LadyOfSorrows Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) In one of my courses, we are discussing the fall of mankind. My professor brought up the view that sexual intercourse may not have been performed in procreating before the fall. Although he stated that it is speculative theology, he wasn't doubting it. I believe this view was held by Gregory of Nyssa. I'm not buying it...I believe they had male and female genitalia, so would it just not be used for intercourse? How else would they procreate? Can anyone provide me with some documents either supporting or not supporting this point of view? This has become a debating matter in the classroom and I would like to hear other people's opinions as well as see some documents on this. Edited February 22, 2012 by LadyOfSorrows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixpence Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) i dont know anything about it or have any docs... but... I don't get it...why would we suddenly be given such a great thing as a result of sin??? Edited February 22, 2012 by sixpence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Yeah, I second sixpence's notion. We know that Adam and Eve were basically commanded to procreate by God even before the fall. But then again, this is one of those topics that we will probably always have to just say "I haven't got a clue." But college profs and students just adore arguing about those. Enjoy it while you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Saint Augustine rejected the more common patristic opinion of a sexless state of innocence. Sex was an original part of God's plan but it would have been different. For example no compulsive sexual urge. Conscious command of the male member. The perfectly dispassionate and deliberate "sowing of seed" with no loss of virginal integrity to the woman (not sure how that would work mechanically). It's funny stuff. I remember laughing when reading that part of "City of God." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyOfSorrows Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1329944946' post='2391378'] Saint Augustine rejected the more common patristic opinion of a sexless state of innocence. Sex was an original part of God's plan but it would have been different. For example no compulsive sexual urge. Conscious command of the male member. The perfectly dispassionate and deliberate "sowing of seed" with no loss of virginal integrity to the woman (not sure how that would work mechanically). It's funny stuff. I remember laughing when reading that part of "City of God." [/quote] From what my professor was mentioning, it seemed like he was stating that procreation would have been done in a completely different way. Maybe spiritual? I don't know. Maybe before the fall we could just stare at each other and soon a baby would appear in the womb... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Unless I am not understanding it correctly, it sounds phishy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1329944946' post='2391378'] Saint Augustine rejected the more common patristic opinion of a sexless state of innocence. Sex was an original part of God's plan but it would have been different. For example no compulsive sexual urge. Conscious command of the male member. The perfectly dispassionate and deliberate "sowing of seed" with no loss of virginal integrity to the woman (not sure how that would work mechanically). It's funny stuff. I remember laughing when reading that part of "City of God." [/quote] thanks for this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) It's been years since I've read or thought about it, but as I recall, one of my problems with Augustine's pov was that it didn't do justice to the erotic. By that I mean the ecstatic dimension of erotic love, which I think is natural to sex, not a concupiscent by-product. I'd hate to misrepresent Augustine so maybe I'll find the City of God reference I was alluding to above. ETA: Okay, here is book 14 of City of God from newadvent. Check chapters 21-26, or so. [url="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120114.htm"]http://www.newadvent...hers/120114.htm[/url] Edited February 23, 2012 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) dbl pst Edited February 23, 2012 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1329963980' post='2391533'] dbl pst [/quote] a double scotch would be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Since we can only speculate, here's mine. Before hand sex was all innocent for bipeds just like animals. Since we had no knowledge of good and evil there could be no sin! For us to choose to love God freely he had to give us free choice. Problem is the devil tempted to choose the knowledge of good and evil. Since then man has been responsible for his choices and choosing certain sexual actions has been sinful. When Jesus said to the adulteress "Go and sin no more" He was saying to her to go and and deal with her sin, since she most likely may do it again. If God (all powerful creator) wanted angels he would have made us angelic. Instead he gave each of us burdens to learn to deal with and mould the ethos of the person. Loving God is not defeating our sins which we cannot do, it is dealing with them as best we can and asking forgiveness for what we can't. Jesus suffered for the forgiveness of those sins that we cannot conquer by ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body has some interesting exegesis on Genesis related to this. Also some interesting philosophical and theological reflections. I want to read that again. It's been too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1329965132' post='2391557'] If God (all powerful creator) wanted angels he would have made us angelic. [/quote] Amen. :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1329965132' post='2391557'] Since we can only speculate, here's mine. [b]Before hand sex[/b] was all innocent for bipeds just like animals. Since we had no knowledge of good and evil there could be no sin! For us to choose to love God freely he had to give us free choice. Problem is the devil tempted to choose the knowledge of good and evil. Since then man has been responsible for his choices and choosing certain sexual actions has been sinful. When Jesus said to the adulteress "Go and sin no more" He was saying to her to go and and deal with her sin, since she most likely may do it again. If God (all powerful creator) wanted angels he would have made us angelic. Instead he gave each of us burdens to learn to deal with and mould the ethos of the person. Loving God is not defeating our sins which we cannot do, it is dealing with them as best we can and asking forgiveness for what we can't. Jesus suffered for the forgiveness of those sins that we cannot conquer by ourselves. [/quote] it's beforehand. just fyi. totally changes the meaning of that sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1329967589' post='2391594'] it's beforehand. just fyi. totally changes the meaning of that sentence. [/quote] I'm so funny, I even make lols without trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now