A) PAST ATTITUDES TOWARDS SEX.
B) THE NEW TESTAMENT

C) THE CHRISTIAN THOUGHT PROCESS.

D) THE BIBLICAL VIEW OF SEX, “ONE FLESH.”

E) PROCREATION.

F) SEXUAL SIN.

G) CONTRACEPTION.

H) FROM MY FAVORITE BIBLE COMMENTATOR.

I) BIBLICALLY UNACCEPTABLE SEX.

 

 

A) PAST ATTITUDES TOWARDS SEX
 

 

In Ancient Israel, the Hebrew people understood and interpreted human sexuality as a positive gift from God.  They were not affected by the later Greek dualism between spirit and matter, which considered sexual intercourse as an evil, “fleshy,” activity, to be shunned if possible.  Such thinking was foreign to the Hebrews who saw sex within marriage as beautiful and enjoyable.  A wedding was a time of great celebration, partly because it marked the beginning of the sexual life of the couple.

The bridal pair retired to a nuptial tent or chamber at the end of the wedding festivities to make love together while lying on a clean, white sheet.  Blood on the sheet indicated that the bride had been a virgin and provided evidence of the consummation of marriage (Deu. 22:13-19).  A newly betrothed man was even excused from participating in war in order to be able to enjoy his bride (Deu. 20:7) for an entire year!

This indicates that the ancient Hebrews had a healthy attitude towards sex.  They saw it as a Divine gift, which gave pleasure to the persons involved, while providing the means for the propagation of the race.  The classic example of the exaltation of human sexuality is found in the Hebrew Book, “Song of Songs;” or as we know it, “Song of Solomon.”  This Book is not an allegory.  It is a romantic celebration of human sexuality.  According to some Jewish traditions, portions of the Book were even sung during wedding processionals and wedding feasts.
 

When the Hebrews came to the land of Canaan, they were exposed to the evil and excesses of the fertility cults associated with the worship of Ba-al, which included sacred prostitution.  To correct these evils, several regulations were given.  There were strict prohibitions, for example, against revealing in public one’s, “private parts” (Gen. 9:21; 2Sa. 6:20), incest (Lev. 18:6-18; 20:11-12 & 14 & 20; Deu. 27:20 & 22), bestiality (Lev. 18:23; 20:15-16), homosexuality (Lev. 18:22; 20:13), and various kinds of sexual irregularities (Exo. 22:16; Lev. 19:20 & 29; 15:24; 18:19; 20:18; Deu. 25:11).  Overall however, the Jews had a healthy view of sex; although they saw it primarily in terms of its reproductive function.

B) THE NEW TESTAMENT

 

 

In New Testament times we find the beginning of two extreme attitudes toward sex:  Licentiousness and Celibacy.  To interpret the freedom of the Gospel as freedom to engage freely in sexual relations outside of marriage, Jude speaks against it by stating:  “ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness,” Jude 1:4.  Peter warns against the enticement of false teachers, who had “eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin.”  Second Peter 2:14.   And, as we know, the problem of sexual permissiveness and perversion had become so noticeable in the Corinthian Church, that Paul openly rebuked those who engaged in incestuous and adulterous sexual relations (1Co. 5:1; 6:16-18).

Influenced by Greek philosophical ideas, which viewed anything related to the physical aspect of life as evil, some Christians saw the sexual act as involving “fleshly” contact and pleasure, and thus it was viewed as inherently evil.  This thinking prevailed in the Greco-Roman world, and exercised considerable influence among some Christians.  In Corinth, for example, there were some Christians who maintained that unmarried people should remain single and those who were married should refrain from sexual activity (1Co. 7:1-5 & 8-11 & 25-28).

Paul responded to these abstemious believers by affirming that it was right and proper for married persons to engage in sexual activities (1Co. 7:3 & 5).  Paul does however, counsel the unmarried and the widows, if they can without “burning,” to remain single (1Co. 7:8 & 25-26).  His reason, however, is based not on a theological point, but on practical considerations, namely, on the need to avoid the added burdens of a family during the end-time persecution which Paul believed would soon break out (1Co. 7:26-31) and that the cares of this life and how to please one another would take time away from the work of God (1Co. 7:33).  Note that this counsel is not taking away from the fact that some Christians worked better as a couple, as Paul had well experienced in his relationship with Aquila and Priscilla.

