A couple of comments come to mind. First, as an undergrad I had a religion prof that theorized that in creation when Adam was created, Adam was actually created a hermaphrodite and when God makes Eve, He does so by taking the femaleness from Adam and thus making him fully male. He further theorized then that this is part of makes men and women attracted to each other. I did not buy it then and I still do not, but interesting theory in any case.

Secondly, it seems crucial that we communicate so that others understand. I am fully on board with recrafting our words and changing how we speak about love, but in my opinion it is far more important or at least should be considered first how others hear the words we speak. As at the recent conference, it takes speaking in love with humility and patience.

Good thoughts Tom! I look forward to walking this way with you!

The claim that, “love is sex misspelled” is very faulty. Although love, in the context of marriage, includes sex, it is misguided to equate the two. As Dr. Oord rightfully notes, there are many instances of love that are not sexual. Love of friends, family, and enemies are only a few instances of love that would not qualify as sexual love.

I agree that sex cannot be interchangeable with love.  While both words are typically used interchangeably in this culture, I disagree that this is accurate.  I agree that sex can definitely be an act of love if meant in a way to promote love or “wellbeing”.  Although in this definition I just wondered if this act of love can only be displayed during marriage, because this was not addressed.

I really liked how you explained different definitions of why humans are attracted to each other. It reminded me of my lifespan development class. In the class we talked about physical attraction, socio-economic attraction, and an evaluation of characteristics. Meaning that we as humans want to get our genes to the next generation and we are attracted to someone who we think also has good genes to pass on. This was a new way of thinking of attraction for me and kind of challenging. I believe it is important for the definition of love to contain eros but not be limited to eros.

Love is definitely not sex misspelled.  Love and sex are two very different things, though the act of sex as an expression of love can be important in a marriage.  These days we see a lot of people having sex just because and even confusing that with love.
When the passion dies down it is the love and the friendship a couple has built that keeps that relationship going.

Love and sex are most certainly two different things.  Alot of people may think they are similar but I think it all has to do with your beliefs and the things that you have learned about love and sex.  I think that sex can be an expression of love (although unfortunately it may not always be that way.)  When you find your one true love then sex is definetly an expression and a way of demonstrating the love that you two feel for each other.  Sex and love are terms that will always have more than one meaning and a topic of controvery in meaning and expression.

This is how I’ve always thought about the relationship between love, sex, and romance.  That love can be a part of sex, but also that sex can exist in the absence of love is not a new concept to me.  From the time I was little, my dad always talked about love not being just a feeling (i.e. physical attraction, ooie-gooie happiness).  He would ask, “If love is just a feeling, what happens when a husband and wife argue or get made, can they still love each other?”  My dad and my mom modeled very consistently, that love was promoting the well-being of the other.  Whether they were fighting or expressing feelings of attraction and admiration for the each other, I always knew they loved each other; that love was much more that just sex or romance, but that love could exist within those.

I would agree that sex is not another word for love.  They can interrelate but often not.  I feel like our society today is often taking love away from sexuality and reducing it to nothing more than physical pleasure and sexual gratification. As a biology major it is simple to tell that human sexuality go far beyond the instincts to pass on our genes and there are many things that make human distinct from other animals.  Humans are the only species I know of that face each other during intercourse.  Also humans are one of the few if not only species were the female has an orgasm as well as the male.  Those things alone suggest that human sexuality was designed for relationship, intimacy,and pleasure.  I would also say that it is designed to be in the context of love and marriage.

I agree that eros should be defined to also be looking out for well-being just as with other forms of love such as agape or philia. When fully committed to the well-being of oneself and others, a person can engage in a romantic, eros love. However, the exact same actions, when done with selfish or malicious intentions can cause extreme harm to all involve, both directly and indirectly. As with any other use of the word “love”, the situations in which it is applied should be carefully thought through.

I think that we walk a dangerously line when we mistakenly think of “Love as Sex misspelled.” Love and Sex obviously go hand-in-hand when the time is right, but my observation is that when a couple decides to push the limits of sex in their relationship before they’re: a) ready for it or b) married, then the dynamics of their relationship immediately change for the worse. Sex when it is not promoting the overall well-being cheapens the meaning of what Love truly is and truly can be.

