Summary:
God has such a high value on sex that He designed it to be just for marriage.
The argument starts in Genesis. God makes Adam and Eve, marries them, and they enjoy sex as an expression of their unity: 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.' Gen 2:24 The implication is that you can't become one flesh physically (ie in sexual intercourse) without first being joined before God in marriage. This makes sense in that sex is a picture of giving yourselves completely to one another- this just isn't appropriate outside the safety net of marriage, where you have made a lifelong commitment to each other.
The high value God places on sex within marriage is emphasised throughout the Old Testament- most notably in the command against adultery (Ex 20:14). If you engage in pre-marital sex, you are in one sense being unfaithful to your future spouse. If the person ends up being someone you marry, you have still spoilt something special and unique meant for marriage only.
There are people in the Old Testament who disregard God's design for sex and marriage, and the result is always spiritual disaster. Look at Solomon: he had a ridiculous number of concubines (300!), and they had a terrible influence on him. He also married 700 women, and they 'turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God' (1 Kings 11:4). Solomon had built the temple and was gifted with wisdom from God, and yet in this matter he was blind to the warnings he was given, and so his kingdom was torn away from him (1 Kings 11:11). This ties into the idea that Christians going out with/marrying non Christians is spiritually damaging, because you are essentially uniting yourself with someone who is spiritually dead (see Ephesians 2 for the strong contrast between Christians and non-Christians, and 2 Cor 6 for instruction on not being 'yoked' with unbelievers).
The New Testament letters speak a lot about sexual purity. There are several key passages where 'fornication' (ie sex before marriage) is condemned (1 Cor 6:12- 7:40; Eph 5:1-7; 1 Thess 4:1-8), and in Hebrews 13:4 it says that the marriage bed should be kept pure, for God will judge the sexually immoral. The key emphasis in all these passages is that we've been saved by God's grace and set free from the crippling, disabling power of sin over our lives. Therefore our whole lives as Christians are about using that power to resist sin and live 100% for Jesus instead of being ruled by passion just like non-believers are.
When people have problems with what the Bible teaches on sex, it actually points to a bigger problem: their attitude towards God. Too often we are driven by our own desires for a relationship or physical intimacy, instead of putting God's agenda at the top of our priorities. If you're a Christian and you know another Christian who is struggling in this area, encourage them to draw closer to God. If you can, suggest meeting up together to read the Bible. Working through a short letter like 1 Thessalonians would only take a few sessions, and all you'd have to do is read it and discuss it. If they're really serious about being a Christian, they have to accept that it intrinsically means giving up what you want, and going God's way instead. And the joy of being a Christian is that God's way is so much better!!! As Paul writes, those things (sexual immorality included) lead to death. Why would we want to go back to them? (Romans 6:21)
Ultimately, we need to realise that God loves us far more than we comprehend. He loved us enough to send Jesus to die for us. Won't He give us anything that's good for us? Would He with hold the best from us? Of course not. (see Romans 8).
Therefore the Bible's teaching on sex and marriage is there to help us. God is FOR sex (he invented it!!!) and He has such a high value on it that he reserves it for those who are married. People who sleep with others before marriage are de-valuing sex. God's way is best because it preserves society and the family unit- look at the result of people sleeping together outside marriage: STDs, AIDS, broken homes, kids without fathers... And I hate to say it, but usually the girl in the relationship is the one with everything to lose and nothing to gain. A guy can sleep with someone and walk away; the girl ends up way more emotionally scarred and potentially with a baby to look after.
I think if a guy really loves you, he'd be willing to wait : Christian OR non Christian. But the real sticking point about Christians going out with non Christians is that they can't be a gospel team, working together to serve Jesus. One serves Jesus; the other belongs basically to the devil and is spiritually dead. I think one of the greatest blessings of Christian marriage is that you keep each other going with Jesus, pick each other up when you're down, lead each other back to the cross. However attracted you are to each other, it's the spiritual bond you share that will keep you going in the tough times.
6 comments:
Dear Sophie,
I think that there is a certain inevitability to my following point, in that if we are to place, and I would agree rightly, so much emphasis on the fullness of sex within marriage, does this not lead us further to saying that contraception is wrong? That is to say, if the highest form of sex is about the full giving of the self to another person out of love, how can we then separate one's (possible) fertility from the fullness of the self? That is to say that we can somehow remove aspects of ourselves but still give it all - surely a contradiction! Yes, we might then argue that we can experience pleasure from sex, and this is from God - certainly, but with contraception there is still a holding back. I cannot overlook this, personally.
