An_Ace_Of_Hearts

Being an Asexual Christian

Recommended Posts

An_Ace_Of_Hearts

I am a Christian, and I've started to get a bit more involved with my church. A few months ago, I also learned that I'm asexual. Recently, I've questioned whether being asexual is considered a sin or not.

 

Just to list my questions:

 

•Is being asexual considered a sin by most/some Christians?

-I've read things about how being single and not having sex would not be considered a sin, but rather a benefit/blessing and would allow one to spend more time with God. However, if you're married and don't have sex with your spouse, that would be considered sinful (that, I'm not exactly sure why. Is there a scripture that states we must have sex with our spouses, or anything related to that?)

 

•If both spouses are asexual, would they be sinning if they didn't have sex? 

 

•Those who have come out to members of your church, what reactions/responses have you gotten?

 

So far, those are all the questions I have. I would appreciate your responses. I'm just a bit lost! ^^;;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dj91

So I'm not religious but always like to point something out when I see these threads. If you are created by God then surely it was the wish of God for you to be Asexual. So regardless of what other Christians say surely Gods wishes out ranks them and it cannot be sinful. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grimalkin

Hey there, long-time Christian and asexual person here.

 

Firstly, I've always felt that my asexuality was sort of a... Christian cheat-code. All throughout my church-going years I heard people warning about the dangers of temptation, people bemoaning desires of the flesh. To which I always thought, "...What desires?"

 

I considered raising my hand when I heard the pastor rhetorically ask if there was anyone who could claim to be without temptation.

 

Because, I mean... are nuns and monks "sinners" for doing what they do? I think not. In fact, I would wager that a great many asexual people throughout history became monks and nuns so that they could get out of marriage.

 

But listen, I guarantee there are some Christians out there who think being asexual is worse than murder. In the same way that some feel that Harry Potter is worse than murder, and eating before church is worse than murder. Some Christians just have their bloomers in a bunch over what minor things constitute a sin.

 

One of my favorite Bible verses is Matthew 7:4-5: How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. If someone starts getting all up in your business about what a sinner you are, then they're not really loving their neighbor as themselves, are they?

 

You can't get bogged down on what people think might be a sin. Ultimately, only God can decide, and I think in His infinite wisdom he's probably not too concerned over whether or not you had a lot of rabbit sex in your marriage.

 

As for telling people in my church that I was asexual, I never felt the need. It's a private thing, and dollars to donuts most of the old people in there wouldn't have understood it anyway. They would have gotten it mixed up with celibacy, plant reproduction, or they would have just told me I hadn't "found the right man yet." In fact, that's usually what I parrot back to them if they ask if I'm seeing anyone. "I haven't found the right one yet." Because I haven't, and I might never.

 

In conclusion, don't sweat it. Be a kind person. Try to live up to the teachings of Jesus as best you are able. It's all anybody's ever been able to do.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AvatarRand

Hi. Im not christian but im muslim. I think of asexuality as something that shouldn't be weird or frowned upon. Coz like there wouldn't be a problem of sex outside of marriage. Or like rape. Or stuff like that. Thats just my own thoughts about asexuality when people are negative about it. So like being asexual is like the best thing, i think. 

 

I think the second question has more to do with the fact that you arent pleasing your spouse or some responsibility to "reproduce" 🤷‍♀️ idk, just at the top of my head. Never heard of anything like that. Not that religious. 

 

I haven't come out yet as asexual. Some people who dont know my family know im into girls A couple of my cousins, nieces and nephews know. Its all just people i know who wont give me s*** about being gay. The whole asexual part though, i dont have the inclination to address. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
knittinghistorian

1.  I've never heard it considered a sin; nuns and monks have always been very respected for their vows of chastity.  And St. Paul very explicitly says that not marrying is a benefit if you can do it, because you'll save yourself a lot of trouble and distractions.  Maybe some specific churches look down on asexuality or virginity, but they would be hard-pressed to find any major denomination, or any scripture, that supports them in that.

 

2.  The married-but-no-sex thing comes from a scripture in which Paul tells married people not to deprive each other, except for a short time (like fasting), because otherwise they would be tempted, and there might also be resentment.  It seems like some people had been trying to be extra-holy by abstaining indefinitely from sex, and Paul was saying that there wasn't anything extra-holy about that, but actually potentially harmful.  I'm not sure it was intended to refer to a situation in which one spouse actually didn't want sex; and anyway, the point seemed to be that there's nothing extra-holy in abstaining from married sex all by itself.  A married asexual is certainly in a difficult situation, but I think trying to bully them into sex by saying it's a sin not to do it, would be stretching the verse a lot.

 

3.  As stated above, the point of the verse seems to have been that the absence of sex might cause temptation or resentment, thus implying that both parties actually want sex, but are denying themselves.  I don't think it would apply to two married asexuals at all.

