Blog

by Katie Erickson

Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
- 1 Corinthians 7:8-16

In the first part of chapter 7, Paul began answering a question from the Corinthians about married life as a Christian. This faith was still new to them, so they needed instructions on how to live properly. Since the beginning of chapter 5, Paul spent a lot of time condemning the sin of incest and other sexual sins in their congregation, so it is helpful now for him to explain what a good example of marriage should look like.

Here, Paul gives advice first to the single people in the church – those who are unmarried and widows. In verses 8-9, it almost looks like he contradicts himself, both saying that it is good for them to stay unmarried but also it’s good for them to marry. The reasons it is good for them to stay single are spelled out in more detail later in the chapter (verses 25-35), but for now he states that it is good to stay unmarried just as he is not married. However, the catch to that is if they are unable to control themselves sexually. Paul considers it better for them to be married where they are in accordance with God’s will to experience sex with their spouse rather than having sex outside of marriage.

Next, Paul addresses divorce in verses 10-11. He first specifies that this is not his own command but that it comes from the Lord. When he talked about single people, that was his own opinion, but here he specifies that this is from God. A married couple staying together is not just good; it is a command from God! The command against divorce echoes the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5:32, Matthew 19:3-9, and Luke 16:18, so there is ample evidence to back up what Paul is saying here. Paul specifically calls out both the husband and the wife in this situation, unlike Jesus’ teachings that seem to specifically call out the man only. But the focus of this passage is on maintaining or restoring marriage as being a command from God.

In the next few verses, Paul goes beyond the instructions of Jesus, specifically addressing a situation where one of the marriage partners has become a Christian and the other has not. Again, Paul clarifies that these are his thoughts, not commands from Jesus. We do believe these words are God-inspired Scripture just like everything else in the Bible, of course, so Paul’s words here are still very important.

Paul makes it clear that whether it is the husband or the wife who is a believer when the other partner isn’t, the couple should not get a divorce (verses 12-13). This was likely a big problem in the early church where people were coming to faith all the time. If one spouse heard the gospel and believed while the other didn’t, they need assurance that staying with their spouse was the right thing to do. This is a different situation than a believer choosing to marry an unbeliever; Paul will address that in 2 Corinthians 6:14. Here, he is talking about when they are already married and one spouse becomes a believer.

Paul explains the importance of remaining in a “mixed” marriage like this in verse 14. The believer can be used by God to influence the unbelieving spouse. This idea of the unbelieving spouse being “sanctified” by the believing spouse does not imply moral purity; rather, it emphasizes a relationship with God in that the family is set apart for God. This makes it even more important for the believing spouse to teach the Christian faith to the children and to bring them up as believers. The hope, of course, is for the believing spouse to bring the unbelieving spouse to saving faith in Jesus Christ.

However, Paul realizes in verse 15 that the unbeliever may choose to leave the marriage. In this case, the believer must respect that and let the unbeliever go since it was the unbeliever who broke the marriage contract. Another reason Paul gives for this is how we as believers are called to live in peace, and it would not be a peaceful relationship if the unbeliever is no longer committed to the marriage. The believer should do their best to live at peace with the unbelieving spouse, but they should not be forced to stay.

In verse 16, Paul emphasizes again that the marriage should remain intact, even if both spouses are not believers in Jesus. The hope is that God will use the believer to bring the unbeliever to faith and salvation.

How does this apply to us today, in our culture where divorce is rampant? While there are Old Testament laws that we no longer need to follow today because they were fulfilled in Jesus, these are New Testament instructions from Paul, and these verses are still part of the Scriptures and were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Even though Paul clarifies that some of this is only his instructions and not instructions from Jesus, what Paul writes here lines up with the teachings of Jesus. God instituted marriage back in Genesis 2:24, and He desires that marriages should remain intact.

If you are single, it is wise to remain single as Paul did, but if you are married, it gives God glory and honor to remain married. We are called to give God glory in all things, including our relationship status.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Katie Erickson

Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
- 1 Corinthians 7:1-7

The next 7 chapters of 1 Corinthians (through the end of chapter 14) contain Paul’s answers to questions that were raised to him by the first-century Corinthian church. While Paul has been providing teaching and instruction specific to their church in that context, that is made even clearer here by the fact that he is addressing matters that they wrote to him about.

Paul will address two related questions from the Corinthians in this chapter. We see the first question here in verse 1 regarding married life as a Christian, and the second begins in verse 25 where Paul talks about whether certain Christians should get married.

As always with reading Scripture, it is important to keep the context of a passage in mind when jumping right in like this. Paul has spent the two chapters prior to this discussing an issue of sexual immorality in the Corinthian church and how they should handle that, along with other sins. Just prior to this passage, he told the people to honor God with their bodies. So, talking about marriage in a Christian context is a natural step after all that setup.

All the sexual sin that was occurring in Corinth (both inside the church and outside of it) appears to be the basis for the statement, “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman” (verse 1). But, that statement appears to go against the traditional Jewish belief of being married; when married, it would be fully expected for a man to have sexual relations with his wife. This statement by Paul is not to be taken as an absolute. It should be taken either as a repeating of a statement that the people of Corinth made to Paul for him to discuss, or it is due to the nature of the specific issues that the church in Corinth was struggling with. Elsewhere in Paul’s writings, he appears to be in favor of marriage – see Ephesians 5 and 1 Timothy 3 for example.

Paul clears up any misunderstanding with specific instruction in verse 2: “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.” It’s not enough to tell people not to do something, but they need instruction on what they should do instead. To counter all of the sexual immorality that was occurring, they should instead only have sexual relations with their spouses. Sex should only be between a husband and wife (verse 3). Paul realizes that both genders will experience temptation in this way, so he makes his instructions very clear. This is the way that the people should honor God with their bodies (1 Corinthians 6:20) – by only having sexual relations with their spouse.

Paul’s instructions in verse 4 are reminiscent of God’s original design for marriage given in Genesis 2:24: “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” When the husband and wife are united as one flesh, they no longer belong only to themselves but to one another. They do not have full authority over their own body, but their spouse has authority over their body as well. This is the implementation of that “one flesh” idea that God instituted.

Paul emphasizes that unity and mutual agreement in verse 5 while also emphasizing the married couple’s relationship to God. Paul’s description of depriving themselves for the purpose of prayer and then coming together again is similar to the idea of fasting, except it is fasting from sexual relations rather than fasting from food. They should be devoted to prayer and building up their relationship with God – focus on Him rather than focus on what they are lacking.

