Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an unofficial archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page or the footnote if you have questions.
Poll
Sexiest part of the Bible
Song of Solomon 0%
Proverbs 7 0%
Something else (comment?) 0%

Votes: 0

 Biblical sexiness

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Jan 10, 2002
 Comments:
I was reading the Bible this morning, and came across a passage Proverbs 7. Man, this is some hot stuff! Now I must contemplate the sinfulness of being aroused by scripture. The full text follows for your enjoyment.
diaries

More diaries by First Incision
What's in my name?
An Afternoon Downtown
First Incision, American Television Viewer, Condemns
Sticker
A marching band has made me cry
Band of Brothers
A request for a book review
My TV crush
Biochem, and other useful sciences
The Air Force
A quote for the readers of Adequacy
Hollywood has lied to me
New Toys
Thomas Kinkade vs. RMS
My newfound non-conformity
Shot Glass vs. Rosary
Analyze this
The recession can't touch me!
Cold Turkey
She's not my queen!
Imagination
Thomas Kinkade: Jigsaw Review
My brush with a playmate
Playmate update
"The Blinding Dawn" or "Breakfast at PizzaHut
The Caffeine Fix
Muppets in a courtroom?
*END* IP Token
The US Civil War
Have a Solemn Lent
King Cotton
God and High Society
[I am saddened that] the Hypermints are gone.
You have broken my will
Glasses make people ugly.
Operation Enduring Uptime
Am I a 75-cent whore?
Vice Principal checks for thongs and bras
Square bacchanal
Fire
Absurdity
Snoozing through Star Wars
Thank you, allies.
Voting
My Father, the geek
Southern Belle Asian Chicks
Adequacy scooped by Fortune
A Down Home 4th of July
A question for the atheists
A dream of Communism and porno
I am dating a liberalist
I'm thinking of joining the Citizen Corps
Shotgun Weddings
I s God punishing my parents?
My Day at the Monestary
On nations and ethic groups
My son, keep my words and store up my commands within you.
Keep my commands and you will live; guard my teachings as the apple of your eye.
Bind them on your fingers; write them on the tablet of your heart.
Say to wisdom, "You are my sister," and call understanding your kinsman;
they will keep you from the adulteress, from the wayward wife with her seductive words.
At the window of my house I looked out through the lattice.
I saw among the simple, I noticed among the young men, a youth who lacked judgment.
He was going down the street near her corner, walking along in the direction of her house
at twilight, as the day was fading, as the dark of night set in.
Then out came a woman to meet him, dressed like a prostitute and with crafty intent.
(She is loud and defiant, her feet never stay at home;
now in the street, now in the squares, at every corner she lurks.)
She took hold of him and kissed him and with a brazen face she said:
"I have fellowship offerings at home; today I fulfilled my vows.
So I came out to meet you; I looked for you and have found you!
I have covered my bed with colored linens from Egypt.
I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes and cinnamon.
Come, let's drink deep of love till morning; let's enjoy ourselves with love!
My husband is not at home; he has gone on a long journey.
He took his purse filled with money and will not be home till full moon."
With persuasive words she led him astray; she seduced him with her smooth talk.
All at once he followed her like an ox going to the slaughter, like a deer stepping into a noose
till an arrow pierces his liver, like a bird darting into a snare, little knowing it will cost him his life.
Now then, my sons, listen to me; pay attention to what I say.
Do not let your heart turn to her ways or stray into her paths.
Many are the victims she has brought down; her slain are a mighty throng.
Her house is a highway to the grave, leading down to the chambers of death


Ah yes, the Good Book (none / 0) (#2)
by because it isnt on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 05:30:26 PM PST
It's my favourite source of pornography.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

get a job and you will afford better porn (none / 0) (#6)
by philipm on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 06:45:52 PM PST
Just because there are sexual organs invovled doesn't mean its sexy


--philipm

Well, (none / 0) (#10)
by tkatchev on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 08:15:27 PM PST
Some children are very startled to realize that everyone has genitals. I think before you reach puberty, you subconsciously believe that having genitals is some sort of very special privilige that only the "select few" are entitled to.

So I think the original poster was shocked to find that Christians have genitals too. He probably thought that since Christians are the "lower caste", in his opinion, they should not be entitled to have genitals.


