I grew up with the assumption that sexual ethics meant waiting until marriage to unleash the dragon of desire.
Once I wore a wedding ring, sex was approved by God without any stipulations about how I approached it or how my partner felt about it. The only thing that mattered was that I never gave my “gift” to anyone but her.
Chapter 15 of my book “Love & Lust” dives into this fallacy and how it has been harmful to many Christian marriages…and to many Christian singles who believed like me that sexual morality meant “get married first.”
It is certainly possible to make the case for marriage before sex on the basis of a New Christian Sexual Ethic. However, I believe we need to have a more fundamental understanding of the reasons why someone might choose this option.
Otherwise, they will end up thinking like I did, that married sex is the same thing as moral sex.
This post shows one of the fallacies common to Christian thinking that comes from the assumption that married = moral. When Jesus said “whoever looks at a women to lust after her…” he did not include an exception clause for marriage.
If you want to dive deeper into this question, leave a comment or send me a message. I have done quite a bit of teaching on this topic and how we can untangle truth from tradition in this part of the conversation about sex and spirituality from a Christian perspective.
Download a free chapter of my book at www.sacrednotsinful.com/book-sampler
Invite me to speak at www.drkevinjenson.com [more testimonials coming soon!]
#sexualethics #exvangelical #polyamory #christianethics #sacrednotsinful #christiansexuality #premaritalsex #premaritalcounseling #premaritalcounseling #christiansex #christiansexed #biblicaltruth #evangelical #purityculture #marriednotmoral
PS. If you struggle with lust (or simply want to know how lust is different than sexual attraction, arousal, or desire), send me a message. I have some resources that can help.
How do you rationalize this viewpoint with 1 Corinthians 7:1-9 or ?
That’s a great question…and a very interesting reference 🙂 Thanks for asking!
For me, there are two important points to consider. The first is Paul’s quotation of what they said: “it is good for a man not to touch a woman”. The second is his response. He doesn’t answer the question, which intrigues me. Why does he respond to their quote by saying “because of temptation, each of you should have your own partner”?
If you read a little bit further, Paul defines the temptation as their “lack of self-control.” Self control is one of the fruits of the spirit (and is, in fact, the opposite of what porneia means). See this video on what porneia really means – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2L-UEANq4c&t=10s
Were they trying to be sexually abstinent and failing miserably…maybe even going to see prostitutes secretly instead of having sex with their partners? People do crazy things when they are ashamed of their ability or inability to control their appetites.
It seems to me that his encouragement toward marriage here may actually be an insult similar to (you don’t know how to control your bladder so you should wear a diaper). Marriage should not be an excuse to avoid developing self-control, and Paul’s subsequent arguments in this chapter suggest he thinks there is a better alternative than marriage. However, at the very least, we can conclude that sex with a married partner is better than porneia.
I will be developing my thoughts on 1 Corinthians 7 a little further as this whole chapter provides a fascinating shift in perspective on marriage from the Old Testament.
What do you think?
-KJ