Christianity and Sex

This is a post I've thought about recently, but have been a little reluctant to write. For two reasons.

One, this isn't a site about religion, specifically Christianity. Yet, the topic does come up here and there, tonight in a post from Marina concerning one theory of history. (Which I would have a hard time swallowing, but that's another issue and not where I want to go here.)

Two, because there are several who are not Christians, and I don't want to come across as pushing that. But there are some here I think who are Christians, and they could benefit from a look at this from that perspective. Plus, I've picked up that some of those who are not Christian, have nevertheless been greatly affected, often negatively, by religion, specifically Christianity. And it is to that which I wanted to address because I think for most places, the real teaching of the early Church has been perverted from what we have now, resulting in the shame and guilt we have so often experienced, instead of the healing that was put into place.

So, keep in mind, this is primarily directed at Christians, but I think those who are not, but have been affected by Christian teachings in a negative way may find this helpful. But you have been warned...this is about God.

Also, to give you a generic idea of where I'm coming from, I have a BA in religion and have been a minister for two parishes. But my readings in early Church writings and study of the Scriptures have lead me to some conclusions that you're not likely to find in many Christian churches in this day and age, especially here in the USA, but also in many places.

Much of the problems have arisen from seeing God as a judge who has a Divine Law. When we break that Law, we are guilty and deserve death. Jesus' death and resurrection was supposed to "take our place" and satisfy the demands of the law that someone die for this violation of God's law, and in God's Divine Justice, He can't just forgive us, someone has to die. So Jesus did. That's the standard Protestant theology of the atonement.

The problems with that are several, but here I want to focus primarily on this one: it makes God out to be the bad guy, thus the image people have of God sitting in heaven, looking down on us, waiting for us to mess up so he can throw his Zeus-like lightning bolt down and strike us dead because we failed to live up to some arbitrary law/rule that God set up and He's down right angry at us.

As it translates into sexual issues, pulled from the Victorian era especially, guilt is brought on because we are guilty of breaking the law of fornication or adultry or uncleanliness, etc. So we feel God's about ready to strike us dead. Then we deal with that in one of three ways. We either hide from God in fear all our lives, try to make amends/seek His forgiveness through standard Christian teachings, or we reject the whole theology (and assuming that represents the fullness of Christianity, that too) and no longer accept that God exist, or if he does, we want no part of him. What doesn't tend to happen is healing. First one, we're too busy hiding by various means, ignoring God, that the issues get swept under the rug, only to build up into a festering pile of rotting stench.

In the second, one may find some "peace" and believe they've been forgiven, but they still haven't dealt with the issue of their perception of God as someone who is unable to forgive their slip-up short of killing someone, so there remains an element of unhealthy fear that will only sink them deeper should they find themselves drawn back to the sin (or some who sweep even that issue under the rug by saying no matter what one does, they are "saved"). In this second instance, what doesn't happen is dealing with the real consequences of the issues.

In the third, the wrong concept is rejected, but the healing concept is not found to replace it. Instead, the baby tends to get thrown out with the bath water. Plus, the affects of those wrong teachings tend to have consequences far into the life because the underlying issues have never been dealt with, making it difficult to find full healing.

But from the beginning, God and salvation were not understood in this way. The current understanding is really a variation on Anselm's attempt to explain the atonement, except instead of the metaphor of a court room and judge, he used the owing of a debt and God is the creditor. In his attempt to explain why Jesus had to die and how that saves us, he said that by sinning, we violate God's honor, and in so doing, we owe that back to him. Except that His honor is infinite, and so there is no way we can pay that back, being finite. So Jesus becomes man and dies, so that he also being fully God and infinite himself, can pay back the Father the debt we owe in our behalf. It is from this that the Catholic Church derives its concepts of merits, because Christ had enough righteousness, an infinite amount, to pay off our unrighteousness before God.

When Protestants took off with this, it had transmuted into the legal framework. Same principles, but a different metaphor.

But what Christ established and the early Church understood is that the Church is a spiritual hospital. Note Christ's words in the Gospels that he came to call the sinners, not the righteous. It's not that the righteous didn't need healing, but as long as they think of themselves as righteous, they cannot be helped. But sinners can. When you're sick, the first step is to know your sick, then you go to a doctor.

This is the reason in the Greek, that the same word is used for "salvation" and "to heal." The only way the translators know which English word to use is by context, but in the Greek, it is the exact same word. So always at the heart of what salvation is about is healing. The healing of the sickness of the fall, which was the loss of divine life in man that allowed him to have contact with the divine God without being destroyed by His presence.