The only response I can see to such arguments pro-contraception is that it doesn't actually diminish what God designed sex for - what about "Go forth and multiply". Yes, children are not the only purpose for sex, perhaps, but I think if one uses contraception, one is settling for a lesser form, a lower form, of sex. As Leibniz says, (sorry, my reading comes in!) "minus malum habet rationem boni, ita minus bonum habet rationem mali", " the lesser evil has an element of good, and hte lesser good has an element of evil".
I wonder what you think.
Phil
That IS an interesting question, Phil!
Just a note of something I have observed on this issue where it's a Christian/non-Christian relationship... I don't think it's the Christian who suffers as much as the non-Christian. If you are asking someone (especially a guy) to wait until marriage, that is a massively big deal for him (not least quite shameful for him in our culture), and a very difficult thing to do without God's help! I would definitely not want to try that without any motivation.
The Christian has a good reason, a strong belief about it, and the power to stick to it, but the non-Christian is completely unequipped. Why would they want to try that?! So it's pretty unfair and unloving for a Christian to put somebody else in that position.
This seems to me to be a big problem with Christians going out with non-Christians and thinking everything will work out fine. The non-Christian probably ends up feeling like the villain due to the disapproval of the Christian's friends, even if they're trying to play by the rules. But in reality it's the Christian who is not being fair by demanding the near-impossible of someone they are supposed to love. So bascially, don't go there!
Mel
Very interesting comments, guys. Thank you for posting.
Phil, I would say with contraception that I think planning a family is consistent with the Bible's view of sex, marriage and children. Nowhere in the Bible does it command that every act of sexual intercourse should be open to conception.
I do think that some methods of contraception are more legitimate than others- for example, some methods could be seen as abortive (IUD, morning after pill). But I don't think there's biblical justification for blanket banning it either.
Ultimately this is a matter of conscience. If a Christian couple are prayerfully planning a family and using contraception to control timing with a clean conscience, that is different to a couple who don't want children at all or are delaying having children for wrong motives.
Mel, I think you make a good point. A non Christian partner would probably always feel inadequate, because they would know that really the Christian would much prefer them to be a Christian. There must be tremendous pressure on them, and if there isn't, that is a worrying sign on the part of the Christian. All together, something to be completely avoided, as you say.
Thanks, just some follow up...
Sophie: that it isn't expressly forbidden doesn't mean to say it is not to be understood as forbidden - I think it would have been highly unlikely that contraception to any such degree of use or social permissibility would have been thought quite perverse actually - it certainly could be said to contribute to the diminution of sex, even within marriage. If we look at the Pope's recent statement (which is by no means a recantation) condoms used to prevent the spread of disease are not permissible, merely a sign that people, even when they don't want to, seem to see sex as a moral/ethical issue! As to whether a couple should be, even if prayerfully, planning their lives, as it were, can we do that? Should we do that even if we can? Look at the birth of Christ, or the sheer number of barren women who are all, by the grace of God, granted children. God works through sex, that is surely clear, but it seems unacceptable to me to say that God works through a failure of contraception. I think that is surely unbiblical, and not putting our whole lives into God's hands, even if we are praying for children, or not for children at this time.
Mel: I would disagree that it would be unfair or indeed impossible for a non-Christian to be expected to wait to have sex, or to even not use contraception, and that is for one reason: God. Now, even prior to Christ's birth, there was an idea of sexual morality, as Sophie highlights with Solomon. This use of women/sex was harmful, and distracts us from God, for the simple reason that it is surely not a relationship of love, which is, a relationship between people with God's help and influence. We must see here what we consider to be a valid marriage: do we need, for example, the Church to regard it as valid? As a Catholic, I certainly do, but where does that leave non-Catholic marriages? It would make little sense for me to say that marriages that are fully 'Christian', that is have the valid matter and form (two people who can get married, not for example brother and sister, and vows until death reflecting the right strength and breadth of married life) are not marriages - may they be blessed by God, and clearly they are. But similarly, although harder, perhaps, this Christian marriage as above, even if God's help is not even invoked explicitly, I could not say that they are 'not married' - that would be counterfactual, given there are so many examples of such relationships that are successful marriages of a couple until death to not recognise that God must be working there. I might say that I cannot be sure of their validity without a Christian witness, but certainly some even non-Christian marriages seem to be blessed by God, not least with children and love. To deny this, for me, suggests that God does not work in the non-Christian, and even if not overtly, clearly some people are blessed by God outside the visible Church. It is interesting to note, therefore, that if I wanted to marry a non-Christian, even an atheist, I would require permission from my bishop, and my wife would have to vow to never discourage me from the faith, indeed I believe help me as to how she could, and bring up all children in the faith. Perhaps this is not ideal, but certainly not impossible, and most definitely not an invalid marriage. I wonder what you both think?
Phil
Post a Comment