 

4.  I came out to my minister, and discussed it with him, and he was completely fine with it.  He has thought deeply and read a lot about gay/lesbian rights, sexual identities in American culture, etc., and I really respect both his wisdom and his compassion about it.  He struggles more with homosexual behavior (he believes, like most Christians I think, that homosexual feelings are not sinful, as no one can help how they feel), but asexuality is something he sees no possible legitimate problem with.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
knittinghistorian
23 minutes ago, Grimalkin said:

Hey there, long-time Christian and asexual person here.

 

Firstly, I've always felt that my asexuality was sort of a... Christian cheat-code. All throughout my church-going years I heard people warning about the dangers of temptation, people bemoaning desires of the flesh. To which I always thought, "...What desires?"

 

I considered raising my hand when I heard the pastor rhetorically ask if there was anyone who could claim to be without temptation.

 

Because, I mean... are nuns and monks "sinners" for doing what they do? I think not. In fact, I would wager that a great many asexual people throughout history became monks and nuns so that they could get out of marriage.

 

But listen, I guarantee there are some Christians out there who think being asexual is worse than murder. In the same way that some feel that Harry Potter is worse than murder, and eating before church is worse than murder. Some Christians just have their bloomers in a bunch over what minor things constitute a sin.

 

One of my favorite Bible verses is Matthew 7:4-5: How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. If someone starts getting all up in your business about what a sinner you are, then they're not really loving their neighbor as themselves, are they?

 

You can't get bogged down on what people think might be a sin. Ultimately, only God can decide, and I think in His infinite wisdom he's probably not too concerned over whether or not you had a lot of rabbit sex in your marriage.

 

As for telling people in my church that I was asexual, I never felt the need. It's a private thing, and dollars to donuts most of the old people in there wouldn't have understood it anyway. They would have gotten it mixed up with celibacy, plant reproduction, or they would have just told me I hadn't "found the right man yet." In fact, that's usually what I parrot back to them if they ask if I'm seeing anyone. "I haven't found the right one yet." Because I haven't, and I might never.

 

In conclusion, don't sweat it. Be a kind person. Try to live up to the teachings of Jesus as best you are able. It's all anybody's ever been able to do.

Exactly.

 

"Bloomers in a bunch", lol!

I did some archival work at my church, digitizing old (like, almost hundred-year-old) newsletters and tracts and things for a historical database.  The Big Controversies were things like "should women bob their hair?" (horrors!!), "should Communion grape juice be served in lots of teeny cups, or should everybody sip from one cup?", "should there be separate Bible classes, or only the main worship service?", and things like that.  And the seriousness!  There were books written and debates held!  But today we just don't even understand what the big deal was.  People just have a universal tendency toward bloomer-bunching, I think, and not only in the Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock

I'm not a believer, so I'd argue that Asexuality isn't a sin on the basis that there's no such thing as sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jona Rhys

There's a thread for Christian Asexuals here:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard_Oz

 

17 hours ago, An_Ace_Of_Hearts said:

I would appreciate your responses. I'm just a bit lost! ^^;;

I'm sorry I don't mean to come across as rude, insensitive or a smart-alec (that is not my intention), but I cannot believe one could even think that being asexual was a sin.

 

Being asexual generally means you are less likely to engage in sexual acts of any kind throughout your life, and in most instances would not get tempted to do so.

 

The whole point of a Christian/religious mandate to "procreate/multiply etc" is to divert one's sexual instincts in the direction of a monogamous married heterosexual relationship which is deemed as the only valid outlet to sexual desires NOT because there is some divine benefit in having sex or engaging in sexual acts themselves. The vast majority of sexual acts in this day and age would not conform to this standard so being asexual in such a sexualised world is a BLESSING for any devout Christian. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marlow1
Posted (edited)

I think St Paul is trying to point out that if one or both partners are actually wanting sex but for some reason the said person or people are feeling deprived this could lead to problems within the marriage but if both of the people involved are in agreement, and they are certain that they will never want sex then such problems

will never arise

 

There might be some difficulty if one of the said partners actually ends up being a grey sexual of some kind. A time could come when this person begins to feel that sex would make things better and this can be hard to know about until it happens. But if the couple have a reasonable length of courtship and know each other well before they marry, it is likely that the two Asexual people will remain Asexual and in this circumstance it could not ever become a problem since neither person would feel deprived

 

I don't think St Paul is saying going without sex is a sin, he is trying to highlight the problems that can occur when a person in the marriage feels like they are being deprived. This problem is not unique to Asexual people

 

Many sexual people experience differences regarding libido, levels of desire, willingness to perform different acts and so on. Plus, there are times within most marriages where sex just is not possible ie following childbirth, during certain illnesses, when folk get older and so on. At these times folk often decide not to have sex at all, or in some cases they find a way to compromise. Much depends on the people involved, and many other factors, but regardless communication is the key

 

Telling folk they must have sex because if not it is a sin, really is not helpful. The intimacy within the relationship is what matters, and as you know there are many ways other than sex to express this. But it really is the communication between the couple that keeps the bond between a couple alive and well

