Women and Sexual Sin, Part 2


Many are unwilling to completely abandon the Freudian ideas of a sex-driven society and have attempted to explain Christian morality with a psychological bent. Secular ideas have been given Christian-sounding names and have been sold as biblical truth. According to a United Methodist clergy member and clinical psychologist, sexual sin has only occurred when “genital contact involves an imbalance of power.” This definition was followed by two examples, child molestation and abuse by clergy. Dr. McClintock writes that the church should rid itself of sexual shame not by talking through the biblical stances concerning sex, but rather by accepting the varying sexual activities taking place in the lives of church members and celebrating them all as an expression of God’s love for humanity.

This argument is an attempt to gain approval of society’s embrace of all sexual behavior as good. By saying God is love and any showing of love is from God, the attempt is made to put God’s seal of approval on activities that are blatantly against teachings in Scripture. But many in Christianity are unwilling to call sin what it is, and instead of teaching about a God who is simultaneously loving and just, they teach that God simply wants his children to be happy. Dr. Heimbach also stated that “with the rise of modernism, an opposing, permissive approach to sexual morality rose to usurp the traditional approach in American culture.” This modern approach makes the argument that “families depend on being happy, and no one is compelled to stay in a family if he or she is unhappy.” No where in Scripture will a passage be found that says that God just wants his children to be happy.God desires what is best for His creation, and the laws He gave concerning our interactions with one another are for our own good, to bring us hope and a future. Much like a father that truly loves his child will set parameters on her behavior, God’s rules are not to stymie our happiness, but to protect us and bring us joy from experiencing His gifts in the best way possible.

There are many passages, however that do say how God expects his children to behave; God expects his children to behave in a holy manner. “You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own” (Leviticus 20:26). The Heavenly Father doesn’t necessarily expect his children to be happy, but he does expect them to be holy, and this holiness should be an integral part of every facet of the life of a believer.

Many consider “holy sex life” to be an oxymoronic phrase, but the Bible has much to say about healthy, holy sexual behavior. Scripture also includes many passages concerning unhealthy and sinful sexual behavior and how an individual can get from unhealthy to healthy, and vice versa. God’s high standard for holiness in sexuality is described well by one Christian writer:
Countless adults enter into all sorts of sexual sin through illicit conversation, off-color teasing, flirting, and inappropriate demonstrations of affection. As long as they don’t commit fornication, they rationalize that they haven’t done anything wrong.

If we’re going to be protected against sexual seduction, we must recognize a radical standard of holiness…. The Word of God uses a very strong command for times when we are tempted to sexual immorality: flee! (1 Cor. 6:18). Scripture tells us to run for our lives from sexual sin (Beth Moore, When Godly People do Ungodly Things, p.164).

Many women find themselves in serious trouble sexually because they wanted to see just how far they could go without crossing the line of appropriateness. God’s call to holiness is not one of toeing the line and seeing just how much one can get out of the world without being in the world. Holiness is a call to be as close to the Father as possible, of clinging to him wholeheartedly. Another author describes holiness in this manner:
Holiness is the image of God put in moral terms…Scripture presents holiness as something extremely positive. We could list a lot of things the Bible says are not holy, but that would tell us nothing about holiness in a positive sense… Holiness in the positive sense is nothing other than measuring up to the character of God, which qualifies us to receive wonderful benefits from an intimate relationship with God (Daniel Heimbach, True Sexual Morality, p. 142-143).

There is absolutely nothing in the character of God that allows for the attitude of finding out how far is “too far.” If Christians are commanded to flee even sexual temptation, there is certainly no indication that one would be ok spiritually to stick around and just find out what may happen next.

While there are many aspects of sexuality and relationships that are viewed as “gray areas” in Christianity, there are certain sexual behaviors that are blatantly outlined in Scripture as being sinful. In the book Women Helping Women, counselor Diane Tyson lists and defines those behaviors. Tyson lists adultery, fornication, homosexuality, and celibate marriage as sexual behaviors that are strictly forbidden. Also included in the discussion are masturbation and sexual fantasies, topics not specifically discussed in Scripture.

I will go into more detail about these issues in next week’s posts.

A New Sexual Ethic? Part 4


This is part 4 in a 5 part series of a response to Carter Heyward’s essay “Notes on Historical Grounding: Beyond Sexual Essentialism,” which can be found in Sexuality and the Sacred:Sources for Theological Reflection, edited by James B. Nelson and Sandra P. Longfellow.

Third, Heyward claims that Christianity is isolating and denies community. By setting rigid boundaries concerning sexual behavior and then consequently excluding those who refuse to live by those standards, Heyward states that Christianity is proving itself dated, close-minded, and supportive of “compulsive heterosexuality” (Heyward, 12). Historically, Heyward claims that women were isolated from the Christian community by being declared “as evil, ‘the devil’s gateway’” and then systematically used as scapegoats for the sexual sins of the men around them (Heyward, 14).