You can relate the affects of the fall to HIV. As created, our immune system keeps us from getting sick and dying. But when HIV comes on the scene, it makes the immune system sick, which allows any other sickness to have free reign over us and potentially kill us. Man was created to commune with God. When the fall happened, we essentially lost our "immune system" to his presence. That would have immediately brought death to us, but he hid himself from us so that we could live in our fallen state, in the hopes of healing us and redeeming us.

Sin then isn't the breaking of an arbitrary law that God made, rather the Law is detailing those activities that destroy relationships between ourselves and him, and thus destroy His creation as he created it to work. He created complete unity, but the fall introduced disharmony. And so we have reasons for books like Marina's because we are not "reunited" as we should be, thanks to this fall.

Salvation/healing then results by the re-infusion of divine life into us so that we can come into his presence without dying. That is why Jesus had to die, so He could be broken, and we could participate in his Life. This is why in the early Church, the Eucharist was called "The Medicine of Immortality." It is why the early Church understood the Christian life to be a means to bring healing of our condition, rather than condemnation and death. God no longer is the meanie who is waiting to punish us, rather He's the guy who gave His only Son so that we could have real life and be healed. So we could once again come into His presence and have the right "immunities" to not die there (the second death, or hell). God doesn't want us to die, He's giving us time to be healed.

What that all means in the context of this site's purpose for those who are Christians and believe in the Christian understanding of God, is that "guilt" and "shame" for committing sexual "sins" is misplaced. It would be the equivalent to coming to the doctor and feeling ashamed that you caught the flu. It should be just as matter of fact to come to God and say, "I'm sick. I need help."

There is a difference, yes. Getting sick doesn't involve your will whereas sin usually does. But addictions are strong, and we are fallen humans. God knows this. We should too. God only wants to heal us, not punish us. So we shouldn't be afraid to come to Him. We shouldn't hide from Him.

And we shouldn't try to pretend that we're good Christians when on the inside we are all too aware of our sins, i.e., those things that are destroying our relationships with others and God. That prevents us from obtaining the healing we need, because Christ didn't come to call the righteous. As long as you think you are, you'll miss Christ who is the means of healing. Admit you need a doctor and take the prescription. Then you can find healing. Because the whole human race fell into this sickness. No one is free from it on their own.

But the unnatural shame and guilt brought on by many results in both this view of God as out to get them, and the facade that many churches want to present that everyone here is righteous and perfect. We don't sin! I.E., everyone here never does anything that destroys relationships. Yeah right. It's the same problem noted when people mention that the Church is full of hypocrites: come on in, there's room for one more! We're all hypocrites in one way or another (holding one belief but our actions don't match). We're all sick.

But the result of that is, I have no basis to judge anyone else. I'm as much a sinner as the next guy. Which is why when Jesus said to the people about to throw rocks at the woman caught in adultery, "the one without sin can throw the first stone," not one of the "righteous" Pharisees could throw that first rock. Then Jesus told her that neither did He condemn her. But she was caught in the act! She was guilty as all get out! Yet Christ, God himself, didn't condemn her. Who are we to do so with anyone else's sin if God didn't condemn that woman caught red-handed in adultery? Therefore, we don't come to God in guilt and shame and fear that he's going to strike us dead, we come to Him because in both the OT and NT He is shown as merciful and forgiving when we come to Him admitting we're sick, and need His help to be healed.

And thus, you have no basis to berate yourself for slipping into masturbation or porn or whatever. You want to avoid those because as Marina shows scientifically, doing so helps our relationships to bond stronger. They are not "nasty" or "bad" because God doesn't like them, and doesn't like us to enjoy pleasure. They are bad because they destroy those bonds, tear apart what God created to be united with each other and Him. You see this through the whole Bible, Old and New Testaments. Everyone of the Ten Commandments, for instance, deals with how to have a healthy relationship with God and others. For instance, stealing from someone will not create a positive bonding relationship with them.

I hope those not holding to Christian beliefs, but decided to read this whole post, will not be too offended at the "God talk." It isn't my aim here to convert anyone, or present the Gospel in an attempt to wave it in anyone's face. But those are issues that I think Christians have dealt with, and I thought it would be beneficial for those Christians who come here to get a handle on why these sexual issues have often from the Christian standpoint been dealt with in a way that is more destructive than healing. And for those who've been affected by them to have the handles, even if you don't believe in Christianity anymore, to sort through the errors in that teaching that lead you down the wrong paths initially, and how you might see the healthy way to deal with those issues, whether or not you ever end up a Christian in the future.

But if I've crossed a line with this post, Marina, feel free to delete it. I won't be offended. I'm only hoping it can be a help to some to see how the original Christian teachings can actually line up very well with the approach you are taking in your book and on this site.

Thanks for indulging me.