When Paul says, “I say this as a concession, not as a command” in verse 6, scholars debate what “this” is that he is referring to. The general consensus is that it refers to verse 2, meaning that while marriage is a part of God’s plan for His creation, it is not mandatory. This is supported by verse 7, where Paul says how he wishes all men were single like him but he realizes that some do have a strong desire to be married while others have a strong desire to refrain from marriage.

His final point in this section on how everyone has been given a gift seems like a foreshadowing of Paul’s teaching on spiritual gifts that is coming in 1 Corinthians 12. But in the context here, it appears to refer to either embracing the gift of marriage or refraining from it, which can also be a gift.

It is important to remember that this letter of 1 Corinthians was written to specific people in a specific context at a specific point in time, but the concepts still apply to us today. While our culture has adamantly tried to change the definition of marriage, God does not change and God’s definition of marriage has not changed. Marriage is still defined by God as between one man and one woman. God’s design of marriage is still supposed to be reflective of His relationship with His Church. Marriage cannot be redefined because God has not redefined it for us; His definition still applies.

Marriage and proper sexual relations within it are one way that we as believers can honor God with our lives and with our bodies. That was true back in the first century in Corinth, and it is still true for us today.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

Let me first say that there are plenty of people who will tell you why you should ‘play the field’ and experiment with sex. There are also plenty of people who will tell their story of waiting, having a bad sexual experience or a broken marriage, and then saying you shouldn't wait because they wished they hadn't. So, if opinion and other people's experiences are the only criteria you are going to use, then anything I say here won't matter. Anyone can justify why they decided to give up the gift of their virginity, and of course it makes them feel better if you join the crowd and do the same. 

But if you are serious about this question, I want to encourage you to read all the blog posts this week on this question. And in this post, I want to deal with one important aspect of this question - giving into your desires/flesh. 

Read the book of Galatians - especially look into 5:17-19 and 6:8 (and the context). There is a simple concept being expressed here. The flesh takes the path of least resistance. Once our flesh learns it can act a particular way, it continues to crave that activity. And if it has learned to ignore any boundaries with that activity, then our flesh will desire that activity anywhere and with anyone it can experience it with. That is why Paul - the writer of Galatians - says that sowing into (following the path of) the flesh leads to destruction. 

Romans 8:8 says that it if we live according to the flesh, we cannot praise God. We cannot remember, celebrate, and trust Him.

I waited until I was married to have intercourse. So did my wife. Our relationship and intimacy are awesome! This is mainly because we have trained our bodies to find the satisfaction for our flesh through the Spirit of God first, which means we trained our flesh to understand that there is only one relationship, one commitment, and one unique place where this level of intimacy happens. Because we did that, we are able to set aside thoughts and lust and distractions that we may have in regard to other people who may be attractive to us. The flesh doesn't care about moral boundaries, but because we trained it properly to understand the purpose of sex is to consummate a marriage, we are able to more easily honor God and each other with our sexuality.

The opposite is true for those who have sex outside of marriage. Even if you try to create a moral boundary other than marriage (‘we're exclusive,’ ‘gonna get married someday,’ ‘really love them,’ etc.), they cannot stand up to the temptation. Removing sex from its intended context and placing in a false boundary is useless - our mind and spirit know it, and so does our flesh. There is no staying power and no faithfulness in false boundaries for sex. 

As I shared, this is only one piece of the answer to this question. So, read the other blog posts. In the mean time, consider whether you want a healthy sex life and a faithful partnership with your spouse. And most of all, do you want to be blessed in that relationship and the depth of that intimacy? Then honor God with your body, train it toward His purposes, and you will experience the favor and goodness of that tremendous gift called sex. 

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Bill Seng

“And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.” ~Genesis 4:1

Fornication is any sort of sexual intercourse that takes place outside of marriage. This includes premarital sex. Fornication is mentioned over 30 times in the Bible (though it’s a word mostly used in older versions like the King James Version) and is never mentioned in either a casual or positive manner. The reason for this is simple: it devalues the sacred bond of sex.

Genesis 4:1 is the first time that it is mentioned that Adam and Eve shared in any sort of intercourse.  Although it is immediately following the Fall, we must assume the way that it is described sets the standard for what sex is all about. Take note that Eve was already given to Adam by God himself (Genesis 2:22) and they were commanded to be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1:28). The word that indicates that Adam and Eve had sex is a Hebrew word which means “to know.” It is commonly used throughout the Old Testament to indicate that intercourse took place. This should already hint to the reader that sex is not to be a casual or noncommittal bond.

One might argue that the spiritual bond is what unites a man and a woman, thus sex is acceptable so long as that exists. I argue that the spiritual bond cannot exist in purity unless it is acknowledged by a community, as a communal recognition of marriage was required in the Old Testament. This acknowledgment was so revered that the king of Egypt trembled in fear after being informed that he had unwittingly taken another man's wife to be his own (Genesis 12:18). Perhaps the reason for this communal acknowledgment is for the sake of accountability and to help encourage the couple to fulfill their marital vows. Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged and honored by others or it is not a pure relationship that honors God.

Sex is to be first and foremost honoring to God. How does this relate to premarital sex? According to God's plan, all things have an appropriate time. It is written that when Jesus returns he will take away the church as his bride (Matthew 25:10). Following Christ's “marriage” to the church, believers will experience all of the joys that come with being in God's presence. Sex, in an earthly sense, is supposed to be representative of that joy. To squander it before its time is right is like trying to tell God that your plan is better than his. Also, the Old Testament likens the worship of false gods to fornication (Ezekiel 16). All around, premarital sex dishonors God.

In a secular sense, then, there should be no problem or reason to prohibit premarital sex. The reasons I outlined are purely religious, and rightly so. There are scientific reasons for why sex should be saved for marriage, but the scientific repercussions of breaking this order are merely symptomatic of a larger problem, namely that of sin. In fact, most people who are truly rooted in secular ideology embrace the fact that they can sleep with whoever they want, whenever they want, and get away with pretending that they feel no guilt, and that they are somehow better than you for doing so. God’s plan is the most satisfying. He will reward those who honor his plan for sex and marriage.

