Valid Question: Is the Bible erotic literature?

[Mangled*]

Now I know I'm almost definitely going to hell already, spare me the humiliation of pointing that out to me, but if you're of a sound rational mind you should find no problem with this question as it's perfectly valid.

I admit, I've not read the whole Bible.. Only small excerpts of it, but as with any novel you basically get the idea of if it's your kind of thing or not just by skimming through a few pages in the book shop. One thing that always struck me as odd is the number of sex scenes in the Bible, if Genesis is anything to go by then the Bible in all probability has as many, if not more sex scenes than the Karma Sutra.

Regardless of what you believe, you should find this article a very amusing and entertaining read (provided you're not completely gormless that is).

Here's some questions I'd like people to go away and think about:

• Are these accounts of depraved sexual instances real? If so what is the Bible trying to teach by telling us them? How are they approrpiate for people of all ages to read about?

• Are these accounts of depraved sexual instances false or intended metaphorically? If so (again) what is the Bible trying to teach by telling us them? How are they appropriate for people of all ages to read about?

• Why are these accounts of depraved sexual instances sacred? Why did God include these in his book? (That's right, don't forget God told all of the collaborative writers of the Bible what to write!)

• Are these parts of the Bible intended as erotic literature? Are they just filler? To entertain us? To attract suggestible readers? Is it possible that a major religion of today is based upon ancient pornography?

These are all valid points I'm looking forward to reading responses to. Please don't choose to be offended by this topic, and certainly if you're a moderator of Christian disposition, don't act brashly as if this is some kind of personal attack.

Discuss.

PS: The lounge is pretty dead lately, you need compelling threads like this.

[jrgp]

Whether it is or not, diehard christians will go to the world's end to debate that it isn't erotic.

[VirtualTT]

[Graham]

The Bible deals with life, sex is a part of life so its in there. Some stories are to show the punishment of immorality so obviously there are accounts are devious actions of all sorts.

[PANZERCATWAGON]

yeah the bible has its problems with not being up to date with things like protecting the children from real life and not being as brilliantly worded or thought out as twentieth century poets and their works who have had hundreds of years worth of literary history to work from

i wonder why

oh thats right. its supposedly unchanged for thousands of years

[Demonic]

It's only erotic if it gives you a boner.

Even so, it might be just you.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Since I'm in class right now I'm not going to look up the actual definition of "erotic literature," but I can almost promise that it would be something like "written works intended to induce arousal in the reader."  That's just common sense.  Further common sense suggests that the inclusion of sex doesn't by itself make a book "erotic," regardless of how prevalent it might be (and in the Bible, it's not at all prevalent).  Think about it: In a written work with 66 books and thousands of pages, the article you linked to could only come up with six noteworthy sex acts.  That hardly translates to it being erotic literature.  With that out of the way, on to your questions.

Are these accounts of depraved sexual instances real? If so what is the Bible trying to teach by telling us them? How are they approrpiate for people of all ages to read about?
Yes, they're real.  I doubt there's any real teaching goal behind including the acts; it's just part of the history.  And since when has the Bible been appropriate for people of all ages?

Are these accounts of depraved sexual instances false or intended metaphorically? If so (again) what is the Bible trying to teach by telling us them? How are they appropriate for people of all ages to read about?
No.

Why are these accounts of depraved sexual instances sacred? Why did God include these in his book? (That's right, don't forget God told all of the collaborative writers of the Bible what to write!)
They're included for the sake of completeness in the historical parts of the Bible.

Are these parts of the Bible intended as erotic literature? Are they just filler? To entertain us? To attract suggestible readers? Is it possible that a major religion of today is based upon ancient pornography?
These conclusions are just so far out of bounds that they barely even warrant a response.  It's one thing to suggest that certain sexual stories in the Bible are part of God teaching us something, but it's totally different to say that sex was included to make the Bible more "sellable."  That's just retarded, and it's questions like that that make it seem like you either have no idea what you're talking about, or you're intentionally saying stupid things to goad responses from everyone else.

Also, just because you call something a valid question doesn't make it one.

[Boblekonvolutt]

or you're intentionally saying stupid things to goad responses from everyone else.

Or would that be you?

They're included for the sake of completeness in the historical parts of the Bible.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

I meant that when scholars dug up these old texts, they're not just going to say, "Well, we don't like sex so we'll cut those parts out," ESPECIALLY if they believe the entire book to be inspired by God.

[Thinkto urself]

damnit mang

[Horve]

god nor jesua wrote it, what did you expect?
The bible doesn't even have proper plot development.

[Shard]

Plot development lol.