 

 

C) THE CHRISTIAN THOUGHT PROCESS

 

The negative view of sexuality was already present in embryonic form in the Christian Church during Apostolic times among some Christians, which developed fully during the early Church, shaping the sexual attitudes of Christians up to modern times.  This view can be traced back to Greek philosophy, especially to Platonic thought, which saw man as having two parts:  the soul, which is good, and the body, which is bad.  Such dualistic thinking influenced Christianity through a movement known as Gnosticism.  This heretical movement taught that all matter, including the human body, was evil.  Only the spark of the Divine in man (the soul) is good, and through special knowledge (gnosis), such a spark could be released from the human body and returned to the Divine realm.  Thus, salvation was perceived as the liberation of the soul from the prison-house of the body.

 

See My Bible Study:  “DEATH, THE BIBLICAL TRUTH ABOUT,” in order to properly understand what a “soul” is.  However, quickly, properly understanding Genesis 2:7, a “living soul” equals “God’s Breath” plus a human “body.”
 

This dualistic teaching of a “human body” being separate from a “soul,” which if that were to happen, means death, greatly influenced Christian thought through the Centuries, to the point that many Christians gradually abandoned the Biblical view of the resurrection of the body, replacing it with the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul.  The fundamental error of this view, which an increasing number of scholars are rejecting as un-Biblical, is its assumption that matter is evil and must be destroyed.  Such a view is clearly discredited by those Biblical texts, which teach that matter, including the human body, is the product of God’s “good” creation (Gen. 1:4 & 10 & 12 & 18 & 21 & 25 & 31).  The Psalmist declares:  “I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”  Psalm 139:14.
 

Partly as a reaction to the negative view of sex as a necessary evil for the propagation of the human race, and as such, a completely different and pleasure oriented (hedonistic) view of sex has emerged.  The sexual revolution of our time has glamorized sexual profligacy and prowess, ridiculing sexual chastity as a prudish superstition. The catastrophic consequences of the sexual revolution can be seen in the ever-increasing number of divorces, abortions, incidents of incest, sexual abuse of children, and the loss of the true meaning and function of sex.  In the light of this painful reality, it is imperative for Christians to understand and experience the Biblical meaning and function of sex.

D) THE BIBLICAL VIEW OF SEX, “ONE FLESH”

 

 

The Biblical view is that man was made in the “image of God,” Genesis 1:27; 9:6.  The Book of Genesis is the logical starting point for our quest into the Biblical view of sex.  The first statement relating to human sexuality is found in Genesis 1:27:  “So God created man in His Own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”  As mentioned above, it is noteworthy that while after every previous act of creation, Scripture says that God saw that, “it was good.”  And after the creation of mankind as male and female, the Record states that God saw that, “it was very good.”  Genesis 1:31.  This initial Divine appraisal of human sexuality as being, “very good,” shows that Scripture sees the male/female sexual distinction as part of the goodness and perfection of God’s original creation (design).

It is important to note also, that human sexual duality as male and female is related explicitly to God’s Own image.  Theologians have long debated the possible nature of this relation.  Since Scripture distinguishes human beings from other creatures, theologians have usually thought that the “image of God” in humanity refers to the rational, moral and spiritual faculties God has given to men and women.   This is a valid interpretation since these faculties distinguish human maleness and femaleness from that of lower creatures.

 

There is, however, another possible way in which human maleness and femaleness reflects the “image of God,” namely, in the capacity of a man and a woman to experience a oneness of fellowship similar to the One existing in the Trinity.  The love uniting husband and wife points to the Love that eternally unites the Three Beings of the Trinity.  In this sense, it constitutes a reflection of the “image of God” in humanity.

The oneness of intimate fellowship between a man and a woman is expressed in Genesis 2:24, by the phrase in which they become, “one flesh.”  The phrase, “one flesh,” refers to the total union of each soul, the entire personage, between marital partners.  This total union can be experienced especially through sexual intercourse, when the act is the expression of genuine love, respect, and commitment.  The physical or sexual meaning of the phrase, “one flesh,” is clearly found in First Corinthians 6:16, where Paul applies it to the sexual intercourse between a man and a harlot.  In other words, sexual exchange unites.  Although it is more so for the woman than the man.