Like the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, God is not prohibiting anyone from experiencing a wonderful joy by prohibiting premarital sex. He is instead trying to prevent us from opening a Pandora’s box of shame and sin, and repeat it. His plan for sex is what’s best and is both statistically and scientifically proven to be what works best for the human race. He designed us, he knows how we operate, and he knows how to ensure the maximum level of pleasure. Furthermore, when sex is practiced in the context of marriage, it honors God and serves as a reminder that the greatest joys of eternity are yet to come.

by Katie Erickson

One of the questions that we at Worldview Warriors are often asked is, “What is the importance of abstaining from sex until I’m married?” Last week we finished up our writings on the book of Habakkuk, so before we start writing on Judges next week we’ll answer this question.

I can give a variety of simple answers to this question, such as that abstinence prevents pregnancy that you may not be ready for, and that it prevents sexually transmitted diseases. There are also Biblical answers, some of which I covered in a blog post a few years ago titled What is Fornication? I encourage you to read that post for more on this.

But the real root of this question is who or what you have as the authority in your life. If you are following the world’s ways, then it’s likely the fear of negative consequences (unexpected pregnancy or STDs) that will guide this decision in your life. But if you are trying to follow God’s ways in your life, the answer is to honor God.

As we wrote about a few weeks ago when we looked at how far is too far to go sexually with your boyfriend or girlfriend, if you’re even asking the question then you’ve likely already gone too far. If you’ve even thought about going farther in a desiring way, you have already sinned.

God created and defined marriage in Genesis 2:20-24. For more on what marriage is, check out “What Is Marriage? God and the Church” and “What is Marriage? One Man and One Woman.” The most important thing to note is that God specifically designed sexual intercourse for the marriage relationship, where two people become one flesh. If you have sex before you’re married (whether just once or multiple times), then you have sex with your spouse, how many fleshes have just joined together? Definitely more than two have become one, because of the way that God has created sex to work.

We honor God with our lives when we follow the guidelines that He has established, which really are based in our well being. We honor God with our body by not sinning sexually. The apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 6:13b, “The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.”

Are you seeking to follow the world’s ways? if so, you can do whatever you want, but you should expect that there will be negative consequences when you go against God’s natural law. If you are seeking to honor God and follow His ways, one way you can show that with your actions is to honor your body and not sin sexually. God created sex to be a wonderful thing, when it stays within His guideline of a marriage relationship. It is important to abstain from sex until marriage, because by doing so you are honoring the God who created you.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

I remember a few years ago counseling a married couple who had started attending where we pastored. Their marriage was unraveling because of hurts, fears, and unresolved anger that had piled up from long before they were married. We knew they had been seeing a professional counselor, so in an effort to see what we could do, we asked how that went.

The wife looked at me and my wife and said, "Well, it was good at first; we felt like the counselor really cared about us and was willing to help us. But then he kept wanting us to talk about the past. That stuff is painful, and makes it hard for us to be with each other. We wanted him to help us now and fix our marriage, not dredge up the past."

Our hearts sank as we realized the barriers they had built against their own health. By refusing to deal with the past, they were refusing to change their present, and ensuring their pain and baggage would rip their future apart. Not surprisingly, they disengaged from counseling with us too.

In order for any good to come out of a desperate situation, there is often a painful process of purging. Like our bodies fighting against disease, the wound or infection must be dealt with first before healing and health can resume.

Read Habakkuk 3:3-10. For context, be sure to read the previous weeks' blog posts. In this section Habakkuk continues to recount the events of the past when God rescued His people and dealt with their rebellion. It's interesting to me that Habakkuk asks if God was angry with the rivers and the sea as he poetically recounts how God chastised Egypt and even His own people. Maybe this is just a poetic device or artistic portrayal, but it seems as if Habakkuk is asking about the collateral damage in the midst of God's work. While this is not the full focus of the passage, it's worth considering for a moment.

Where is God purging infection, rebellion, selfishness, etc. from you? Are you willing to let God do whatever is necessary to bring you to health? Will you trust that what you may consider collateral damage may be part of the process God uses to heal you and others?

I encourage you, don't do what that married couple did and avoid the healing process. Dig in and let God have total access.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Jason DeZurik

Recently I was told in a conversation with someone a bit younger than me basically that I didn’t understand today’s world. People have sex outside of marriage all the time, and to promote abstinence from sex before marriage and to only have sex with one person was thinking like someone from the 1920s.

While I never disagreed that people have sex before marriage, I did encourage him to actually listen to what I was saying and to stop making things up in his head, which were more than likely based off of previous conversations he had been a part of.

I shared with him that two consenting adults who decided to have sex together are making a choice and should be responsible for their actions and the consequences of their actions, whether married or not. He then said how old fashioned I was and kept attacking the position I was holding in our discussion. My position was a Biblical one based on a Biblical worldview, and he wasn’t really interested in having a conversation about it. What he was interested in, though, was imposing his “wisdom” upon me and my “old fashioned” thinking.

What this young man has done, along with many others in our society, is to make sex a “little god” in their life. This is one that so many seem willing to bow down to, while at the same time trying to evade the consequences of their choices and actions.

What do I mean? Well, please watch this video to understand a little more of what I am trying to convey:

As you can see, this person, even though she thinks she is trying to “work hard,” has really created a much more difficult situation for herself. In the process, she has bought into victim mentality, even though she has consented to her situation.

To say that sexual activity between two consenting adults is not a choice is nothing short of an attempt to take away an individual’s responsibility in regard to this act. All sexual activity between two consenting adults is always a choice.

Should we as believers in Jesus Christ educate and warn others of the sinful consequences to their actions? I believe we should, but we need to follow the example of Christ and speak out the truth in love. If our loving warning or truth we speak falls on deaf ears or is flat out ignored, then I believe we need to allow those who want to sin to go down their path of destruction. When they do this, God’s natural law to teach them the error of their ways. If someone chooses wisely, then God’s natural law will reward them or give good benefits for their actions. In this way, people get to choose to follow God’s truth or not, which is a great teacher.

When people say that someone is born a certain way regarding their sexual preference or they just cannot control themselves, they are ignoring the fact that all sexual activity between two consenting adults is still a choice. Therefore, this leads to the conclusion that when people make the claim that someone is born a heterosexual, homosexual, or whatever else comes around, this claim is basically moot because all sexual activity between two consenting adults is a choice. Therefore, any sexual activity outside of the bounds of the God-given institution of marriage, found in Genesis between one man and one woman, is a sin.

Don’t allow sexual sin to become a little god in your life. And if this has gripped you…
#1 Seek out Christ even more. Spend time in His word and in prayer.
#2 Find an accountability group to keep you focused on Christ.