--
Peace and much love...




lowercaste (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by because it isnt on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 09:03:31 PM PST
So I think the original poster was shocked to find that Christians have genitals too. He probably thought that since Christians are the "lower caste", in his opinion, they should not be entitled to have genitals.

Surely, the people without genitals would be the users of Leunuchs?
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

 
four possibilities: (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by nathan on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 06:48:42 PM PST
  • You are completely serious.

  • You are trying to make some kind of point about the Bible being a stupid or dangerous or obscene book.

  • You are trying to make some kind of comment on people who believe that the Bible is a stupid or dangerous or obscene book.

  • You are taking a shot a Christians (ie, trolling.)

    Point 1 makes you a very twisted individual. If the Bible, which is not a work of erotica and does not primarily contain erotica, is what you use[1] for pr0n, you are clearly into fetishes and kink.

    Point 2 makes you a rather misguided individual; I followed your link, and virtually all of the "x-rated" verses cited within the main hits are trollish. For instance, Esau's swearing upon Jacob's genitals is hardly erotica, it's a description of a custom. You'd be as well as to argue that unmarried Zulu women are strippers because they traditionally go bare-breasted, or that certain New Guinean tribesmen are gay because they are ritually fellated by teenage boys before marriage.

    Point 3 makes you quite apposite.

    Point 4 places you squarely in the Adequacy editors' crosshairs, which is a position I would envy no-one.

    Ball's in your court, as it were.

    [1] Ewwwww. Eww eww eww. Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

    Nathan
    --
    Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

  • Good work, Holmes! (none / 0) (#11)
    by because it isnt on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 08:52:18 PM PST
    That's an awful lot of critical thinking, and I commend you for sharing it with us fellow Adequacy participants this eventing. The truth of the matter is nowhere near as interesting. I was reading The X-Rated Bible : An Irreverent Survey of Sex in the Scriptures recently, and I thought I'd share that with you all. Using the word "favourite" was a bit rash, but it's just regular phrase that I like using.

    The search engine link was so you could see all the reviews of the book too, although there seem to be some less relevant sites in the results. They are not very well written, certainly not to the standards of the book itself.

    The Holy Bible is a tome which comments on the full spectrum of humanity, obviously sex, love and depravity are going to be in there. It's a shame that certain Christians conveniently forget this when they issue their conservative judgements on popular media which likewise tries to capture aspects of humanity.

    BTW: Putting your hand on other people's genitals is licentous, whether it's for a ritual or not, and if only unmarried Zulu ladies bare their breasts, surely this is to make use of the male's natural attraction to them. Strippers do this too, but for money rather than marriage. Details of the Papua New Guinea adolescence rituals would be interesting, please give some references.
    adequacy.org -- because it isn't

    Nudity (none / 0) (#13)
    by First Incision on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 09:36:49 PM PST
    I'm sure members of the Taliban would say that unmarried Iranian ladies baring their faces is to make use of males' natural attraction to them.

    I'm sure Iranians would say that unmarried American women baring their legs is to make use of males' natural attraction to them.

    I think clothing is about the most subjective value human cultures have. Just look how much the acceptable level of clothing for women has changed in the US in the last 100 years.
    _
    _
    Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

     
    I don't get it (none / 0) (#14)
    by nathan on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 10:18:01 PM PST
    Am I supposed to feel stupid for not having been sufficiently 'hip' or (worse) 'ironic' in responding to your post?

    I must be a big old square. I found it snidely ambiguous and gave you a (mostly) straight answer, as it were. That must make me an unbelievable dumbass.

    If you wanted to include review links in your post, then why didn't you bother to check your googling in the first place? That's moderately trollish (or lazy, but I have faith in you.) And of course the Bible contains sexual material, but calling it 'porn' is rather far-fetched. Practically any important work of fiction of the last thirty years would have more, franker, and more eroticism-intended content. I'm not willing to concede that Updike's The Centaur is porn, for example.

    I expect that a certain editor will explain to you the difference between licentiousness in your culture and normal behaviour in someone else's. I don't recall any passage in the Bible saying hand-genital oathtaking is wrong, and it doesn't seem abstractly philosophically evident, so your judgement of licentiousness is prima facie a product of your cultural bias, and thus without objective meaning.

    As far as New Guineans are concerned, I categorically refuse to post gay porn.