I have never seen it written so plainly how humans choose a mate. It is interesting to think that subconsciously women could be choosing a spouse because of the things listed above-status, power and wealth. The reason given above is that she chooses a man who possesses these traits because he will protect her offspring. I think that because of the media this could be more true than ever. Our society places weight on wealth and status and we are taught that these things are important for happiness. Yet, I believe that wealth can make a relationship easier, it does not ensure the level of happiness or security for a woman’s offspring

My goodness, Love is not complicated.  I have been married for a good while now.  I treasure my wife.  We are more passionate today than we were years ago.  Jesus has a way of making love so powerful that it cannot be explained!  Your spouse becomes your best friend, one that only takes a back seat to Jesus himself.

It really is very simple when Jesus is at the center.

I think love is a strong word that often time is used in-correctly whether it be an accident of not knowing its real meaning or not; the word should be used wisely. I would agree that love is not sex misspelled and I think its silly to say that it is. Sex at times can have absolutely nothing to do with love; for some its just a way to fill a emotional gap or feeling that they can not fulfill otherwise. It made me sad when you said, “We who have once fallen in love also know that the initial burst of attraction often does not last.” Although attraction is not what I think a relationship and love should be based off, I do think that it is an important factor, maybe not in loving someone but to be intimate toward someone most definitely.

I don’t really think that there is much confusion in the fact that sex is not equal to true love. I believe two people can show perfect love for one another and not have a sexual relationship and that most people know that what they find in sex alone is not complete love. I also think that sex is a natural process for two people who do share their love. I would find it odd for a couple to be in a loving marriage and not have sexual relations.

I my own theory, I disagree completely when referring evolutionary principles to the concepts of “love” and “sex”. For one, I don’t believe in evolution and find it completely ridiculous as a theory. One should be careful to relate to primitive apes as human relatives because the theory of evolution is still just a theory. I believe that God created sex to show its true power in a physical way.  Love is such a potent and mysterious inward emotion and that’s why I believe that God created two sides of it. There is nothing more beautiful and intimate than the physical union of two humans (under the appropriate circumstances) and the intense feelings of passion and pleasure that ensue. Used how God intended, sex can be the ultimate representation of what it means to love and be loved.

I think that God initially designed sex to be an intimate expression of love, but our society and media skewed it. With movies where friends act shocked that they haven’t had sex by the third date, it’s harder for people to see the love that can be there. I do not think sex equals love. I agree with the idea that when it is done to promote the other’s well being, such as in a married relationship, then it is an act of love. If you come to sex through love, that is an expression of love that God has given us. If you come to love through sex, that is not a love-based or godly thing.

I agree with your definition of love and sex. I agree that they can be separate and the same but never both all of the time. Girls are raped and that is not considered out of love or for their well being, so I do agree that love is not always sex. Sex can be an expression of love at times, as you stated. I really like your point that love creates well-being but also seeks well-being. I do not agree with the entire evolution theory because that is not something I believe in but it is a good point to compare knowledge bases to.

The myth of love seems pretty wild to me, I had never heard of it before. Finding one’s soul mate seems to be common knowledge, but I did not realize it came from this story. I find the biological explanation to be a bit raw, how can a human know if the others genetics is good and if the couples genes combined are going to compromise one another to produce viable offspring. The biological definition leaves out reason and relation.
I would agree that sex and love are not the same and that sex is an expression of one’s love. I think because sex is no longer valued as a sacred act within marriage alone and is often engaged in outside of marriage, sex has been confused as love. Sex can promote well-being for another, but we have to have pure intentions of promoting well-being because sex in terms of one’s hormones and emotions can be very complicated and can misguide.

I find the different theories presented in this blog interesting but I do not agree with all of them. However, I do agree that love can be love without using sex or romance to describe it. Sex can be an action of love when like Dr. Oord said “used for the well-being.” But when sex is used in a ill-manner it can no longer be an action of love. Romance to me is just a word that really has no meaning. What does it mean to be romantic? Is it when you spouse brings you home a dozen roses or is it when he throws out the trash? I think society today has turned the terms sex and romance to met their standards and expectations.

The particular images of beauty we find, becomes interchangeable across people and things, ideas, and art: to love is to love the Platonic form of beauty-not a particular individual, but the element they posses of true beauty - then true beauty becomes somewhat subjective. The love that goes by Plato’s definition seems to be such a “light” love. The special love people find should be in each other’s virtues-one soul and two bodies. It is make love to be of a higher status, ethically, aesthetically, and even metaphysically than the love that behaviorists or physicalists describe.

I think it’s interesting that this blog is started with an “ancient love myth” and then uses the evolutionary theory to defend and support the definitions of love, sex and romance that are presented.  How is the love myth of gods becoming angry and tearing the human in half any different than insisting humans came from primates or slime?
However, while I disagree with most of the evolutionary theory, I do agree with the definition of eros and love presented in this blog.  I just wish more of the evidence had come from the human species and studies done based on them, and not focused on creatures who may or may not have a soul.

