Hi, welcome to Redeem the Commute. I’m Ryan, your host of the Daily Challenges. Today’s Wednesday, so it’s the day we try to let our thoughts be challenged and transformed by the words of the Bible that we saw yesterday.
We’re exploring how following Jesus resets our views of sex and marriage, using a passage from the Bible where the author, Paul, related misuse of food with misuse of sex. To justify unlimited sexual freedom, people will say, things like: Sex is a natural part of life. We have a need for sexual release, just like a need for food and water. I just need to meet the right person, be sexually compatible with someone, to find fulfillment.
To say that, we have to separate our physical selves from our spiritual selves, and God didn’t design them to be divided. Paul makes it very clear, our bodies are not just a throwaway container for our souls, but they are part and parcel of who we are as God’s creations. God didn’t create us as souls with containers, but as human beings…all in one.
The Corinthian Christians he wrote were those who committed to intentionally practicing life in God’s kingdom, even while they are still in this world. That’s what makes them Christians, they are followers of Jesus, and members of a church community.
When the Corinthians decided to be Christians, to follow Jesus and reconnect with God through his power rather than their own, they weren’t just making a decision that impacted their souls, but that impacted every part of who they were, bodies included.
Paul goes so far as to say they are joined with Christ…not just in some spiritual sense, but in a way so physical, tangible and real that he says if they go and join their bodies with a prostitute…it’s like they have joined Christ with a prostitute.
That is a clear image that our bodies matter, the physical reality of sex matters as much as the spiritual aspect, and so following Jesus naturally means trying to view sexuality in light of God’s kingdom plans, rather than our own plans.
So what did God make sex for? What limits did he give, or what boundaries did he lay out? It might surprise you. Here is what comes after yesterday’s reading from 1 Corinthians:
7 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
See how Paul views marriage and celibacy as “containers” for sexuality.
First, he encourages people to be celibate like him. Recognizes that’s hard, but full devotion to God’s kingdom is what he’s all about, and why many have chosen celibacy like him. In a culture obsessed with sex, like our own, this is a clear way to signal that sex is not a god to be worshipped, it is not our identity, it is not all that our culture says it is.
For those who can’t be celibate, Paul gives a backup option of marriage. Most people assume that Christian teaching is entirely pro-marriage, but Paul only suggests it as a backup to celibacy!
Even within marriage, Paul makes clear there are God-given limits to sexual expression. Sex isn’t to be selfish, you give up authority over your body. Sex isn’t to be abusive, either. Sex, or depriving of sex, isn’t to be used to control someone. Sex isn’t to be the only reason for the relationship, the spouses should be able to stop for prayer. Yes, prayer is more important, another clear way for Paul to communicate that sex isn’t meant to be the ultimate goal in life, or our source of meaning – God is.
Question: Whether you’re married or not, how does this lens of having been reset in Christ change your views of marriage and sex? Does it challenge our culture’s view?
Read the Bible in Sync Today
Loading Content...
Share a Link to this Message
The link has been copied to your clipboard; paste it anywhere you would like to share it.
We asked yesterday if you could list of what comes to mind when you hear the word “church”. Our lists probably included buildings, events and services. It may have included organ and choir music, stained glass windows, dusty books, bake sales and more. It may evoke good experiences, or bad ones.
But not how the Bible usually sees “church”. Church is described in several cases as a family. This is why our vision is to become a church made up of many groups who are “like family” with one another.
But you might immediately think this means something strange and cultish, usually because our ideas of family today is pretty narrow. We think of family as the nuclear, immediate family in isolation.
But in Jesus’ culture, in some cultures today, and not so long ago in Western culture, the family was the word used more naturally to describe an extended network of relations, often living in the same area.
That was the context for family in Jesus’ day, and Jesus had plans to develop a new kind of extended family. Here’s a striking moment when he described his plans to create an alternate family:
Matthew 12:46-50 While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
On the one hand, it seems Jesus just put down his mother. I just saw “Guilt Trip” where Barbra Streisand plays Seth Rogen’s overbearing mother. She calls several times a day, tries to get him to drink water constantly, and so on. In the middle of their road trip, he finally snaps, and tells her off.
It seems like that might be what Jesus is doing to his mother here. Is he putting her down, in his plans to join another family? Look at it another way. Jesus is actually elevating his disciples to family status. His followers, fellow practitioners of his kingdom, are his family.
She’s not excluded. Later in the story of Jesus’ life and death, we see Mary his mother appearing as a devoted member of this extended family, and Jesus even assigns one of the disciples to look after her after his death, saying he’s her new son, and vice versa.
Jesus isn’t narrowing his definition of family to exclude blood relatives. He’s broadening it, to include his extended family of followers as if they are blood relatives.
Question: Imagine your immediate family suddenly adopting a dozen new members. How would it change your way of life? What would be the pros and cons?