    Nathan
    --
    Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

    why do you go around accusing everyone (none / 0) (#15)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 11th, 2002 at 01:09:25 AM PST
    being "trollish?"

    If there was a troll on adequacy.org it would be deleted and the troll's ip would be banned. Trolling is strictly forbidden.


    looks like a troll post to me n/t (none / 0) (#16)
    by nathan on Fri Jan 11th, 2002 at 01:13:12 AM PST

    --
    Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

     
    Nathan, (none / 0) (#17)
    by derek3000 on Fri Jan 11th, 2002 at 05:34:34 AM PST
    You know I like you. You posts are well-written--even if I disagree with you. But this one:

    I expect that a certain editor will explain to you the difference between licentiousness in your culture and normal behaviour in someone else's.

    I hate to say it, but doesn't this smack of moral relativism?




    ----------------
    "Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

    Re: (none / 0) (#19)
    by tkatchev on Sat Jan 12th, 2002 at 07:40:33 AM PST
    The way I read it, there is a difference between "ethics", (I hate that word) which are universal, and "politeness" which is relative to each culture.

    In other words, it may be OK in some cultures to walk around naked; however, adultery is immoral everywhere humans live. I hope you see the difference. (Hint: the difference is in intent.)


    --
    Peace and much love...




    Let me help. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 13th, 2002 at 09:27:15 PM PST
    Though you are the last person who would accept anyone else's definitions, I find it helpful to separate morals, the priciples and values that one holds (or that hold for the entire world, if you prefer), from ethics, the system whereby one applies those morals to life, and resolves situations in which moral principles come into conflict.

    Just a thought. I'll go back to searching for pornography now.


     
    Derek, (none / 0) (#21)
    by nathan on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 06:40:11 AM PST
    Some things are always wrong, and some things are merely customary. I don't see anything particularly licentious about swearing on someone's genitals. Genitals are not intrinsically evil (although, as the genitalia can be provocative, one must observe due care and so forth.) Still, although I wouldn't particularly want to swear on my brother's testicles, I can understand the emotional, visceral reason for doing it.

    Nathan
    --
    Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

     
    Au contraire (none / 0) (#18)
    by because it isnt on Sat Jan 12th, 2002 at 02:55:52 AM PST
    Am I supposed to feel stupid for not having been sufficiently 'hip' or (worse) 'ironic' in responding to your post?

    Hardly. You can claim the big points for replying with depth of understanding and for giving us all an insight on how Adequacy.org posts should be interpreted. Your only 'error' (if we can call it that) was assuming a greater level of thought and intelligence behind the post than was actually there.

    why didn't you bother to check your googling in the first place?

    Well, I had already decided that the post was going to be a 'quicky', and the google link gave plenty of links to the book and its reviews. I'm sure most of the other results disappear when you turn the family filter on.

    of course the Bible contains sexual material, but calling it 'porn' is rather far-fetched. Practically any important work of fiction of the last thirty years would have more, franker, and more eroticism-intended content. I'm not willing to concede that Updike's The Centaur is porn, for example.

    Well, there's an important difference between the Bible and works of fiction. However, the Bible does indeed contain descriptions of people's pornographic conquests, even if the the authors of the bible are not deliberately trying to write porn. And as I understand it, recent books are like films, in that the publishers demand at least one sex scene because they're convinced it'll make the book/film sell better.

    I expect that a certain editor will explain to you the difference between licentiousness in your culture and normal behaviour in someone else's.

    Well, yes, of course there is a cultural difference, but copping a feel is a sexual act regardless of culture. It may be wrong or right depending on the context and the culture. On the other hand, I would expect the Bible to condemn sexual acts (other than procreation) done in the same of religion, as I seem to recall that it was very heavy on this other religious body of people -- the Cannannites or something -- who liked to have sex as part of religious ritual.
    adequacy.org -- because it isn't

    All I can say... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 15th, 2002 at 05:59:25 AM PST
    ...is I'm oh so happy I grew up when I did. I only had to worry about vd and the crabs, so I could have as much unprotected sex as I wanted! Nothing like todays culture, where the government lets loose a virus that could kill us all if were not careful.


     
    biblical sexiness (none / 0) (#22)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 15th, 2002 at 02:16:27 AM PST
    Just try out Song Of Songs, chapter VII. Woooow!



     

    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.