A Thought excercise...

[Rev. Smith]

In strolling through this forum I see a wide variety of views within the church over sexuality, from the Augustinian/ Manachean formula that all flesh id corrupt, to some fairly liberal views that amount to let the Holy Spirit convict you.

Now, most churches hold the following to be true:

All lust (sexual desires) are sinful
Sex before marriage is sinful.

Some churches hold that
Sex even between man and wife that is not intended or at least open to procreation is sinful.

Where do these ideas come from? For example, in Leviticus most sexual activity had one or two effects: It resululted in being ritually unclean, which did NOT make the Jew unreightious, only made him unable to worship until after he was cleansed. In the case of pre-marital sex the penalty was, if the girl was a virgin and a Jew, to pay the bride price to her father and marry her. If the woman was a pagan the man was only required to take her into his house, or return her to her people. Abraham slept with his wife's maid, and was rightious none the less. There are other examples.

This does not seem to apply to everything, homosexual and bestial acts (yuk) had the death penalty... but the offense attached in scripture to most sexuality was either minor or non-existant.

So the question is: When it comes to sex are we, His church, being more prudeish than God? If so, is this driving people away from salvation?

 

[KTskater]

But you also must realize that we're in the New Testiment. Wherof Paul condemns all sexual impuruty. Also how did God create it in the beginning? Man and Woman.
The Old Tesitment is very sketchy (teenage slang for "unsure") because many of the Laws are Moses', I've been told that the only Laws of God in area of time are the Ten Commandments.
But because the church should be holy and pure, Paul tells them to keep away from sexual temtations.

 

[Rev. Smith]

Thanks KT, I understand that, but St. Paul also teaches (often) that we are to look to the law to determine what is sinful. Further, as an orthodox churchman I find it difficult to buy into the revisionist view that only the "big ten" came from God, many passages in Ex. and Lev make it clear that Moses went into the Tent of Meeting, and before the Holy of Holies and received the wisdom and law from God.

So I repeat, it seems to me that with the exception of the obvious perversions (like the two in my OP), we set our standards of purity higher than God.

This may not be a bad thing, there are cultural norms that it is important to uphold. My fear is, that by holding people to a standard that they can't meet - and one that goes beyond ewhat God wants of them do we risk keeping people away from a strong, true and spiritual relatinship with God?

 

[Johnnz]

I so agree with the original post. The second is so sad. Sad, beacuse it just exemplifies the point that was made originally.

Much of our heritage regarding sex is severely tainted by many non scriptural beliefs. Evidence of this is abundant in these forums. Many people cannot distunguish between normal sexuality and lust - yes, they are different. Single people need to get this distinction sorted out. There is far too much false guilt, confusion, shame and plain old ignorance among too many young people.

That there are so many posts and even more viewers on sexual topics is indicative of a widespread interest in sexuality amongst Christians, that many do not have access to healthy, informed information, and that many active church goers feel unable to discuss such issues within their local Christian community.

For me the big questions is "Why". The initial post points towards one good answer.

John
NZ

 

[JeremiahJ]

In taking his maid, Abraham was sinning, just having premarital sex with a virgin or committing adultery is a sin. God says that sex, lust itself, is sinful. Jesus makes that very clear. A more lax punishment is understandable in OT times, as they were slaves to sin, but we are free from those bonds, free to live beyond the temptation. You don't have to think much about the church being too prude. Just look at the New Testament. It's laid out pretty clear that homosexuality, premarital sex, adultery, and lustful looking is sinful. What more do we need to know? It's iniquitous behavior, and therefore dishonoring to God and bringing death upon ourselves. Truth does not hinder people from being saved, for it is only through Truth that they can be saved. The truth is, there are standards of sexual purity in the Bible.

 

[Rev. Smith]

In taking his maid, Abraham was sinning, just having premarital sex with a virgin or committing adultery is a sin. God says that sex, lust itself, is sinful. Jesus makes that very clear. A more lax punishment is understandable in OT times, as they were slaves to sin, but we are free from those bonds, free to live beyond the temptation. You don't have to think much about the church being too prude. Just look at the New Testament. It's laid out pretty clear that homosexuality, premarital sex, adultery, and lustful looking is sinful. What more do we need to know? It's iniquitous behavior, and therefore dishonoring to God and bringing death upon ourselves. Truth does not hinder people from being saved, for it is only through Truth that they can be saved. The truth is, there are standards of sexual purity in the Bible.

Shaloam Jeremiah, Did Abraham and Hagar sin? I have read the account many times, and it appears that no unreightiousness fall to Father Abraham, and that Hagar and her son are treated with favor. Do you find that the Angels of God often come to the sinners who have offended God to offer them sustanance, and to promise them a patrimony? For that is what God did for Hagar.