There are many other things you can do as well, including contacting us at Worldview Warriors. I look forward to hearing from you with your experiences in the Lord and helping you to overcome this little god in your life.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

In an effort to address some of the questions our website and radio show get at WorldviewWarriors.org, we are selecting some for our bloggers to respond to. You may see these pop up from time to time, so keep an eye out.

A question we get quite often is, “How far is too far to go sexually with a boyfriend or girlfriend?” really is a good question to ask. Just asking the question is the start of defining some healthy boundaries in the relationship, and examining what is God’s best for your relationship.

Let me address four things to consider:

1 – If in asking the question you are really asking “How far can we push a passionate moment before sinning?” then you need to step back and examine your heart. If God is most important in your life, then pushing boundaries and getting away with making out would not be something you play around with. A loyal heart doesn’t cheat, and it doesn’t worry about getting caught. A loyal heart doesn’t push the edge as far as they can go without getting in “trouble” or “caught.” A loyal heart chases purity and integrity, and it protects itself and its love interests from wandering near boundaries. Here is a simple practical example: for a young man, a French kiss feels like an upward invitation to a lower invasion. When a couple understands this, in the interest of purity, it may be a good idea not to participate in something that raises desire to follow through with intercourse. This is where both in a couple need to be wanting God’s best first, and be willing to talk to each other and parents about what “pushes their buttons” and would be wise to steer clear of. Without that level of friendship, maturity, and commitment of faith, romantic involvement of any kind should be avoided.

2 – Please read 1 Corinthians 6:12-20. This one almost speaks for itself. As followers of Jesus Christ, and because of His grace and forgiveness, we have great freedom and should not fear if we make a mistake. We should, however, be aware of the consequences of our choices, especially when it comes to sex. To have sex with someone, whether oral sex, mutual masturbation, or full on intercourse, there is a bond that happens in our mind, spirit, and body. We are uniting with that person, sharing in something physically with that person that is designed by God to be exclusively with one person of the opposite sex. It is meant to be a bond expressed in the presence of and with the unifying power of God’s Holy Spirit. It is meant to be with someone of the opposite sex, and for life. If this relationship is not moving toward marriage, then you may want to consider what your real motivation is in dating this person. Sex IS the physical expression of a marriage commitment.

3 – I had a friend in high school whose father was a gynecologist. He was not a practicing Christian, and yet at lunch one day when the subject of sex came up, like it usually does in high school, he mentioned that he was not having sex with anyone who was not his wife. I was shocked to hear him say it, especially since he was part of the punk/metal/forerunner to goth/emo crowd. So, I asked him why he was waiting. He said his dad had taught him from medical case studies how the male and female sex organs are designed to shape together over repeated sexual encounters between a male and female. When people have multiple partners, it can cause problems with the sex organs because they are bending and reshaping with each new partner. He said he learned enough that just knowing the effects of changing partners once wasn’t worth the risk to him.

Now I am sure that our bodies have a tremendous capacity to adjust, and there are many people who have had a spouse die, or had multiple partners and apparently have few or no issues. But as a young person I took that medical information to heart. It impacted me to realize that every part of my body would be affected by sex, and that my body would even try to form a perfect fit with the woman I was with. The preciousness of that actually deepened my commitment to stay a virgin until I was married. Consider the sacredness of your body shaping to a unique fit with someone else, that is meant to be for a lifetime.

4 – The mind is the last place I am going to address, but the first place where purity is tested. Jesus said, “if any man looks at a woman lustfully, then he has committed adultery” (Matthew 5:27-28). That means our first compromise of our values, the first compromise of our commitment to Jesus Christ, the first compromise of our purity with our boyfriend/girlfriend is in our thoughts. If we are lusting (imagining having sex with someone), we are actually practicing a compromise of our physical purity.

So, there are four things to consider in response to the question of how far is too far. My questions back to you are: Are you actively seeking to honor God with your life? What are you doing to decide your boundaries before you are in a passionate situation? How will your relationship show that God is first, in your life and in everything to two of you share?

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Charlie Wolcott

[This post is part of a series. The previous post is here.]

We’re on round 9 in this series dealing with Matthew Vines and his 10 Reasons in support of homosexuality with one more to go. Here is his 9th argument:

“From the beginning of Genesis, human beings are described as having a need for relationship, just as God himself is relational. Sexuality is a core part of what it means to be a relational person, and to condemn LGBT people’s sexuality outright damages their ability to be in relationship with all people—and with God.”

As I have been saying in this entire series: watch out for smooth words and appealing to emotion. Matthew Vines speaks the truth in his first sentence here. Yes, from Genesis forward, humans have always had a need for relationships. We should have all heard the phrase “no man is an island” in some way, shape, or form. Mankind needs to be in relationship with each other. No one questions that.

However, Vines oversteps his boundaries and his definitions with his second sentence here: that sexuality is a core part of what it means to be a relational person. That is not true at all. Being relational does not require sex at all. Sex belongs only in the marriage bed which I addressed in more detail last week. But this brings up a key question: What does it mean to be relational if sex is not a core part of it?

There are many different types of relationships; marriage is just one of them. We have relationships with our family, our blood. We have relationships with friends, in fact two types of friends - acquaintances and true friends. Acquaintances are those we love to hang out with but we don’t have that deep bond where we can trust them with even our darkest secrets. A true friend is someone as Proverbs says can stick closer than a brother. We have relationships with those we work with. We have relationships with those we live around. There are many, many types of relationships. And only ONE of these gets the privilege of sexual intimacy.

If sexuality is a core part of relationships, does Vines want to have sex with every person he is friends with, or with any of his family members? I better quit there, but I am dead serious when I ask this. If sexuality is a core part of relationships, how does Vines integrate this with his claim that he can have a “loving, committed” relationship with just one partner? I am pretty sure he is talking about just “marriage” between two men, but such a defense does not fit with this claim here. My point here is that if you have far more relationships that have nothing to do with sex than you do with those whom you would, then sexuality is not a core part of relationships. Keep in mind that in the previous argument about marriage, Vines claims that procreation is not a key part of marriage. Now he is saying sexual activity is a key part of ANY relationship. I hope you can see the problem here.

But there is another charge Vines is making. He claims that to deny homosexuals their sexual intimacy is to deny their ability to have relationships with others AND WITH GOD! I made that all caps on purpose. To deny homosexuals their “rights” to have sex hurts their relationship with God. I have to ask two questions: What relationship with God was there to begin with? And which “God” is he referencing?