In the phrase, “one flesh,” is shed considerable light on God’s estimate of sex within a marital relationship.  It tells us that God sees sex as a means through which a husband and a wife can achieve a new unity unknown before.  It is noteworthy that the “one flesh” imagery is never used to describe a child’s relationship to his father and mother.  A man must “leave” his father and mother to become, “one flesh” with his wife (Mat. 19:5; Mark 10:19).  His relationship to his wife transcends the one to his parents, because it consists of a new oneness consummated by the sexual union.

Becoming “one flesh,” also implies that the purpose of the sexual act is not only pro-creational, that is, to produce children, but also psychological, that is, the emotional need to consummate a new oneness-relationship.  Oneness implies the willingness to reveal one’s most intimate physical, emotional, and intellectual self, to the other.  As they come to know each other in the most intimate way, the couple experiences the meaning of becoming, “one flesh.”

 

However, sexual intercourse does not automatically ensure this oneness intimacy, although it is designed to do so.  Rather it consummates the intimacy of perfect sharing, which has already started to be developed mentally.

 

Sex represents the most intimate of all interpersonal relationships, expressing a “one-flesh” unity of total commitment.  Such a unity of commitment cannot be expressed or experienced in a casual sexual union with a prostitute, where the concern is purely commercial and recreational.  The only oneness experienced in such sexual unions is the oneness of sexual immorality (see 1Co. 6:18).

Sexual relations within marriage enable a couple to come to know each other in a way which cannot be experienced in any other way.  To participate in sexual intercourse, means not only to uncover one’s body, but also one’s inner being to another.  This is why Scripture often describes sexual intercourse as “knowing,” which is the same verb used in the Hebrew language to refer to, “the knowing of God.”  Genesis 4:1 says:  “And Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived.”

Obviously Adam had come to know Eve before their sexual intercourse; but through the latter, he came to know her more intimately than ever before.  Dwight H. Small aptly remarks:  “Self-disclosure through sexual intercourse invites self-disclosure at all levels of personal existence.  This is an exclusive revelation unique to the couple.  They know each other as they know no other person.  This unique knowledge is tantamount to laying claim to another in genuine belonging.  The nakedness and physical coupling is symbolic of the fact that nothing is hidden or withheld between them.  Couples should feel as if their most hidden inner depths of their beings are brought to the surface and revealed and offered to each other as their most intimate expression of their love.”

From a Biblical perspective then, sexual activity is unitive (oneness), procreative (reproductive), and pleasurable; even to the point of the “marriage” “bed” being “honourable.”  Hebrews 13:4.  In fact, God’s Command to “Be fruitful and multiply,” Genesis 1:28, is a Command to be sexual.  When we obey it, we fulfill God’s purpose by becoming “one flesh,” and producing children.  God’s Command, “Be fruitful and multiply,” Genesis 1:28, expresses God’s original intent for the purpose of sex.  Through marital sex and the birth of children, God enables men and women to reflect His image by sharing in His creative activity.  The lengths to which some married couples will go in order to have children reveals the deep creative urge God has placed within us.  Therefore, sex in marriage is both “unitive” (Godlike in nature), and procreative.  And Paul’s Biblical advice to be sexual, lest one “burn,” First Corinthians 7:9 (see also verses 2-5), with inappropriate desires, covers pleasure and unity, and also sinful temptations.

 

 

E) PROCREATION

 

As Christians we need to recover and maintain the Biblical balance between the relational and pro-creational functions of sex.  Sexual intercourse is a relational act of perfect sharing that engenders a sense of oneness, while offering the possibility of bringing a new life into this world.  We need to recognize that sex is a Divine gift that can be legitimately enjoyed within marriage.  Like all other Divine gifts, sex is to be partaken of with thankfulness and moderation. 

It should be remembered that Bible writers are unanimous in commending sex within marriage, and in condemning all forms of sexual activity outside marriage.  In regards to the condemning of, Paul warns the Corinthians, “that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”  First Corinthians 6:10.  And the Book of Revelation states that, “whoremongers,” Revelation 21:8, or better, fornicators, will not be there either.