Nor were the People of God slaves to sin. Many failed and fell short, it is true - it has always been so with Man, but many others were faithful and rightious, as promised there has always been the faithful remnent.

It is not just with matters of sex that we do this. Many churches teach that any lie, even those made to save embarresment or pain, are sins - yet scripture teaches that we shall not bear false witness, we shall not tell lies that harm others. All of the passage in the Prophets and the Psalter that decry lies couple the practice with vile practices, renforceing the commandment.(the practice of discerning doctrine from a psalter has always troubled me as well - but thats another topic )

Christ taught that if you look at a woman lustfully you have committed adultery with her in your heart. Since adultery is the specific act of having relations outside the marriage vows may we not assume that he was speaking of either married men with a wandering eye (almost all men were married in his era, most of the disciples were) or in the alternative that the woman being observed was.

Rahab the prostitute was rightious, without giving up her occupation, Tamar became a Harlot to get her rights as a widow, and was considered more rightious than her father in law who had denied her. The entire Mosiac law treats MOST (not all) natural sexuality as an issue of civil law (the bride price) and ritual law (cleanliness). The Prophets and Proverb (wisdom) writers treat it in a similar vein.

Christ spent little speech on sexual matters, leading us to believe that it was of less importance that the injustice, inteprence and greed that he frequently preached about.

Even St. Paul & St. James, the two canonists who wrote the most about sexuality seemd far more concerned with hedonism than with normal sexuality, the Pauline prhabitions speak of "filthy passions" "given over too", which seems to be much more than "boy meets girl"

You assert that premarital sex is "clearly laid out" as a sin. Really? Show me.

 

[seekingpurity047]

First thing, concerning Abraham's ordeal with the maid, sure, he committed adultery, etc etc. However, Abraham was made righteous by faith in God, so let's not get so legalistic here. One cannot lose salvation if in their heart they truly believe that Jesus died for their sins and rose froimn the dead, and they proclaim it with their lips that Jesus is Lord! And, also, Abraham was on earth prior to the Law in the OT, so we have to disregard adultery as sin, cuz that was in the Law.

Take David, I think that's a better example. David committed adultery with Bathsheeba, and oh boy! Did he ever get it from (was it Nathan?) via God! David = after the Law. So David was bound by the Law, however, David also, was made righteous by faith in God, and not by keeping the Law. The Gospel clearly teaches us that we are justified by faith in Jesus Christ, however, that doesn't mean that we shouljd then disregard the rules, and all. But, we shoudl rejoice in obeying God. In order to be truly saved, there has to be a change.

James 2:26 "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." This means that we should go on doing whatever we want merely becuase we're guaranteed salvation, cuz then... technically, you weren't really saved, and one believed in vain.

1 Cor. 15:1-2

1Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

This means more than falling away from the faith, or converting to, for example, islam or something. But it means the doctrines too, hence, sexual immorality.

1 Cor. 6:18 "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body."

I find that the NT clearly states that sexual immorality (impurity) should be avoided.

Pardon me reverend, but have you been looking at the Liberal theology posts? Cuz... lemme tell ya, I got some serious issues with them. But... I'm not allowed to debate them or anything, so meh! (Personally, I don't even think that such stupidity should be allowed on this website, as it's not christian, but that's just my opinion).

Thanks for the post though!

To God be the glory forever and ever, Amen.

Randy

 

[Rev. Smith]

I don't think any thinking Christian would support "sexual immorality", or assert that the scriptures are in favor of it. The issue in my mind is: Are we of the church setting a higher standard than God?

For example, I think we have to agree to disagree about Abraham and Hagar. Scripture is not shy about condemning conduct that offends God's will - but no indication of condemnataion appears regarding Hagar (in fact the opposite, favor ,is shown to Hagar), or Tamar etc.

Nor do I think this is really about sola filde vs. faith hope & charity: Regardless of a church's views regarding the path to justification, sanctification and salvation we must impart moral teaching to our people. (While Christ's teaching on the sheep and goats in Matthew appears to indicate that even people who had faith in God will not see heaven if they have done nothing active to love their neighbor - it is equally clear that faith is an essential element.)