 Imo, the bible is a book that contains information, on what may or may not be real(Jesus was, not arguing that). What is included in that book, most of it has become outdated compared to modern times such as the whole spilling your seed thing, but I'm sure the stories were put there to illustrate the temptations and wrong doings that should not be carried out under any circumstances(incest). The fact is we can't know what was gonig through the heads of the writers when they were writing it or what was or wasn't acceptable in their own eyes(assuming the didn't go with the general consensus on such things).

[TBDM]

it's just a love story gone wrong.

accidental pregnancy > couldn't afford abortion > jezus > crap to fill up the book > jezus meets maria,falls in love, nails her > falls in love > old jewish schoolfriends of maria are jealous > crusify jezus > more fictional crap to fill up the book.

[Mangled*]

Yes, they're real.  I doubt there's any real teaching goal behind including the acts; it's just part of the history.  And since when has the Bible been appropriate for people of all ages?

Since whenever it is that Christian parents began reading from the Bible to their children or sending them to Sunday school, I suppose? Do you agree that the Bible is not appropriate reading for children?

They're included for the sake of completeness in the historical parts of the Bible.

Here's my issue: this and the answer to the first question rely on the Bible being an accurate historical document... Which if it was... well, I don't really need to go over that do I? The age of the Earth, evolution, etc etc...

Science explains it without any need for embellishment to fill the gaps. For a historical document the Bible has next to no credibility, no mention of specific dates when things happened, contradicting established fact. I could go on.

These conclusions are just so far out of bounds that they barely even warrant a response.  It's one thing to suggest that certain sexual stories in the Bible are part of God teaching us something, but it's totally different to say that sex was included to make the Bible more "sellable."  That's just retarded, and it's questions like that that make it seem like you either have no idea what you're talking about, or you're intentionally saying stupid things to goad responses from everyone else.

But those are perfectly rational questions. Sex sells, history has proved that, and I'm fairly sure the only form of pornography 2000 years ago was either drawings or literature. The Bible may have initially been marketed as a book for all people and purposes, even if its intention was much deeper and more sacred.

The sexual scenarios described in the bible are completely comparable to much of todays erotic literature and pornography.

Also, just because you call something a valid question doesn't make it one.

You wouldn't say that if this was about any other book. They're as valid as you are biased. 

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Do you agree that the Bible is not appropriate reading for children?

It's a fantastic tool for raising kids with, but you can't just plop a Bible down in front of a kid and expect them to get anything out of it.  Their intellects haven't developed enough to understand anything more than extremely basic concepts, and some sections of the Bible are just more graphic than I'd be comfortable exposing my future children to.  Just as you need to learn arithmetic before you can do calculus, you need to have the basis of "God is love" and all that jazz before Christianity becomes understandable and relevant.

Science explains it without any need for embellishment to fill the gaps. For a historical document the Bible has next to no credibility, no mention of specific dates when things happened, contradicting established fact. I could go on.

As far as the date thing goes, how would you expect them to keep track? There's no BC/AD system for the Old Testament (obviously), and the New Testament was written before Jesus' birth was used as a basis.  However, what the Bible does have is detailed genealogies (this person lived for this long before having this kid who lived this long, etc. etc.), so dates CAN actually be determined that way.

[Hair|Trigger]

Mangled, why don't you just read the bible for yourself?  For so long you have come here to baffle on about religion, and you're clearly fascinated by it... just go out and buy one.  or if you're super lazy, look for a .pdf copy >_>

[VijchtiDoodah]

As far as the date thing goes, how would you expect them to keep track? There's no BC/AD system for the Old Testament (obviously), and the New Testament was written before Jesus' birth was used as a basis.  However, what the Bible does have is detailed genealogies (this person lived for this long before having this kid who lived this long, etc. etc.), so dates CAN actually be determined that way.

Jesus didn't invent the calendar. The Jews and Romans had their own calendars long before Jesus was born and both were in simultaneous use during Jesus' time. Jesus' birth was only used as a set point for the start date of the existing Roman (Julian) calendar and the change was made more than 1500 years after his death (it is now the internationally accepted Gregorian calendar).

And, Mangled: when I put on my spandex chaps and whip a woman during our BDSM sessions while yelling "I AM THE LORD THY GOD, OBEY MY ERECTION!" and quoting from the Bible, it's erotic literature. Anything I quote with my sultry voice becomes erotic literature.

[Boblekonvolutt]

However, what the Bible does have is detailed genealogies (this person lived for this long before having this kid who lived this long, etc. etc.), so dates CAN actually be determined that way.

That it does. However, since it has people living for several hundred years and has contradicting genealogies all over the place...

[pavliko]

The bible was an erotic porn comic at start but it was changed for 1500 years by some lame fanatic poets. No one realy knows what was the bible at start. It could be even the bible of loli at the beginning. Even i would start to believe in it if i knew("not because of loli"and i did read it all T_T)

[PANZERCATWAGON]

i liked the part in that book where all the animals went on the bus two by two

then i think they had party. i cant remember