 

The Biblical condemnation of sexual relations before, or outside marriage, is abundantly clear.  Adultery, or sexual intercourse between married women, or married men, and someone other than their marital partners, is condemned as a serious sin.  Not only is adultery forbidden in both versions of the Decalogue (Exo. 20:14; Deu. 5:18), but it was also punishable by death in ancient Israel:  “And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”  Leviticus 20:10.  Compare with Leviticus 18:20 and Deuteronomy 22:22-24.  The same punishment was meted out to a man or a woman who engaged in pre-marital sex (Deu. 22:13-21 & 23-27).

The New Testament goes beyond the Old Testament by internalizing the whole sexuality of a person and placing it within the context of motivation.  Jesus emphasized that to entertain lustful desires toward a person of the opposite sex, outside of marriage, means to be guilty of adultery (Mat. 5:27-28).  The reason for this is that defilement comes not only from outward acts, but also from inward thoughts, which in Biblical symbolism is derived from the heart:  “[19] Out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. [20] These are what defile a man.”  Matthew 15:19-20.

 

 

F) SEXUAL SIN

 

 

Sex outside of marriage is sin, because it is sex without commitment.  It reduces a person to an object to be used for personal gratification.  Such a selfish use of sex impairs, if not totally destroys, the possibility of using it to express and experience genuine love and commitment toward one’s marital partner.  At a time when sexual permissiveness and promiscuity prevails, it is imperative for Christians to reaffirm their commitment to the Biblical view of sex as a Divine gift to be enjoyed only within marriage.

 

G) CONTRACEPTION

 

 

Is the use of contraception allowed in the Bible?  Does Scripture allow us to limit our family’s size, and time our children’s births?  Or does the Command to, “Be fruitful and multiply,” mean that we should leave the issue of family planning to the mercies of God?  No explicit answer can be found in the Bible, because the subject of contraception was not an issue in Biblical times.  In those days, larger families were needed and welcomed to meet the demand for helping hands in that agricultural society.

In seeking for Biblical guidance on the subject of contraception, we need to ask two fundamental questions:

 

(1) What is the purpose of sexual intercourse?  Answer:  For pleasure and procreation.  Then:

 

(2) Do we have the right to interfere with the reproductive cycle established by God?
 

We have seen that the function of sexual intercourse is both relational, and pro-creational.  It is a relational act of perfect sharing that engenders a mysterious sense of oneness and offers the possibility of bringing children into this world.  The fact that the function of sex in marriage is not only to produce children, but also to express and experience mutual love and commitment, implies the need for certain limitations on the reproductive function of sex.  Why? Because, if a couple were to risk a new conception each time they made love, they would soon forfeit sexual intercourse as a means of giving themselves totally to each other.  This means that the relational function of sex can only remain a viable dynamic experience if its reproductive function is controlled.
 

This leads us to consider the manner of controlling the reproductive cycle.  This issue is addressed by the second question, namely, do we have the right to interfere with the reproductive cycle established by God?

 

If you feel that the Bible condemns artificial contraceptives, than you may allow for a natural method of birth control, known as the “rhythm method.”  This method consists of confining intercourse to the infertile periods in the wife’s menstrual cycle.  However, the morality, or immorality, of contraception, is determined not by the kinds of contraceptives we use, but by the reasons for their use.

 

It is significant to note that the Command, “Be fruitful and multiply,” is immediately followed by the Command to subdue and have domination, “over every living thing.”  Genesis 1:28.  This implies that God is calling us to be responsible stewards of His creation, controlling any destabilizing factor, such as for this discussion, the threat of a population explosion within the family that funds are not available enough to harbor such a large family.

 

To be responsible stewards of God’s creation, means that, as Christians we have a right to control the amount of children by using natural, or the questionable, “unnatural” means of contraception.  This reasoning can be based through common-sense, with thought of our financial, political, environmental reasons, etcetera.  We have a duty before God to become responsible parents, by bringing up children in the love, and “discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Ephesians 6:4.  The way we fulfill this duty will vary from couple to couple as we prayerfully seek Divine guidance regarding the timing of our children’s births, and the methods we use to this end.