Matthew Vines MUST defend his claim that homosexuality is not a sin, and on his website and in his main talk he never did. He just claimed it and tried to explain away the Scriptural references against it. Many Scriptures deal with sexual deviancy of all types, not just homosexuality. When one chooses to pursue a lifestyle that goes against what God clearly ordained, can said person have a relationship with God? Any relationship with God we have must come from Christ, and if not, that relationship is one of enmity and rebellion against him. Vines claims to be a Christian, but with what he teaches, I cannot simply give him the benefit of the doubt. There is a huge difference between struggling with a sinful issue and promoting it. Romans 1 does not speak kindly of those who do evil and approve of it.

Matthew Vines, in his talk, said part of Christianity requires “dying to self.” However, Vines is asking us to die to “our traditions and our sensibilities” and yet Vines refuses to do it himself. Part of Christianity is surrendering control over your sexual life to Christ and have him rule over it, something Vines would not dare consider without having to give up his dream. And I have to wonder what relationship Vines has with God. It’s clearly not one I see out of every other person I would be willing to stand in court and testify they are a born again believer.

It also makes me wonder which “God” Vines worships. MANY, many people today do not worship the God of the Bible who sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die for our sins. They worship an image of God in their own making. They choose the parts of God they like and create an image of him that only has those parts, completely ignoring the other parts. They want a safe, loving, merciful “god” who just lets them live how they want to live, and to let them into paradise when it is over. However, this is not the God who Christians worship. The God of the Bible is good, but he is not safe. When we take sin lightly, we take God lightly and that never ends well.

So is sexuality a core part of relationships? I will stand and emphatically say “NO!” It is only a part of a particular type of relationship (heterosexual marriage) and any deviancy to that definition that God made is sin, rebellion against his ways, and abuse of that which God gave us. Any sexual activity, even in thought, outside of marriage, is adultery. It is a crime every one of us is guilty of in some way, shape, or form. And it is crime that makes all of us in need of a Savior. But Jesus did not die merely to save us from the consequences of that sin. He died to save us from that sin… period.

Matthew Vines, Jesus died to save you from homosexuality, not to give you the freedom to do it. Drug addict, Jesus died to save you from the grip of drugs, not merely from the consequences of doing them. Porn addict, Jesus died to free your mind from those images. Bitter person, Jesus died to free you from that anger. Gossiper, Jesus died to free you from your loose tongue. Lover of money, Jesus died to free you from greed. The list goes on. Jesus did not die to save us from hell alone. He died so we can be freed from sin, from the very problem and presence of sin. If we continued to seek and pursue that sin, however, I must ask, “Are we saved?”

Next week, I wrap up this series by dealing with Vines claims of if “Other Christians support homosexuality, you should too.”

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Charlie Wolcott

[This post is part of a series. The previous post is here, and the next post is here.]

I am now back to wrap up my series on Matthew Vines and his 10 Reasons Why the Bible Supports Homosexuality. I have three more posts to do including this one. Here is argument #8.

“Marriage often involves procreation, but according to the New Testament, it’s based on something deeper: a lifelong commitment to a partner. Marriage is even compared to the relationship between Christ and the church, and while the language used is opposite-sex, the core principles apply just as well to same-sex couples.”

This is an interesting argument and honestly, most people would not know what to say about this. I have seen a number of people stumble and stammer trying to find a response. The whole concept is so foreign that trying to process it really causes thinking malfunctions.

However, as I’ve been praying about how to address this, one thing came into mind. In order to call something “good,” it must be in full agreement with God’s standards. That means 100% agreement, a standard none of us can match. Because God is so holy and so perfect, it took a perfect, innocent ‘lamb’ to die in our place to take away what we truly deserve for our rebellion against God. But this also got me thinking about definitions.

When we define something, it has certain characteristics it must match or it is not that object. Geometry is a great example. Take the shapes of a square, rectangle, rhombus, and parallelogram for example. A square is a four-sided figure with all four sides being of equal length and with 90 degree angles in the corners. A rectangle is a four-sided figure with all corners at 90 degrees, however two sides are a different length than the others. A rhombus is like a square, however the corners are not necessarily 90 degrees, but all four sides are the same length. A parallelogram as a four-sided figure with two parallel sides regardless of length or angles of corners.

A square fits the definition of a rectangle AND a parallelogram. It however does NOT fit the definition of a rhombus. A rectangle fits the definition of a parallelogram, but being a rectangle does not make it a square. A diamond can fit the definition of a square, but it can also fit the definition of a rhombus. A rhombus has some of the characteristics of a square, but not all, and yet is also a parallelogram.

Now what does geometry have to do with marriage? Matthew Vines is suggesting we can define marriage generically in a similar way I described a parallelogram. The Bible describes marriage in the context of a square but his picture of a homosexual marriage is like a rhombus. Both squares and rhombuses have a lot of in common: four equal length sides, two sides parallel, and two other sides parallel. The only difference is that a square must have 90 degree angle corners and a rhombus does not. So likewise, a heterosexual marriage and a homosexual marriage are almost identical (according to Vines) except that heterosexual is male-female and homosexual is same sex. That’s the argument being made.

But do not get lost in the argument. There is a deeper issue at hand here. Vines is suggesting he can define a marriage other than what God gave. He thinks he can suggest marriage involved a “deeper” issue than what the Bible actually describes. This thinking puts Vines in a position where he is above Scripture. Who really gets to define marriage? Vines? The courts? A preacher? Or God? If God defines marriage, Vines’ definition goes and any definition that does not 100% comply to that definition is not that thing. What is this definition? Without going in to excessive detail, the key thing to point out is part of the definition is “male and female.” That means any definition of marriage MUST include “male and female.”

If God defines marriage like a square, then anything that does not completely fit the definition of a square is not marriage. A rhombus looks a lot like a square but because it does not have 90 degree angles, it cannot be a square. I mentioned before that Vines’ arguments tend to show hints of jealousy and coveting. He desires in a homosexual relationship that which God ordained for heterosexual relationships. Anything that violates that ordination is a corruption of what God intended. A homosexual relationship is a relationship, but because it does not fit the definition God gave, it cannot be a marriage.

If you look throughout the history of the Bible, one of the things Satan has sought to destroy over and over again is the institution of marriage. It started in Genesis 3. Satan maneuvered to get between Eve and her husband. Adam’s sin was far more treacherous than Eve’s because he simply let Eve go her way to death and then followed. Marital issues have occurred ever since. The family institution has been attacked every step of the way.

