Tag Archives: Marriage

Making Love Face-to-Face

 

How did Adam and Eve know how to make love, especially on their first attempt?

They had no parents or friends or sex manuals to explain the marital act to them. They were completely on their own.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)

Thus, how were Adam and Eve able to become one flesh?

It’s my belief that Adam, who named all of the animals, watched the animals mating with their own kind. After all, God said, “Be fruitful and multiply.”

Maybe he saw horses, cows, cats, dogs and whatever animals pair off and mate. Then, it also would have been normal for him to project what he saw happening with animals to what it might be like for humans.

But you must remember that all of this took place before the fall of man as recorded in Genesis Chapter 3, which means the animals were not corrupted by the sin of Adam. Each animal mated in the way God intended them to do it.

Yet, you can’t compare Adam and Eve to other animals because the two were created in the image of God and His likeness. Holy angels were not even accorded this honor, only humans.

The term “created in the image of God and in His likeness” is a ho-hum one for today’s believers, but it wasn’t that way for Adam and Eve. They walked and talked and fellowshipped with God on a daily basis. Their nakedness speaks not only of them being without clothes, but also without sin before the Father.

Except for a few species of monkeys and chimpanzees, humans are the only creatures that can make love in a face-to-face manner. Most of the other animals mate with the male standing behind the female and looking at the back of the female’s head in some sort of manner or another.

Is this important?

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her (Ephesians 5:25 NKJ)

The intimate relations Jesus has with His bride (or church) is through our worship and seeking Him. It is always with the bride looking into His face and Him looking into our faces.

Shouldn’t a married couple’s most intimate relations be carried out in the same manner as our Lord does with His bride? Face-to-face.

 

Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge. (Hebrews 13:4)

The reason for this article is that a friend, Glen Slabaugh, felt the Holy Spirit said to him about Hebrews 13:4 – “That’s not correct.” Glen knew the Holy Spirit was speaking about his interpretation and understanding of the verse.

Glen had always believed that Christian husbands and wives were free to engage in all sorts of sexual acts, including oral sex and anal sex. Why? Because marriage made these sexual acts okay and did not defile the participants. His various pastors over the years agreed with his thinking on this verse.

The Lord’s words caused him to study and meditate on Hebrews 13:4. Other translations shed a different light on the verse:

Let marriage be held in honor (esteemed worthy, precious, of great price, and especially dear) in all things. And thus let the marriage bed be undefiled (kept undishonored); for God will judge and punish the unchaste [all guilty of sexual vice] and adulterous. (Hebrews 13:4 AMP)

Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. (Hebrews 13:4 ESV)

These translations reveal that the marriage bed can be defiled by our sexual actions and lust. Glen decided that the Holy Spirit knew scripture better than he did. So, he repented and changed his beliefs.

What are the origins of oral sex and anal sex acts? Homosexuality.

These are the only ways that same sex partners can have sex with each other. It cannot be carried out in a face-to-face style like Jesus and His bride.

Should Christian couples borrow these acts from homosexuality, which God calls an abomination?

Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? (1 Corinthians 6:18-19 NKJ)

For this the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God. (1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 NKJ)

But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints. (Ephesians 5:3 NKJ)

Like Glen, I believe many of us married believers have been deceived and have wrongly interpreted Hebrews 13:4. Our errors may have contributed to our problems in our marriages and may even have caused some of us to undergo divorces.

The good news is that Jesus still sits on His throne.  We can ask His forgiveness, repent of our sins and walk in His ways from this moment forward.

Why is the Lord putting an emphasis of something like this right now?

That He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. (Ephesians 5:27)

2 Comments

Filed under America, Christianity, Church, Marital Sex, Marriage, morality

Ravi Zacharias on the Christian View of Homosexuality

 

The video is 11 minutes and 21 seconds long. It is well-worth listening to, but for those who would rather read than listen, I have written out his dialog:

Moderator:  How do you respond to unbelievers who say Christians are hateful toward people who support lifestyles that are not according to the precepts of our faith?

Zacharias:Very important question. I would be a dishonest person if I told you I don’t think about that question or worry about it. In fact, our speakers’ team has sat around a table and asked, “How do we deal with this question, the trying social issue of our time.” And even if the word is not used in the question – the homosexual lifestyle and all that has come about in our lifetime. How should Christians deal with it?

Let me give you three panels for an answer on this, okay?

The first panel is the logical or sociological problem. The second panel is the theological problem. The third panel is the relational problem – how do you communicate it.

So, first, let’s take the sociological issue here. What is the problem now? We talk about tolerance.

I was speaking at a prestigious university and someone walked to the microphone and asked this same question about homosexuality.

I said to this person, “I will be glad to answer your question if you first answer mine. What kind of culture are we living in right now? You have to define it for me.

“I see three cultures in relation to absolute.