 

To get personal, my wife raises show dogs.  In her opinion, she can only pay close enough attention to each individual dog by restricting the number of dogs she has at one time at 6.  To have more at one time becomes to overwhelming to pay close enough attention to all.  And just as one or more may become neglected to a certain point, this is exactly what we don’t want to have happen within our families.

 

 

H) FROM MY FAVORITE BIBLE COMMENTATOR

 

 

“He Who gave Eve to Adam as a helpmeet performed His first miracle at a marriage festival.  In the festal hall where friends and kindred rejoiced together, Christ began His public ministry.  Thus He sanctioned marriage, recognizing it as an institution that He Himself had established. . . Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones.  He Himself is the Bridegroom; the bride is the Church.”  The Adventist Home, page 26.

 

“If those who are contemplating marriage would not have miserable, unhappy reflections after marriage, they must make it a subject of serious, earnest reflection now.  This step taken unwisely is one of the most effective means of ruining the usefulness of young men and women.  Life becomes a burden, a curse.  No one can so effectually ruin a woman’s happiness and usefulness, and make life a heartsickening burden, as her own husband; and no one can do one hundredth part as much to chill the hopes and aspirations of a man, to paralyze his energies and ruin his influence and prospects, as his own wife.  It is from the marriage hour that many men and women date their success or failure in this life, and their hopes of the future life.”  AH:43.1; The Review and Herald, February 2, 1886.

 

“Marriage is something that will influence and affect your life both in this world and in the world to come.  A sincere Christian will not advance his plans in this direction without the knowledge that God approves his course.  He will not want to choose for himself, but will feel that God must choose for him.  We are not to please ourselves, for Christ pleased not Himself.  I would not be understood to mean that anyone is to marry one whom he does not love.  This would be sin.  But fancy and the emotional nature must not be allowed to lead on to ruin.  God requires the whole heart, the supreme affections.”  AH:43.3; The Review and Herald, September 25, 1888.

 

“Few have correct views of the marriage relation.  Many seem to think that it is the attainment of perfect bliss; but if they could know one quarter of the heartaches of men and women that are bound by the marriage vow in chains that they cannot and dare not break, they would not be surprised that I trace these lines.  Marriage, in a majority of cases, is a most galling yoke.  There are thousands that are mated but not matched.  The Books of Heaven are burdened with the woes, the wickedness, and the abuse that lie hidden under the marriage mantle.  This is why I would warn the young who are of a marriageable age to make haste slowly in the choice of a companion.  The path of married life may appear beautiful and full of happiness; but why may not you be disappointed as thousands of others have been?”  AH:44.1; The Review and Herald, February 2, 1886.

 

“Those who are contemplating marriage should consider what will be the character and influence of the home they are founding.  As they become parents, a sacred trust is committed to them.  Upon them depends in a great measure the well-being of their children in this world, and their happiness in the world to come.  To a great extent they determine both the physical and the moral stamp that the little ones receive.  And upon the character of the home depends the condition of society; the weight of each family’s influence will tell in the upward or the downward scale.”  AH:44.2.

 

“Most men and women have acted in entering the marriage relation as though the only question for them to settle was whether they loved each other.  But they should realize that a responsibility rests upon them in the marriage relation farther than this.  They should consider whether their offspring will possess physical health and mental and moral strength.  But few have moved with high motives and with elevated considerations which they could not lightly throw off -- that society had claims upon them, that the weight of their family’s influence would tell in the upward or downward scale.”  AH:45.3; Messages to Young People, 461.

 

“Like every other one of God’s good gifts entrusted to the keeping of humanity, marriage has been perverted by sin; but it is the purpose of the Gospel to restore its purity and beauty.  In both the Old and the New Testament the marriage relation is employed to represent the tender and sacred union that exists between Christ and His people, the redeemed ones whom He has purchased at the cost of Calvary.”  RH, December 10, 1908.

 

 

I) BIBLICALLY UNACCEPTABLE SEX

 

 

According to Leviticus 18:20; 20:18; Ezekiel 18:6; this is the only time that you “shall not lay with her.”

 

If we go to Leviticus 15:20-30, this is how she is to be considered over her period.

 

But the main point of all of this is found in Leviticus 15:31, in that you are not to enter into the Lord’s Tabernacle “unclean,” that is, with sin in your heart or body.

​