I believe the “force” that drives people of the opposite sex together is the simple fact that God made us that way. In the words of God, “It is not good for man to be alone,” and I think this can be extended to women. Each human is designed to need someone of the opposite sex for an intimately close relationship. In our fallen state, we can twist this desire into, for instance, a pure desire for sex without the relationship that goes with it, or some other perversion, but the design is for us not to be alone. I know that some people are called to celibacy, but I believe God gives these people a special gift of grace to be able to handle that call.

I do not think love and sex are the same at all. The one thing i do agree with is that the media often betray them as the same thing. I feel in today’s society it is hard to find the differance between the two because things are different. Instead of waiting for marraige for sex, people are willing to give up sex for the smallest attraction and call it love because its the easy way out.

Love and sex go great together in marriage, but when you take marriage out of the picture sex and love could be farther apart. When your not married and you put those two together you will have a disaster waiting to happen. Love and sex can and should go to together in a romantic relationship, but love should come first then marriage then sex. Evolutionary theories, I believe, do not play apart in the reason of why people have the desire to find their sole mate. I believe it is because that is how God made us. He made us to want to have that desire to find that special someone.

I agree that love and the act of sex are two very different things. If not, then I need to stop telling a lot of my friends I love them, because we are not having sex. In today’s society these two words seem to be interchangeable to most, due the medias effect on us.

I agree that sex and romance should not be equated to love.  It is possible to have sex with someone or romance someone without having love for them or doing it for their well-being.  However, it could be argued that love is equatable to sex and romance even when a person is engaging in these acts without the purpose of promoting the other’s well-being.  Often times I think you could consider these acts, acts of self-love; which promote that own person’s overall well-being (enhancing confidence, self-worth, etc.).  But I think this is more so the perception of the person in this position at that time, who is looking for ways to increase their self-worth, or well-being.  However, in the process of promoting their well-being through these means it isn’t necessarily increased long-term.

I would agree that sex and romance should not take the same definition as love. Its sad to see in todays society that so many people are using sex to mean love. The media I believe has a huge influence of this distorted view of such a sacred act and feeling.  You can have sex with someone and not love them at all. I think the key thing in relationships is the solid foundation of friendship in order to keep love and romance alive. I believe that over time you cannot solely rely on romance to keep the relationship going. if we relied only on sex and romance to save our relationships, we wouldn’t have any.

I found this particular blog very interesting. I think its odd that we go through our everyday lives talking about love and our reasons behind it without a real definition. Without defining love, we don’t pay attention to whether or not we are truy trying to promote overall well being or if we are using the word love in the wrong context.
I think it is really important to focus on the different types of love and how they can be expressed. Having an overall view of what truly constitutes love enables us to avoid situations where we are surround or involved in “false” love- Sex, even though highly associated with love in our society today, does not always promote overall well being and thus cannot always be viewed as a form of true, genuine love.

I liked this reading it was interesting to hear all of the different takes on what love means including the sex and romance part. I myself have to agree that love has to do with the romance but more than that it has a deeper meaning and connection when it is there and promotes the well-being of that other person when there isn’t that burning roll of emotions. I also think that because in today’s society we use the word love to explain sex or romance that it has led us to bewilderment when we get asked what the definition of love is. I definitely want to work on using other words to define romance and sex and leave the word love to itself.

I liked the discussion on eros and how it was defined as a type of love when promoting well being.  I do think that society often skews the meaning of eros to deal only with sexual matters.  But if eros is being used in the sense of promoting good then I think it is then under the umbrella definition of love.  In my opinion romance has its’ place but if it is being used under the wrong contexts then romance doesn’t belong being associated with love.

This blog post presented some interesting theories and ideas. Although I may not agree with them all I find them very interesting. First I agree that sex an love are not one in the same. I believe this because in today’s society there is so much sex that is love less. Wether that be rape or just sex to fill a void or sex with false love. Also, love and sex can coincide. This is what I think it meant to be. I believe God wants sex to be love filled. To promote the well being.

Another interesting thing stated was “We who have once fallen in love also know that the initial burst of attraction often does not last.” I find it very interesting that you say this and agree. Those who have been in love I believe agree with this. Those who have been in premature love I believe see this statement as false, harsh or sad. But i believe this is something that all strong marriages or loving relationships encounter.

