Are Sex and Spirituality like Water and Oil?

I have a long time friend in Germany. He knows about Eckankar, but years ago chose a different path.

But he reads books from Eckankar, and to say the least, he is a friend of Eckankar. Recently we had a short encounter and he mentioned that in the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, the main Book of Eckankar, it is mentioned that man shall not become animalistic and dwell in sex to satisfy his/her lust.

Love and sex always had played an important part in my life. But I had felt my mind played a more important part. I was lucky to have my first sexual encounter at a very early age. No, I was not abused, I was probably the one using the other person. But it was also a time where I was a very good christian. Probably not from a moralistic point of view, but in a spiritual sense.

God was part of my life and so was the puberty. But due to my early experience in contrast to my "friends" I did not speculate to much about sexuality but has my mind free for God.

Before I was 15 I was thrown out of the paradise we call faith. It was lunch time at work and we workers gathered, ate our lunch and discussed various things of course woman and also God. One of the older Workmates made a statement which as a consequence made me an atheist. As far as I can see now, out of croup of maybe 10, I was the only one affected. Strangely then also began a long drought in love and sex (about from 15 until 19). Writing this, it occurred to me, that there might be a connection I had not seen earlier.

About 40 years later

Maybe my falling out of faith had made me more critical towards the christian teaching. Maybe because of my strong sexual drive the body hostility of the christian teachings rebuked me. Why would God give me "Lust" if it was a sin.
Correction: Why would God give me a sexual drive if it was not to be used. Even Eckankar says that a seeker should not indulge in lust! For me Lust is satisfying my own desires. And if my desires control me I am addicted. 

Maybe it is not really wrong to say that I had an addiction to love. But when I hear the word Lust, I become uneasy. Is it still lust if my desire is not to satisfy my desire but that of my partner? Is it not an act of love to hold my satisfaction back to allow her to have hers?

At the end of my sexual prime not only my lust declined but also my desire to get involved, in love. In German there is a green joke

A man basically is surprised twice in his  life: 

The first time when when he cannot perform a second time

and the second time he is surprised when he cannot perform the first time.

With the declining sexual desire I observed a new freedom. It was a shocking experience. I always had thought I am a spiritual being (not a moralistic one), but now with the lessened desire I had a choice! Did I not have it before?

Yes, I could chose if I go after her or not, but I had no choice to find her attractive (fairly independent from her looks).

Do I enjoy this "new "freedom?

Of course I do, but I also miss the desire.

So the Church is right to say lust is bad? Body hostility is good?

I do not think so!

God gave us the hormone level we have to fight with, so it is good. 

If it declines in later age we are free to focus on other things. We can look back on our life and learn from it, or we can prepare to go into the other world and are not so much distracted my the hormonal needs.

I like to think that the churches favor a sex free life to control us via guilt. But originally before, when the church was a body of love, not one of power,  it meant the freedom from sex, older men and woman experience. They did not know that we are under hormonal control. And the more sex we have the lower our hormonal level, or without sex and masturbation the hormonal level rises and more and more controls us. The more we become less ourselves".

So, if I am right, if the churches asks us to refrain from sex, they ask us to more and more become subject to our hormones.

But what if the hormones are the real evil? 

Nice line of thought! I invite you to follow it!