Let me tell you a story to illustrate my concerns. A woman came to me church for a while (she moved out of the area but I understand is with another O.C. parish now) Her family had been members of a evangelical church for years. Her daughter had been active in youth ministry, and as she grew older mission work for their church. One afternnon a fellow congregant asked the daughter why, at 30+, she was unmarried (this denmination apparently places great emphasis on a woman's obligation to raise a family). The daughter made the mistake of being honest and admitting that she was a lesbian. The congregation held manny meetings, discussions and temperes rose and the girl was aked to leave thye congregation. Her entire family left with her. Nobody bothered to ask her if she was actually engageing in homosexual activity. She wasn't (she admits that prior to thatr time she had on several occasions during one summer - but had resolvded to live a chaste life). For this congregation merely being homosexual and deciding against being a wife an mother was enough to make her "sexually impure" and unwelcome in the church.

Upshot - the daughter is now not only not Christian but activly anti- religion and living in a gay relationship. The mother and father are now Catholic (which I know for some evangelical types is worse than being gay )

Now a reading of St. Paul indicates that all the prohabitions on sexual immorality are about doing, not thinking.

This is why this question is serious to me, we are supposed to win souls for Christ, not drive people into the arms of Satan.

So far everyone who has responded to my exerecise has neglected to address the actual question.

Are we setting standards that are too high? The commandment is thou shall not commit adultery, which we have redefined as thou shall not have sex with anyone not your spouse (unless you are among the 40% of Christians who get divorced). The commnadment says thou shalt not bear false witness, we made it into thou shalt not tell any lies, ever.

Just as troubling we are lax on others - Many folks in my congregation go from church to the mall; how is that keeping the sabath holy? Honor for our parents seems at best ignored.

So, the point is not that we should "accept" sexual immorality", but rather is our standard really in accord with God's desires for us as revealed in scripture. Are we the people of God or the people of St. Augustine?

 

[Cristiano]

I don't think any thinking Christian would support "sexual immorality", or assert that the scriptures are in favor of it. The issue in my mind is: Are we of the church setting a higher standard than God?

For example, I think we have to agree to disagree about Abraham and Hagar. Scripture is not shy about condemning conduct that offends God's will - but no indication of condemnataion appears regarding Hagar (in fact the opposite, favor ,is shown to Hagar), or Tamar etc.

Nor do I think this is really about sola filde vs. faith hope & charity: Regardless of a church's views regarding the path to justification, sanctification and salvation we must impart moral teaching to our people. (While Christ's teaching on the sheep and goats in Matthew appears to indicate that even people who had faith in God will not see heaven if they have done nothing active to love their neighbor - it is equally clear that faith is an essential element.)

Let me tell you a story to illustrate my concerns. A woman came to me church for a while (she moved out of the area but I understand is with another O.C. parish now) Her family had been members of a evangelical church for years. Her daughter had been active in youth ministry, and as she grew older mission work for their church. One afternnon a fellow congregant asked the daughter why, at 30+, she was unmarried (this denmination apparently places great emphasis on a woman's obligation to raise a family). The daughter made the mistake of being honest and admitting that she was a lesbian. The congregation held manny meetings, discussions and temperes rose and the girl was aked to leave thye congregation. Her entire family left with her. Nobody bothered to ask her if she was actually engageing in homosexual activity. She wasn't (she admits that prior to thatr time she had on several occasions during one summer - but had resolvded to live a chaste life). For this congregation merely being homosexual and deciding against being a wife an mother was enough to make her "sexually impure" and unwelcome in the church.

Upshot - the daughter is now not only not Christian but activly anti- religion and living in a gay relationship. The mother and father are now Catholic (which I know for some evangelical types is worse than being gay )

Now a reading of St. Paul indicates that all the prohabitions on sexual immorality are about doing, not thinking.

This is why this question is serious to me, we are supposed to win souls for Christ, not drive people into the arms of Satan.

So far everyone who has responded to my exerecise has neglected to address the actual question.

Are we setting standards that are too high? The commandment is thou shall not commit adultery, which we have redefined as thou shall not have sex with anyone not your spouse (unless you are among the 40% of Christians who get divorced). The commnadment says thou shalt not bear false witness, we made it into thou shalt not tell any lies, ever.

Just as troubling we are lax on others - Many folks in my congregation go from church to the mall; how is that keeping the sabath holy? Honor for our parents seems at best ignored.

So, the point is not that we should "accept" sexual immorality", but rather is our standard really in accord with God's desires for us as revealed in scripture. Are we the people of God or the people of St. Augustine?