When you talked about the biological studies of love and sex, and how evolution effects these two aspects of human nature, it reminded me of a species of monkeys (i forget the species name) whose members have sex with any other monkey, regardless of whether that monkey is it’s mate, or even of the opposite gender. Obviously, having sex with anyone who will agree to it, regardless of gender or anything, goes against almost all of the biblical teachings and is a completely self-seeking action. But this example of the monkeys makes me wonder. Are these monkeys further down the evolutionary path than we are? and can we see our future through their example?
We have already fallen into the “iWorld” where society puts an emphasis on being completely self satisfying and only doing what is best for yourself, but will it actually go that far? I’m not trying to debate the morality of homosexuality, but simply the morality of sex regardless of any relationships, sex that is purely motivated by the desire for pleasure. It’s a scary future if these monkeys have any indication on what we are headed towards.

or maybe they are just monkeys, that is a perfectly valid argument as well.

This was a very insightful blog about the differences and similarities between love and sex. I completely agree with the statement love is not sex and I agree that you can express love through sex, although sexual activity is not always expressing love. I think it is very difficult for couples to separate love from sex and romance. I recently had some friends that broke up after being together for five years because the initial spark was gone. I really appreciate the last line of your blog, “Love seeks well-being when the fires of romance rage.  But love also promotes well-being when passions die down to embers or ashes”. If you really love someone that you are in a romantic relationship with, you are there with them even when its not easy, fun, or exciting. It is interesting how many studies have been done on love and sex. It is obviously an important topic and if we are called to love, it should basically be of the highest importance in our lives.

The line “But I suspect that we would all gain greater appreciation for the word “love” if we were more careful how we use it “ really grabbed my attention.  The word love is often times thrown around to describe so many different things, but it is also thrown around between friendly exchanges or posts on someone’s profile page.  The power that love holds is so great that the over use of the word, without a further thought on what the word actually means, diminishes our recognition of that power. I strongly agree that love is active through the passion stages and through the embers or ashes stages.  Promotion of well-being can be sought and expressed in many different ways. I agree that love is not sex misspelled, but sex may be love misrepresented.

This blog was really interesting to me. It seemed like there was a lot of thought condensed into a short blog. Right away the blog touched on music, which can definitely be seen as some form of expression of what people feel. Just how much can we read into every song? Likewise, when should we look at songs as “guides”? After this the blog quickly touched on what keeps relationships together. So what does really make a relationship last? The ancient love myth was one I haven’t heard before. I liked how it suggested that we are stronger with our other half. The blog went from this myth to science pointing out that as history as moved on, we have moved more from “story” to “fact”. I’m curious as to how this movement is related to the Bible. The Bible holds many “stories” that are used to teach. Should we lose sight of all of these myths? Or can we still learn things from them as well? Further, how much of the Bible will we strive to move away from? And is this good or bad, limiting or enhancing to us?

I agree with what you are saying in this article. I do believe that romance and sex can be used as ways to show love to your significant other, but they can be detrimental to others as well. I agree with your idea of promoting the well being of others. If it does not promote well being I do not think it can be considered love. The problem with this, is people especially young people, believe that they are in “love” with someone and actually it is more lust they are feeling. This can be a problem with the definition of love because these people do believe they are promoting well being and actually they are not. How would we discuss this with them, when they feel like they are doing the right thing?

Everyones definition or belief of love will differ from one another. I think that it is difficult to explain why we love. Research can give us clues as to why we choose the type of partner that we do but I also think that some is not possible of explaining. I agree that attraction affects our choices in a significant other but I do not always think that it is what initially draws us to that person. To show love you do not need sex and romance. I agree that love seeks well being first and then from that can come romance. You must fully commit to the well being of oneself and others to be able to experience eros love.

I have never before seen love, sex, and romance so objectively discussed using different fields of study and differing lines of thought. It seems to me that in the present way we look at these terms it is backwards from traditional thinking. In a modern relationship it is not uncommon to try and find love through sex and romance when it would seem much more fulfilling the other way around. As you said these sexual attractions fade after the puppy dog love phase. When those have faded what is left if that emotional connection of love is not established.

Particularly within our demographic of students at a Christian university, the idea that love is not synonymous with sex is not unfamiliar. However, while it may seem to be a tired and obvious statement, at least a subconscious belief in it permeates society, and residual effects seep into Christian circles. Music, movies, the media and countless other sources bombard us with information and perpetuate the idea that we can find the love we long for through superficial sexual gratification. We must be diligent to guard our hearts and minds and not let these false values influence our subconscious and sway our thinking.

