposed to surpress it.

David

Sexual desire is a natural gift of God and very good. Lust is a perversion of that gift and sin. This is has already been discussed on this thread if you'd like to go back and learn something.

Even Plato knew primal instincts were a slippery basis for morality...

And like FFC said, there's nothing wrong with sexual desire. Augustine thought there was (I believe he thought sex was only for procreation), but he was wrong there. Just read the Song of Solomon...

That book (in the Jewish community wisely restricted to males of 33+ years of age) has been called 'pornographic' and similar adjectives lately. It is not. People who saw sexual desire per se as sinful (and, thence, sought other, less candid ways of having sex) have made it a dirty word, as well as those who say that it is merely a 'primal instinct'. Sex is a gift from God.

Whoever sees sex as anything other than sacred intimacy, is wrong.

--

Some things that made little sense...

pdavid wrote:I don't see what business anyone 's private life is of anybody else other than the parties involved.

What about rape? It hardly belongs to public life, does it? It is anybody else's business?

pdavid wrote:Why is god so interested in what people do behind closed doors?

So location changes good/evil now, does it? Hmm...
People can also commit murder behind closed doors.
As an omnipresent God (means 'on both sides of the door') who doesn't want His creatures to spend their lives in sin, of course He's interested.

You may say that murder/rape are coercive, and dreaming & other kinds of sexual sins do not have to be. Does that mean we should tolerate everything that goes on 'behind closed doors' and with mutual consent? I have a nice example. A man went looking on the Internet for someone who was willing to commit suicide (behind closed doors, of course) and then be eaten by him. Someone agreed, committed suicide, and (I believe) had been partly devoured when the police put a stop to it. Should that be tolerated, simply because it happened behind closed doors and with mutual consent?

Turgy wrote:A man went looking on the Internet for someone who was willing to commit suicide (behind closed doors, of course) and then be eaten by him. Someone agreed, committed suicide, and (I believe) had been partly devoured when the police put a stop to it. Should that be tolerated, simply because it happened behind closed doors and with mutual consent?

Ewww! And you said my image of a gruesome hand was disturbing?!

That was an image, not a story.

I can take all of the entrails in the Iliad, but no blood in comics...

Turgonian wrote:That was an image, not a story.

I can take all of the entrails in the Iliad, but no blood in comics...

Semantics.

No, the ability to take anything as long as there isn't a picture...

Turgonian wrote:No, the ability to take anything as long as there isn't a picture...

Everything creates a picture in your head whether it's reading the description or seeing the image.....hows that?

... in response to the title:

Only if thinking is a sin.

Physiologically the two are very similar.

Morally...? Well, it shouldn't be a moral issue.

FFC wrote:Everything creates a picture in your head whether it's reading the description or seeing the image.....hows that?

Untrue. For me at least.

identity_in_development wrote:Morally...? Well, it shouldn't be a moral issue.

Why not?