Reverend,
I agree with some of what you are saying, but I also think that we are relying too much on our "feelings" to decide right from wrong. Paul condemns homosexuality and adultery and sexual impurity. The Holy Spirit will guide us in those areas. Problem is that most people consult their "feelings" rather then God on the issue. I want to make this clear before I continue: I am a young Christian guy who struggles with same sex desires and always have. However, I understand that those actions are not in God's plan. I also understand that merely being sexually attracted to someone doesn't mean I lust for them. So being attracted to someone of the same sex isn't a sin, it's what we do with those basic thoughts that becomes sin.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what you've been implying the whole time, like having sex in a loving relationship is okay outside of marriage or what? You've said repeatedly that we are too strict in our interpretations of what sexuality is, but have not defined what you are really getting at. I totally agree that we should LOVE ONE ANOTHER. What that church did to the girl was a disgrace to God and is shameful. However, as far as sexuality is concerned, I think inside of marriage is the "safest" place for sex to occur and believe that was the original intention. We may be forgetting that "A man shall leave his family and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." That means, whover we have sex with, we become one with. PERIOD. I'm sure you know that already, but I would like you to clarify what you are getting at.

 

[Rev. Smith]

Reverend,
I agree with some of what you are saying, but I also think that we are relying too much on our "feelings" to decide right from wrong. Paul condemns homosexuality and adultery and sexual impurity. The Holy Spirit will guide us in those areas. Problem is that most people consult their "feelings" rather then God on the issue. I want to make this clear before I continue: I am a young Christian guy who struggles with same sex desires and always have. However, I understand that those actions are not in God's plan. I also understand that merely being sexually attracted to someone doesn't mean I lust for them. So being attracted to someone of the same sex isn't a sin, it's what we do with those basic thoughts that becomes sin.

First, I'm sorry for your struggles and wish you peace. The section of your quote illustrates my point, did you know that MANY protestant churches here in America, at least, teach the opposite? If you go into many evangelical churches you will hear that even having the desire is sin, and requires repentance. I heard one preacher, who had supposedly divined the guideline from scripture and declared that any sexual thought (except for thoughts about ones spouse) that was not activly banished with a prayer constituted "lusting in the heart", and was the same as adultery.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what you've been implying the whole time, like having sex in a loving relationship is okay outside of marriage or what? You've said repeatedly that we are too strict in our interpretations of what sexuality is, but have not defined what you are really getting at. I totally agree that we should LOVE ONE ANOTHER. What that church did to the girl was a disgrace to God and is shameful. However, as far as sexuality is concerned, I think inside of marriage is the "safest" place for sex to occur and believe that was the original intention.

And I agree with you that marriage is the only proper place for a sexual relationship. Nor do I think the Church should be promoting "anything goes", I am often surprised when people (not to suggest that you have done this) assume that if you question any part of the dogma they accept than you must be in favor of some other extreme. We see this especially in theological discussions. For example, my church rejects sola filde, I can't tell you how many times I have had an reform church member exclaim that that means that Christ's sacrafice was for nothing, as if there was no other possable theology. It seems to me the same with sexual matters.

If young people hug, and kiss and "pet" (do they still use that term?) many churches teach that it is a sin, and the couple must repent or be damned. My experience is that as often as the teaching stops the conduct it also stops the young person from believeing.

Now, if the strict abstinance churches are correct then this is simply a sad reality, we must be faithful to His truth. But, if those churches are wrong than we, as Christians are commiting one of the gravest of sins, according to Jesus, keeping his children away from him.

We may be forgetting that "A man shall leave his family and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." That means, whover we have sex with, we become one with. PERIOD. I'm sure you know that already, but I would like you to clarify what you are getting at.

Again, I am not forgetting this important principal - I am asserting that the words and teaching of Torah, the Prophets and the New testament have meaning, and we churchmen should not be distorting them to make them fit our cultural perceptions, prejudices and desires.

A Messianic Jewish group wrote an interesting article on the meaning of the important terms use for sexual law: http://www.righteouswarriors.com/controversial/article4.html

And what it boils down to is; Adultery is a breaking of the marriage covenant. Fornication is any unlawful sexual practices. There is a detailed list of such practices in scripture, but our churches have gone beyond them to define any form of intimate of sexual expression outside of marriage as fornication.

Abraham took his wife's maid Hagar as a concubine, and incurred no disfavor (Hager was shown favor). Tamara became a harlot to obtain her bride rights, and was considered rightious. Since homosexual intercourse is clearly on the list of unlawful acts, you are most wise to deal with it as you are. On the other hand an awful lot of what people ask for help with on these boards is not in that unlawful category, and yet people, including pastors tell the person struggling with thise issues to stop, repent and "offer their suffering to Jesus"

My point is that if we, laymen and priests alike, are going to speak for the Lord we MUST speak truth, not our opinions or dogma.

What I am getting at is what I originally asserted, that we have become Saducees - all law, no understanding. And that is dangerious.