Today, divorce rates are right on par with marriage rates. Some say the church is the same as the world, however that stat is relatively misleading as these count total marriages and divorces, not WHO is doing the marrying and divorcing. One person marrying and divorcing four times counts as four marriages and divorces. That being said, divorce in the church is still incredibly high.

Divorce is not the only issue. Single parents are an issue, because the lack of a father is rampant, especially in the poorer communities. In wealthier communities, the father may be there but he is often not around because he’s working 80 hours a week. And now we have a Supreme Court that states homosexuals can get married. But can they actually define that? The answer is no. God defines marriage and anything differing is not marriage. “Commitment” and “loving” does not make a marriage. It is God that makes a marriage.

Notice how I have not addressed the issue of “committed and loving” in this post until now. That is because that really is not at the core of the argument. Committed and loving does not make it right. Samson was committed and loving with Delilah and where did that get him? David was committed and loving with Bathsheba and where did that get him? Into a lot of trouble. God can still restore us despite our sin, but we need to be seekers after God, his heart, and his character. You cannot do that if you are trying to redefine terms God clearly laid out.

Next week is argument #9, dealing with how humans are relational so homosexuality should be just fine.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Charlie Wolcott

[This post is part of a series. The previous post is here, and the next post is here.]

Here is Round 7 in this series about Matthew Vines’ “Ten Biblical Reasons to support Homosexuality.” Today’s argument is this: The word “homosexuality” did not exist until 1892. The Bible never addressed committed, homosexual relationships. It did condemn lustful relationships, but not this and it is not deserving of condemning all gays and homosexual relationships. That is the argument.

This argument is very similar to Vines’ second argument, that the early church leaders did not understand the loving, committed homosexual relationship. Vines suggests that while recently Bible versions include the word “homosexuals” (in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10), this is a concept Paul did not actually face nor understand. In this verse, the word “homosexual” was inserted into more recent versions because it fit the understanding of what it was. But is this so?

I again bring forth Ecclesiastes 1:9. There is nothing new under the sun. Nothing. Well, we have cell phones and computers. That was never here before. This passage is not talking about technology. But even if it does, what are all those things? Just different means of doing the same thing: communication and representing data. It is talking about concepts, ideas, behaviors, history. A very well-known statement is: “Those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it.” What is this talking about? Simple: history tends to repeat itself when people don’t learn from those who came before them. And Solomon in Ecclesiastes reveals that there is no new idea that had not been brought forth before.

Vines claims that his ideal of a homosexual relationship is unique, that it has not been considered before. But he never actually makes a case that his ideal is separate from the lustful kind he agrees the Bible condemns. He claims it, but never makes a case to defend such a claim. Remember two weeks ago, I explained how the whole sexual orientation foundation is rooted in sexual desires, and such desires are frequently mentioned throughout the Bible. Not only are they mentioned, they are all referenced in context of lust.

But let’s examine the core of his argument: this “term” did not exist until recently therefore any mention of such a term prior to that must not mean this. There is another issue similar to this in regards to evolution and creation. The Bible never mentions dinosaurs. It never uses that word. But why? Simple: the word “dinosaur” did not exist until 1841, invented by Sir Richard Owen. But did dinosaurs suddenly exist because the word existed? No, they were around the whole time. So what were dinosaurs known as prior to 1841? Dragons. Finding “dragons” is very common in ancient literature. The creatures never changed. Just the label they were given.

The same concept is true with homosexuality. Nothing has changed about what homosexuality is, just the label men have given it. Men were practicing homosexuality thousands of years ago. It was clearly recorded in Genesis. Many scholars as recorded in my second post on this series (see this link) suspect it was rampant prior to the Flood and was the final straw to bring in God’s judgment. It’s nothing new at all.

One of God’s attributes is that he is immutable. That means he does not change. That means his character does not change. It means his laws do not change. It means his standards do not change. What God said 2000 years ago at the cross does not change. What God said 3500 years ago at Mt. Sinai does not change. What God does said 6000 years ago does not change. If God said homosexuality is a sin, he means it is a sin. If he said it in Genesis and repeated it in Leviticus and repeated it again in Romans and Corinthians, it is still a sin… today.

But didn’t God change when he went from the Mosaic Law to the cross? Isn’t the New Covenant a “new” covenant? Not quite. The old covenants of the Old Testament were a picture and foundation-laying for the New Covenant. The standards did not change. Instead of being written on tablets of stone, they were written on the tablets of our heart. God did not change. Being under the law of grace does NOT give us luxury to do what we want.

Matthew Vines repeatedly asks the question: “Why can’t homosexuals have that which heterosexual marriages have?” That is covetousness. The Bible gives no basis for why they should do it. It actually gives a very strong basis that it cannot. Pay attention to the tactics used here. Vines never actually provides a defense for his position, or even a logical accounting for his position.

Is anything Vines offers new? No. Jesus warned that at the end of times, it would be like Sodom and Gomorrah. That it would be like prior to the Flood. And embracing of homosexual activity by the culture is traditionally held as one of the final actions before God brought forth destruction. That Matthew Vines is pushing this and claiming to be a question makes think of Jesus’ question: “When I return, will I find any faith?”

I expect people like Matthew Vines to come forth and present arguments like he has. I expect to see this type of thing presented in the church. Why? Because the enemy has always sought to bring in confusion and false teachings into the church. That’s his game. I do believe Vines is honest about his position and that he really does believe he is right. I do not believe he is a willing participant in an attempt to undermine the authority of Scripture. While I do believe he is not intending to do that, it is what he is doing, and I know that is Satan’s agenda. But I am not angry that Vines has brought forth such arguments. I am angry that the church is more and more accepting of these messages, that the church as a whole has left truth fallen to the streets to be trampled. If you have not seen this in me by now, let me make it clear: that will not happen on my watch, not without me having a say in the matter. I write to uphold the truth of Scripture. Matthew Vines needs the true Gospel, repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, faith that Jesus died to save him from himself, just like any of us. Our biggest enemy is ourselves - our selfish, sinful selves. Let us nail it to cross and take on Christ.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Logan Ames
Originally posted on February 13, 2014

I think it’s safe to say that we are all in a sex-crazed society and have been for decades. It’s never been more accessible than it is now. Network television shows advertise it as one of the main attractions of their program. You can find it on the Internet intentionally and sometimes even unintentionally. Even commercials for products that have nothing to do with sex use it to try to increase sales. A large percentage of the children I work with each day do not have both parents in their lives and were born out of wedlock. The adults I work with frequently have different sexual partners than they did the previous week. However, I’m sure none of this really surprises you.

