Monday, March 14, 2011

My First Ever Book Review (from 2006): Sex, Lies, and the Bible by Frank Ritter

This was published in the IU Kokomo Correspondent.  I have not edited it.  Enjoy!

When I first received the book “Sex, Lies, and the Bible; How Human Sexual Behavior is Controlled Through the Corruption of the Bible” I sort of scoffed.  I am an atheist and I do not need the sanction of God for any sexual activities I desire.  However, this is a very important book for Christians.  Francis D. “Frank” Ritter, CLI, does a very good job explaining some truths many people avoid.  As a forewarning, I do not agree with what Ritter says about sexuality, but for you who need the sanction of God to act this book is a great liberator. 

Ritter claims throughout the book that our sex drive is our third strongest drive; the first two strongest drives are for food and water.  He constantly refers to the antagonist of liberal sex to be “controllers” and their vehicle of corruption as the bible.  Frank Ritter is a Christian that views incest, masturbation, bestiality, sex outside of marriage, prostitution, and homosexuality all as perfectly acceptable.  He legitimately explains each one in accordance with the gospel and Jesus while rejecting the “fanaticism” of St. Paul and the Tempering of St. Jerome with the words of Jesus. 

This book leads people to question the very foundation of the bible, the canonization.  Why do people so blindly believe that the bible as a whole is a God breathed article of literature?  People accept the Godly nature of scripture similarly to the way college students accept that big business is evil, blindly and without question.  How does a Christian come to the realization that activities like incest, prostitution, and sex outside of marriage are ok.  Let me summarize some of his main points.

Incest would probably be the most controversial topic in this book.  Does the bible, or rather does God ban incest?  First we must do away with the idea that sex is for procreational purposes only.  Ritter does this in chapter 10 when talking about why Moses made the laws he did.  Before the nation of Israel reached the Promised Land for the first time Ritter said, “The Israelites still masturbated, and they still engaged in incest.  They were still having sexual relations not only with people other than their spouses, but with prostitutes and harlots, and animals too.”  If people aren’t procreating while having sex then incest, according to the God, is ok.  Anyone who says it is not has a lot research to do.  To reiterate, rape not incest.

This is all fact.  Lot had sex with his daughter’s creating two highly favored nations, Abraham’s wife Sarah got it on with Pharaoh.  According to Ritter all these activities and the many other that were occurring before Mosaic Law was set in place were acceptable to God and there is absolutely no reason to believe otherwise.  Ritter explained that Mosaic Law was meant to encourage procreation but has been twisted by people to mean that sex should be done only for procreational purposes. 

In Chapter 12 Ritter shows how the Sermon on the Mount is not acceptance of Mosaic Law because Jesus directly contradicts it.  Ritter points out that Matt. 5: 38-39 contradict Ex. 21:24-25.  For space purposes look those versus up and read them for yourself. 

Ritter defines adultery as Moses would define it and as he claims Christ would define it.  On page 251 he said, “Moses’s definition of ADULTERY was: One spouse having carnal knowledge of another outside of the marriage without the knowledge and consent of the spouse.”  In other words group orgies and gangbangs are ok as long as you have permission!

Ritter does a well enough job tearing apart certain sexual restrictions we have today but is incest really ok?  His philosophy seems to be “as long as God says it’s ok than it goes.”  First of all, however, the belief in God is ridiculous let alone interpreting what may or may not be his word.  What is sex anyways?  It is a celebration of ones body.  How can we to this with an animal or a child?  Ayn Rand had a much better view of sex, the only truly free way of having sex.  By needing a God Ritter needs permission.  Acting by permission is not an act of freedom or even freethinking.  Any religious sanction on an action requires an individual to give up his individuality, not to mention that God does not exist and therefore religious sanction is a human and often fouled construct. 

Overall this is a great book for those who need sanction to live.  For others it may tear them from overbearing Christian mores.  For atheist it should mean very little except that “God’s” word can really mean anything you want depending on your view of the canonization.   

No comments:

Post a Comment