What is so interesting about Heyward’s quick dismissal of all things “christian” is that God’s moral law, especially his guidelines concerning sexual relations in general, create and then reinforce exactly the sort of relationality that Heyward claims she is attempting to achieve. Relationship, community, unity in diversity, profound oneness and even wholeness are recurring themes throughout Scripture. Heyward is attempting to achieve the end of spiritual wholeness through the means of sex. Scripture teaches that even the most holy sexual relationship is but a picture of the unity and wholeness experienced in being a member of the bride of Christ (Eph 6.22-33). The foundation of Christianity is found in the words of Christ Himself when He stated, “I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14.6).

Throughout the epistles of the New Testament, believers in churches across Europe and Asia Minor are exhorted to live as a unified, healthy body (1 Cor 12), as a well jointed building (Eph 2); they are told to lay aside petty differences (Phil 4) and to pray for one another and for their common goal (1 Thes 5). These instructions for community are plentiful, and they center on the common love of God and the common call of spreading His glory among the nations. There is one part of living in community that Heyward seems to miss—justice and love are not relative terms that can be interpreted to mean that believers should turn a blind eye to those things which Scripture condemns as going against the nature of God. Justice and love are characteristics of the nature of God, and God declares to His people, “For I the Lord do not change” (Mal 3.6). If God does not change, the characteristics of His nature are fixed and unchanging as well. Therefore, the principles of spurring one another on to love and good deeds (Heb 10) and of confronting one another when fellow believers are entrenched in sin (Mt 18; Gal 6; 1 Cor 5) apply to all things described in Scripture as moral laws which reflect the character of God. So long as desires are allowed to reign unchecked and people continue to seek fulfillment in things other than a relationship with God through Jesus, true spiritual wholeness will not be realized.

C.S. Lewis described this spiritual wholeness of Christ as Joy, and upon contemplating this matter of desire and pleasure made the following observation: “Joy is not a substitute for sex; sex is very often a substitute for Joy. I sometimes wonder whether all pleasures are not substitutes for Joy.” Heyward and her intellectual companions have attempted to substitute pleasure for Joy by completely freeing human sexuality from all encumbrances of law and discipline, but they have yet to achieve the wholeness and fulfillment for which they so desperately search. The struggle to find wholeness through the creation instead of the Creator (Rom 1. 25) is a confirmation of Lewis’ belief that physical pleasure is an unsatisfactory attempt to fill the “God-shaped void” in the lives of people.

This God-shaped void brings Heyward to the natural end of seeking God in God’s created order—Heyward describes sex in divine terms, completing the move from a supposedly “christian” sexual ethic to a glorification and worship of sex that is essentially pagan sex worship. In her discussion of this new christian ethic of sex, Heyward draws upon the work of Freud, who described the eroticism of sex as the “life force.” Heyward also quotes Audre Lorde’s description of the erotic as “the source of our creativity, the wellspring of our joy, the energy of our poems, music, lovemaking, dancing, meditation, friendships, and meaningful work.” For the Christian believer, this description could very well be used to describe God. In the Psalms, it is the glory and worship of Yahweh that inspires David and the other psalmists to write and dance and meditate. The entire book of the Song of Songs describes the fruition of a sexual relationship between a husband and wife when that relationship is rightly focused upon God and upon one another. Paul tells the church in Corinth, “So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor 10.31).

The focus of the life of the believer is not self pleasure or self glorification. Rather, the believer is to focus on the glory and worship of God. To give creative or inspirational credit or worship to anything other than God Himself is to commit an act of idolatry. Heyward attempts to explain this usurpation of God by declaring, “Theologically, we are speaking of our power in right relation; from a christian perspective, the power of God” (Heyward, 15). She claims that the power of God is reached and realized through the act of sex, but God himself prohibits worshiping him through sex acts (Lev 18, 20).

These major themes—the role reversals of men and women, the search for false community, the replacement of God with an idol—work together to show that while Heyward claims that her work, heritage, and ideas are Christian, she is actually committing the very sin that she exposes in the Church; she is further removing herself from the authority of the Bible and establishing her own ethic based upon tradition and personal experience. Heyward has taken Wesley’s quadrilateral of interpretation and reversed it; instead of beginning with Scripture and clarifying it through tradition, philosophy, and personal experience, Heyward begins with personal experience and reinterprets or discounts philosophy, tradition, and Scripture. Those ideals and absolutes which go against personal experience and desire are laid aside and explained away as being culturally irrelevant. This is precisely the place that Heyward envisions: “A historical perspective on sexuality is important… because such a view enables us to envision and perhaps experience our own possibilities…. We are involved in shaping our own dreams.” By using sex as a means to channel the power of God, Heyward argues that personal, sexual realization enables humanity to make its own destiny—humanity becomes god.