What might surprise you is that research has shown that things aren’t much different in the Church. Infidelity and divorce statistics are about the same. Some of the regions with the largest consumptions of pornography are in the so-called “Bible belt”. I have talked to several pastors who have had young Christian couples in their churches come to them seeking relationship advice without wanting to address their number one problem area of living together and being sexually active with no marital commitment! In 1997, Christian musician Michael W. Smith wrote a book called “It’s Time to Be Bold”. He encourages young people to boldly live for Christ, but reports that 62 percent of CHURCHED teens have become sexually involved by the twelfth grade. That was in 1997! I wonder what that statistic is like today.

All of the problems that have been caused by sex outside of God’s plan for it have brought the Church to a point where we don’t want to talk about it, even though the Bible introduces it as a gift from God through marriage. When Adam was all alone in this world, God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him” (Genesis 2:18). I’ve often wondered what the word “suitable” means there. I’m sure there is an explanation for it if we dig into the Hebrew, but I’ll leave that task to someone else because I think the word “suitable” is perfect! I’ve heard this verse used to explain that everyone should get married, and I’ve recently heard it as an explanation for why a man should marry again after his wife died. While I wouldn’t fully disagree with those explanations, I don’t believe they express God’s gift.

When God said it was not good for the man to be alone, I don’t believe he just meant that Adam was spouseless. Adam was the only human being on the planet! God never intended for that to be the case, so he created a way to make more humans. What a gift this was! God created the first two humans on his own, yet loved them so much he desired to allow them to bring forth life. God could have made the process excruciating for his created beings, but instead chose to bless them with an incredibly pleasant and joyful experience. Once God had created the possibility for them to procreate, he commanded them to do so. We see in Genesis 1 that it is his very first commandment to them after they are both created. “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it’” (v. 28a). I believe this gives us a picture of the mind of God. He desired to create a human race that he could love and bless. His plan was to create the first two and then give them the gift of “making” the rest of the human race. Eve’s body was physically “suitable” for Adam to complete the task God had commanded. Knowing this would LITERALLY cause two different fleshes to become one, God recognized the intimacy and commitment that are involved. The writer of Genesis, inspired by God, declared that the woman is the man’s “wife”, a singular feminine noun as described in Katie’s post on Monday. This was all before there was sin.

Thousands of years later and after sin had stained God’s gift of sex just like it does the rest of his creation, the Apostle Paul bluntly explains the purpose of marriage. “Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband” (1 Corinthians 7:1-2). The word for “to marry” can also be translated “to have sexual relations”. Paul is admitting that complete celibacy is noble for those whom God has called to such a life, but that he has also given couples the gift of each other as the only relationship in which sex is a blessed and God-honoring event. Throughout the chapter, Paul reiterates that remaining unmarried is great for those who have been given that strength by God. “But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion” (v. 9). Paul also commands those who are married not to deprive each other of sex “except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer” (v. 5). For the husband and wife, who agreed to the sexual relationship when they married, depriving one another of that gift would only increase their vulnerability to the enemy’s attacks through temptation.

Based on God’s desire that mankind would fill the earth, the way he intentionally designed male and female bodies to “fit” together to make that happen in an enjoyable way, and the very unique commitment and intimacy that process would require between the ONE man and ONE woman involved, I can only conclude that God created marriage to protect the gift of sex that was not meant to be shared with multiple partners. We’ve seen the destruction caused by those who have not followed him in protecting that gift, but that doesn’t change what his plan was and still is for marriage. Our God is big enough to restore all of that destruction, but we can only experience restoration when we first admit that we have broken away from his plan for one man and one woman, and then turn back to him for healing.

by Katie Erickson
Originally posted on February 24, 2014

When I first saw the blog topic for this week I had to laugh. While I have been married for over ten years, we do not have any children, so it is somewhat ironic for me to write about how children are important in a marriage. But, I do truly believe that children are vitally important.

So why are children so important? Well first off, none of us would be alive if it weren’t for children! God didn’t create every person on this planet all at once; he created two people, a man and a woman. God commanded them to “be fruitful and multiply” in Genesis 1:28. So, that man and woman had children, who also had children, who had more children, et cetera. Many many generations later, here we are. If my parents didn’t have children, I wouldn’t be writing this post to you today. As Psalm 127:3 says, “Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from him.”’

Whether you have children of your own or not, it is likely that you are an influence in at least one child’s life. You may have nieces or nephews, young siblings, young cousins, or close friends who have young children. I would guess that everyone reading this can think of an adult from their childhood years who was not a parent and had a significant impact on their lives. I have a great relationship with many children in my church family, and to the children of close friends. Even if I am not directly raising them and providing for their daily needs, I do have an impact on their lives. I strive to be a good example of Godly living for them.

If you do have children, it is important to raise them in a Godly way. The Bible explains this in passages such as Ephesians 6:4, Deuteronomy 6:6­-9, Proverbs 22:6, and 2 Timothy 3:14­-15, among others.

But what does this have to do with marriage? Children can be raised by an unmarried, single parent. Because of the sinful nature of the world we live in, there are circumstances where this can be better than living with an abusive parent, for example. But when children are raised inside a marriage relationship, there are two parents to love them and direct them in their lives. Mothers and fathers have different gifts and abilities; with just one parent, the child misses out on experiencing the gifts of the other parent. By being raised in a household with married parents, a child can experience firsthand what marriage looks like and why it is important. A child has two examples of Christ in their life, right there in their own household, living life together through all of its ups and downs.

It has been said that it takes a village to raise a child. Whether you biologically have a child or not, we should all play a key role in the lives of children close to us. We should strive to be the example of Christ in that child’s life.