I really liked this blog and agreed with what you said. I found it really interesting the way you described love using the biological, psychological, evolutionary, etc. I agree that love is not sex misspelled. Sex may be a way to express love, but it is certainty not the definition of it. Our world today has a hard time understanding this, and I think as Christians it is our responsibility to show the true meaning of love.

I completely agree that love and sex are very different. Sex should be an act of love, but we are taught in our culture that is something to be freely given to anyone we are attracted too. We are taught to have fun and feel good, not to consider the happiness and well-being of those around us. A good relationship and marriage should be so much more then friendship and sex, it is a partnership that is no longer taken seriously because we do not put others first.

I have personally never heard of the ancient myth of love, but it does help possibly explain to the people of the past why we have a desire to seek out another to love and be loved.  In my opinion though, I believe that humanity has only one innate desire: To be loved by another or those around you.  However, this needs to be a two-way street.  In order to be loved by someone, you need to learn to love him or her in return.  And personally, I subscribe to the idea that love is an emotion, while that can include sexual attraction, is something that is beyond that need.  To me, it not simply a genetic desire to preserve our own genes or mate, but something that we cannot understand, but must somehow find in our lives.

It is sad to me when I realize that people often consider sex justified without love. Someone may be romantically involved with someone, but leave out love completely. Acts of love and acts of sex are two completely different things. It does get frustrating how science thinks that it needs to find a theory or a definition for everything. Sex can be well-defined as a biological term, but when trying to define love, science pauses. They are two different things, but together they make up what God intended for a man and a woman to experience together in love.

It is interesting to think about how different humans in history have sought alternatives to what God intended for sex and love. Obviously, this is a very heated debate among people. It saddens me that there are/were religious structures that promote polygamy and other sexual beliefs. One could look at Christianity and also point fingers because we can be close-minded in our beliefs. I don’t want to be close-minded, but I also don’t want to disregard the Truth. I am not saying that I know what the truth is, but it scares me to see how Christians have accepted philosophies based on relativism, especially in this area of sex and romance.

I definitely agree with what you stated. I know I often hear people use the word love for the act of sex. Love is not sex misspelled. When people have sex for reason other what you said as increasing overall well being it is not love. Love can include sex when those two people have sex for the right reasons. In my mind those reason are not for personal gain such as pleasure but rather sex in the right way and time is an expression of your love meant to bring each other closer together. It is complicated trying to distinguish when sex is a part of love and when it is not. For those that are sexually active I feel that their intentions during sex are what make the difference.

I do not think sex and love are the same. There are many instances where there is a loving relationship where a sexual relationship is not present. For instance, the love someone has for their family or friends has no correlation with a sexual love. Sex is an expression or act of love meant for a marriage relationship.

I found the reasons for marriage to be very interesting. While I do agree with the two reasons for marriage, I think there are a lot more reasons why people get married.  It seems, especially in religious communities, that people get married in order to have sex. In this case I think sex is mistaken for love and vice versa. Getting married for this reason is wrong because the couple builds up enough emotions to make them feel like they love each other enough to have sex. Once sex is over many relationships that start out this way fail because they have already experienced sex, which was a huge reason why the couple decided to get married.

In the world we live in today, casual sex happens all the time. One night stands occur every night and people seem to like the freedom of being able to sneak out and have the ‘walk of shame.‘With this said, love and sex are not the same thing. These casual sex occurrences lack love and respect for the other person. It is not valuing the person as who they are, but only as they pleasure they can bring you for a brief moment of time. Sex can be a part of love, but is not the definition of love. It is sad that something meant to be an expression of love between two committed people became so distorted. So we must separate love and sex and distinguish them from one another, in order to preserve the sanctity of love.

When you talk about “burning passion” or the “smoldering embers” I feel that we are actually talking about the relational and sexual maturity people are experiencing. Most people refer to the burning passion in a relationship to sex but why is it limited to that. I can experience burning passion towards what I want to do in life or my calling and my spouse can help fuel that flame and I fuel theirs. People limit the passion in a marriage to sex and I think its because of the emphasis society puts on sex and how skewed or misguided our view ends up being on sex. I think we set up ourselves for failure when we focus to much on sex in marriage, don’t get me wrong it is a very important aspect to a marriage, but when we worry less on what we get and focus more on what we can provide the passion never has to end and can be so much more than you can imagine. When we focus less on ourselves the spiritual and relational aspect of sex start to understand the other aspects sex has to offer, besides procreation.