Plato’s Symposium and St. Augustine’s City of God represent seemingly opposing ideas about human sexuality.  Alcibiades and most people of Plato’s time feel human sexuality as a result of love is a wonderful gift.  Pausanias, Aristophanes and Socrates, however, give speeches contrasting this view which St. Augustine echoes in his book City of God.  Although their religions and final verdicts on human sexuality are different, St. Augustine and Plato share many thoughts about love and human sexuality.
     One of the most obvious statements explaining what the Greeks expect in terms of human sexuality is Alcibiades’ speech about Socrates.  In his eulogy, he recounts his relationship with Socrates.  Alcibiades complains that Socrates is not a typical lover.  While Alcibiades expects Socrates to whisper “sweet nothings” and “think[s] that something [is] bound to happen” at the gymnasium, Socrates disappoints him (Plato 568).  Alcibiades even goes so far as to invite Socrates to dinner.  Alcibiades, like most Greeks of the time, believes human sexuality is extraordinary and is meant to be shared.  That is why is he so hurt when "[he] got up next morning [and he] had no more slept with Socrates, within the meaning of the act, than if [Socrates] had been [his] father or an elder brother” (Plato 570).  The people of Plato’s time feel human sexuality as a result of love is a blessing.  Diotima tells Socrates “there’s a divinity in human propagation” (Plato 558), and Agathon claims love is “the loveliest and the best” of all the Gods (Plato 547). By thinking that Love is a God, Plato and his friends believe he is wonderful and beautiful.  However, there are a few people who disagree.
     Pausanias is the first to suggest there may be a bad side to sexuality.  He argues there are two types of love: earthly and heavenly.  The three characteristics of earthly love are loving women, having “desires. . . of the body rather than of the soul,” and “looking forward to the mere act of fruition” (Plato 535).  This definition shows that some people only lust.  Pausanias differentiates between the two types of love by regarding how people perform them.  He says, “if done rightly and finely, the action will be good;  if it is done basely, bad” (Plato 535).  Pausanias recognizes that lust, not love, attracts many people, and that this attraction is not honorable.
     Aristophanes also presents an abnormal side of love.  He tells the audience an amusing tale about the origin of lust and love.  He believes that lust and love are the result of a punishment; that human beings were originally two people in one ball and Zeus separated them because they were trying to reach the Gods.  Consequently, these half-people spend all their time trying to find their other half (Plato 543).  Even though Aristophanes believes love is a result of a punishment, he claims “the happiness of the whole human race. . . is to be found in the consummation of our love, and in the healing of our dissevered nature by finding each his proper mate” (Plato 546).  So, Aristophanes’ story has a happy ending; even though humans sinned, they are allowed to achieve happiness by finding and loving their other halves.
     Socrates, too, goes against the normal view that love is beautiful and wonderful.  He argues that love is neither beautiful nor ugly; neither god nor mortal; neither good nor bad.  Diotima and he agree that love is a man’s longing for “the good to be his own for ever” (Plato 559).  The only way it can be his forever is through immortality, which he can achieve either through propagation or through fame.  They also agree that love progresses from the love of one body to the love of all bodies.  From there, man “must grasp that the beauties of the body are as nothing to the beauties of the soul” (Plato 562).  This will lead him to the love of institutions, and to finally the love of the “one single form of knowledge, the knowledge of the beauty,” better known as the knowledge of the form of good (Plato 562).  Socrates’ view of love as a natural progression toward the form of the good goes almost entirely against most of his friends’ beliefs.  It does, however, sound like modern Christian thought on the true reason for love.
     Like Pausanias, St. Augustine also believes lust is bad.  He refers to it as “morbid lust” (Augustine 583) and even comments “a man would prefer, if possible, to beget children without lust” (Augustine 577).  While Pausanias divides sexuality and love into heavenly and earthly, Augustine lumps all sexuality together as bad.  St. Augustine also argues that “Platonists. . . acknowledged that anger and lust are perverted elements in man’s character, or soul. . . They are disturbed and undisciplined emotions” (Augustine 580).  He goes as far as to say that people consider sex a private act because of the shame that occurs with lust (Augustine 579).  Shame is an important factor in St. Augustine’s argument that sexuality is bad.
     Both St. Augustine and Aristophanes agree that lust and love are the results of punishment.  The details are different, but the general story line is the same.  Both have humans doing something that displeases their God.  As a result He punishes them by the introduction of lust and love.  While Aristophanes accepts this punishment as an eventual blessing, St. Augustine detests it and feels humans should be embarrassed by it.  He calls private parts “pudenda”, or parts of shame (Augustine 578).  St. Augustine also believes man’s inability to control his private parts' response to stimulus mirrors God’s inability to control Adam and Eve (Augustine 578).  He concludes “it is right, therefore, to be ashamed of this lust” since it is a punishment (Augustine 578).  In this whole argument, however, St. Augustine makes no real mention of God.  He dwells on man’s sins and admonishes his readers for having “indecent thoughts” before he even starts to explain how procreation without lust might have occurred (Augustine 587).
     St. Augustine misses the heart of Christian argument about human sexuality, however.  The Bible does say that God punished man because of his sin, and that this punishment caused embarrassment or shame.  On the other hand, the Bible also says “each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband” (I Corinthians 7:2 NIV).  It goes on to command “do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time” (I Corinthians 7:5 NIV).  Not only does the Bible allow sexual relations within a marriage, it also blesses them.  Proverbs 5:18-19 says “may your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth.  A loving doe, a graceful deer-- may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be captivated by her love.”  St. Augustine in his attack on human sexuality forgets the most important aspect of it-- God created it.  He might have done this as a punishment, but it is still one of God’s gifts.
     St. Augustine and Plato present similar views of human sexuality in the Symposium and the City of God.  They both introduce the idea that lust is bad, and is a result of sin.  Plato concludes his arguments about lust and human sexuality by realizing that love is a means to become acquainted with God.  St. Augustine misses this point, however, and concludes that all sexuality is wrong.  St. Augustine’s vehement arguments against human sexuality intrigue this reader and make her wonder if his arguments might have something to do with his disdainful description of sexual dysfunction.