 

Most Christian when they marry they hope it will be for a lifetime. And the earlier a person starts to understand themselves the better. You are doing the right thing just by being here at AVEN. If you stick around you will learn a lot and this will enable you to find the words and terminology you need to explain your wants and needs over time. I was 60 years old when I found AVEN I do so wish my partner and I had found this site earlier, it would have helped us avoid a very lot of heartache

 

Anyway, all is well with us now, and our communication grows daily and it is because of this site. We are kind of in a mixed relationship, we definitely do not see everything the same, nor do we feel exactly the same on every aspect of our relationship, but the more we find the words we need to express what it is we are meaning the better our relationship is becoming

 

Hope this makes sense, and I wish you all the best. Please try not to see St Paul's writings as a condemnation but more of a loving kindness to folk who are going through the many trials that married life, or even single life can bring

 

 

Edited by Marlow1
To clarify what I was saying, some of the text appeared to be accidentally deleted
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(NotSo)DirtyDiana

Good replies here. I don't know if you want my two cents as I'm not Christian, nor do I identify with any particular religion; however, I do consider myself an omnist, which means I see the big picture and words of Truth in all religions and spiritual faiths, and I do believe in a God. I feel like I have my own relationship with God, and I think God must know all about me, including my feelings on relationships and sex. God hasn't sent me a partner yet, if/when He does, it will be the right man who's the right fit. If having sex makes me feel bad, then God is not going to want me to have sex. As for sex in general, I think it being "sinful" is really about the absence of love. Sex is fundamentally an emotionally intimate activity; to share a soul with somebody in the absence of love and genuine closeness is perhaps an erroneous idea - not because it's evil, but simply because it can be harmful to both parties. I may be wrong and feel free to reject this, but "sin" as far as I understand it does not mean evil. It means an error or wrong turn. (It may also apply to evil deeds, like murder, but a lot of the time it's an error.) Everybody makes wrong turns, that is nature, that is life. Choosing not to have sex is certainly not an error, and I agree with the other posters about that passage simply referring to the problems that can arise in a marriage if sexual intimacy is deprived from someone with the need. Also with sex being a sharing of souls, it may be encouraged in a marriage. But there are many other ways in life to share souls besides sex. I think God is very happy with those other ways. He knows you, He wants what is healthy, happy, pure and true for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bronztrooper

So, I'm far from religious and I'm not really a fan of the Church (which I consider to be separate from Christianity as a whole- people can believe whatever they want, but organizing what beliefs are considered to be 'appropriate' is a method of controlling people, imo.  Just look at how many times the Bible has been changed), not to mention that when I was younger, I had a lot of negative views towards Christianity that really were due to my experiences with Christians who tried to push their beliefs on others as well as learning about everything that happened during the Dark Ages.  I've pushed those negative views out of my mind when I realized how much of the negative stuff that I associated with Christianity was due to radicalized individuals using their religion to justify their actions (which would normally be considered sinful on their own) since they directed it towards people they didn't consider to be 'pure'.

 

Due to this, I believe that it's up to the individual to determine for themselves what is and isn't sinful based on their own knowledge of their beliefs, not what an organization claiming to be dedicated to that religion dictates.  I personally don't have any religious beliefs, but I can understand why people would want to have them in the first place- the world in general can be a damn scary place, so thinking that there is a divine plan for everything and that there's something to look forward to after death is comforting to many.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that you should decide whether it is sinful based on your own knowledge of your beliefs, and if anyone tries to convince you that something you do is sinful, you're probably better off ignoring them.

 

I do agree with @Dj91 in that if everyone's path is decided on by God, then people ranting and raving about how someone is a 'sinner' are basically saying that they don't agree with God's decision.  There is one story I like (which I can't find atm, so this is a rough description) where a monk is teaching a pupil about not feeling pity for those who do not believe in God since they were likely meant to be the kind of person they are.  It ends off with the monk saying that while a religious person may see someone in need and say "I will pray for you," an atheist may see that same person and say "I will help you."  If I were religious in any way, I would probably think of that as applying to all kinds of people, regardless of how they are.

 

Also, if anyone knows where to find the story I mentioned, please feel free to link it- I'd appreciate it.

 

Anyway, I hope this helps a bit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ace-actly

I think @Grimalkin is spot on and incredibly helpful especially with their reference to Matthew 7. As I recently came to recognise my place on the ace spectrum, one of my initial responses were

a) cool, I always liked what Paul said about the opportunity in singleness to grow in faith

b) Since my ace-ness is only the business of my SO and myself, why 'come out'?  (all respect to those who embrace the fullness of their identity and share it, you're incredible!) 

 

On the marriage side of things, hopefully they'd have an understanding of your asexuality and continue to support you. I wouldn't consider not having sex a sin at all, surely the most important part of marriage is support and commitment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now