“The first culture is called a Theonomous culture where the Law of God is so embedded in our hearts that we all think in the same way.

“Once, upon a time, we talked about the natural law as in “we believe these truths to be self-evident. The early framers believed in the natural law. We don’t believe in natural law anymore nor do we believe in the Theonomous culture in the West.

“So, what’s the second culture?

“It’s a heteronomous culture. This means that the mainstream of a culture is dictated to by the top or its leaders. If you look at Marxism in secular terms, it is a heteronomous culture with the handful at the top controlling the masses. If you look at Islam, it is a heteronomous culture. The mullahs or sheiks or ayatollahs at the top tell the masses when they can eat, what they must wear, who they can be seen with and so forth. It is a heteronomous culture with the few at the top dictating to the masses below them.

“So I looked at the questioner and I asked, ‘Are we a Theonomous culture?’ He said, ‘No.’ ‘Are we a heteronomous culture?’ He said, ‘No.’

“That leaves with us the third which is an autonomous culture, which means each person dictates their own moral prerogatives. So, I asked him, ‘Are we an autonomous culture?’ He said, ‘Yes.’

“Okay, if we are an autonomous culture and I answer your question, are you going to give me the privilege of my autonomy, too? Or as soon as you disagree with my answer, will you switch to a heteronomous mode and dictate for me what I must believe as well?”

That is the sociological dilemma.

If A disagrees with B, A wants to enforce his principles on B. Not only that, B wants to do the same to A. So there is a mutual autocracy being sought here.

But it will never be consistent in a culture that is neither Theonomous or heteronomous because everyone has their own autonomy. That’s the sociological issue.

Now, the theological issue.

Years ago, I did some forums at Indiana University. At one, a reporter came and asked if she could film some of our program that night. I said yes. She only planned to stay for a part of the program, but ended up staying for all of it, even the question and answer period afterward. She ended up walking with me back to my lodging on campus.

The reporter asked, “I have a question for you.”

“Is this an on-the-record question or an off-the-record one,” I replied.

She said, “No this is just for me. It will not appear in print.”

“Okay,” I said. “Go ahead and ask.”

She said, “I have a problem with Christianity. Christians are generally against racism, but when it comes to homosexuality, they discriminate against the homosexual. How do you explain that?”

“I find your comments so interesting,” I said. “In the first part of your question, it’s an -ism you’re talking about. In the second part of the question, you particularize it with an individual. That fascinates me.

“The reason we believe ethnic discrimination is wrong is because the race and ethnicity of a person is sacred. You do not violate a person’s race or ethnicity. It’s a sacred gift.

“And the reason we believe in an absoluteness to sexuality is that we believe sexuality is sacred. You will help me better understand your question if you tell me why you treat racism as sacred and do not do the same for sexuality.

She replied, “I never thought about it in those terms.”

Here’s what I want to say to everyone: marriage as God has given it to us is the most sacred relationship you will ever enter. Love is given one word in the English but it has four words in the Greek: agape, philio, storge and eros. Agape is God’s love. Philio is friendship or brotherly love. Storge is protective or parental love. Eros is romantic love.

Marriage is the only one that pulls these four loves together. And if you take agape out of this mix, eros is gone. Romantic love will become redefined.

For believers, the Bible gives the sacredness of marriage as God gives Christ to the church, the bridegroom and the bride. In the sacredness of the beauty of that consummate relationship between a man and a woman in the singular marital vow: “I do and I will…” When you say I do to the one, you say I don’t to all of the others. When you say I will to one, you say I won’t to the others.

Any departure from this beauty and sacredness of the full union of love is against the biblical notion of what it really means to be married. Just to take one behavior and make it look like it is aberrant is not right. All departures from this model of a man and woman are not right in the sight of God.

The theological position is a consummate relationship between a man and a woman in the procreative act and the sacredness and paying each other the ultimate compliment of taking each other at his or her word.

Theologically, we are put in a conundrum. So, how do we deal with it? This is the hard part.

I accept people with a love and genuineness on anything if their views are different than mine. I have learned to love humanity. I can put my arm around a person who has a different view on marriage.

God gives us the most sacred gift: the prerogative of choice. But God does not give us the privilege of determining a different outcome of what the choice will entail for us . Consequences are bound to the choice.

That brings us back to the Book of Genesis 4:7, where it says, “If you do what is right, you will be accepted, but if you don’t, sin crouches at the door and desires to have you.”

When I look at the sacredness of marriage, any change from the biblical point of view is a departure from the biblical mandate. But at the same time, the Bible commands us to love even those we disagree with. Our responsibility as a church is to never to hate individuals. Our privilege is to love. Only God can change the heart of a person and He is the ultimate judge. Let us be light, salt and learn to love one another and let God be the judge. We can make errors and He does not.

 

2 Comments

Filed under America, Christianity, Homosexual, Marriage, Uncategorized