As a man, I feel it is important to address something in this writing that is a ridiculous falsehood that has been commonly accepted for far too long. It struck me a few months ago when a good friend of mine at work had been having a discussion with several other co-workers and decided to bring it to my attention because he knew me as the “pastor” at our agency. I was speaking to my supervisor about actual work when this man came up and asked if he could interrupt for a minute. He then said, “Hey Logan, who was the ho that was about to get stoned by the well in the Bible?” I want to make it clear that his use of the derogatory term for a woman who has been promiscuous is not to be accepted. However, I feel it is important to give you the exact quote that he said because it shows just how much we have tolerated the view of adultery or promiscuity being the problem of a woman. I was able to share with this man and my supervisor that he was combining two different Bible stories – the woman caught in adultery in John 8 and the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4. I was also able to share that the identity of the woman caught in adultery is not revealed and that the point of the story is not who she is, but who Jesus is and the freedom and victory over sin that he offers to her.

In thinking about that conversation this week as I prepared for this writing, I remembered that my friend mentioned nothing about the man who was involved in that act of adultery. That got me thinking about how many times I have read the John 8 passage and have rarely given even a passing thought to why the man was not present on the scene. I began to realize how serious of a problem this is, going all the way back to Genesis 3:12 when Adam first blamed the woman for his own sinful choices. The blame game has been played ever since that day, and it’s no more obvious than with sexual sin. The woman is blamed for what she is wearing when a man can’t stop lusting. If a woman has multiple children out of wedlock, even other women say something like, “She just has to learn to keep her legs closed”. The actions of the man or men who impregnated her are written off as “just doing what men do”. In the book and movie “The Scarlet Letter”, who has to face public ridicule and wear the shameful letter? Hester has to face that punishment all alone while the cheating minister experiences his consequences privately.

I’m certainly not excusing women from their part in this sin, but am simply making the point that the physical act of adultery requires TWO people, not just the woman who is often blamed. Regarding the adultery of the heart that Jesus addresses in Matthew 5:28, you can look and see that he refers to a MAN who lusts! The more I think about it, I can’t think of any place in the New Testament where Jesus actually mentions adultery and he is not talking to a man or a group of primarily men. In John 8, it is the men who say they caught the woman in an act of adultery. Jesus never mentions her specific sin, but only urges, “Go now and leave your life of sin” (v. 11). He acknowledged that she was a sinner, the same as everyone else who was there and everyone who watched as he handled the situation in truth and love. The self-righteous Pharisees who prided themselves on being followers of the Law failed to adhere to a very important component of the specific law they cited. Leviticus 20:10 clearly says, “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife – with the wife of his neighbor – both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death”. I guess their strict adherence to the Law only mattered when it suited their interests and biases.

The other important truth the Pharisees missed was that Jesus has the power over sin. Regardless of whom they wanted to accuse and what they thought the just penalty was, Jesus came to defeat ALL sin. He didn’t do this through condemnation and public humiliation, but through urging people to repentance. He told the woman to “leave” her life of sin. Friends, this is the essence of repentance – to turn and go the opposite direction in your life. Jesus offered the same opportunity and urging over and over again to the Pharisees throughout his ministry on earth. Because they failed to see their own need for a Savior, they usually rejected him.

Later in John 8, Jesus speaks to the Jews who were listening to him about one of the most important truths in the entire Bible. In vv. 31-41, he talks to them about being set free by the truth as they hold to his teaching, but they can’t understand what he means because they understand freedom only from a political standpoint. Even in that, they were wrong because they had been slaves of several other nations in their history and were controlled by the Romans politically even at that very moment. But Jesus assured them, “I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin” (v. 34). However, there would be no hope if that were the end of the teaching. Because he was the only one there who was not a slave to sin but the actual Son of God, he declared, “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed” (v. 36).

Are you walking in that freedom? Are you the woman who has been somewhat shunned by others because of your mistakes while the men involved seem to face no consequences? You can simply cry out to Jesus right where you are today. He has set you free if you believe it and is inviting you to leave your sins behind and start your new journey with him. Are you the man who knows deep down inside you are an adulterer regardless of whether others see your sin or not? You must first humbly recognize that you are a slave to your sin and that you desperately need Jesus. I promise you, he has already set you free from what you are hiding from others if you believe it. It’s time to walk in that freedom and leave your life of sin. Whoever you are, claim the victory in Jesus today!

Some of you reading this may say that I must be very sheltered, since I actually had to look up the word “fornication” before starting this blog post; I honestly did not know specifically what it meant! What I learned is that fornication, simply put, is consensual sexual intercourse between two unmarried adults.

So why are we at Worldview Warriors writing on this topic? Well, the question for the week is not just discussing fornication, but why it is considered sinful. As always, I turn to the Bible to find the answer to this question.

First, let’s look at 1 Corinthians 6:18, which says, “Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.” Paul, who wrote this, isn’t just making this as a suggestion if you feel like it; no, he is commanding the people at Corinth to flee from sexual immorality! The root word used in Greek here for ‘sexual immorality’ is “porneia,” the root that we get our English word ‘pornography’ from. But specifically, what does this Greek word mean? I consulted four lexicons, and the meanings I found were: sexual immorality, sexual unfaithfulness, whoredom, fornication, adultery, incest, unsanctioned sexual intercourse, and prostitution. As you can see, often Greek words don’t have just one English word that fits with them, but rather a range of words to give the general idea of its meaning. So essentially, this word “porneia” generally relates to any kind of illegitimate sexual intercourse. Legitimate sexual intercourse is defined as one man and one woman who are married, as we talked about in last month’s blog posts.

Back to 1 Corinthians 6:18, it says that all other sins are outside a person’s body, but sexual sin is against that person’s own body. Had you ever thought about it that way? If I tell a lie, that is outside my body. If I commit murder or am mean to someone, that is outside my body. But a sexual sin is done to my own body.

Why is it important whether a sin is inside or outside your body? Keep reading in 1 Corinthians 6:19-20: “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.” As a follower of Christ, you have received the Holy Spirit - who is God Himself - and the Spirit lives in you. Jesus Christ died for you, to pay the price for your sins. That is the price you were bought for, Jesus’ own life. Because God lives in you and God died for you, wouldn’t it logically follow that you would want to honor God? We often honor heroes who gave their lives to save others, but what about honoring God for that? Whether you know it or not, Jesus died for YOU and He deserves your honor, not just with your emotions but with your body as well!

How do we honor God with our bodies? By not sinning sexually, since that is sin committed within your body. Earlier in the 1 Corinthians 6:13b, Paul writes that “The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality [“porneia”] but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.”

Even though the Bible is pretty clear about how it is a sexual sin to have intercourse outside of marriage, a common line of thought is that it can’t be wrong if the two people love each other and it’s consensual. But did you see anything in the verses quoted above that indicate it’s ok if you love each other? Go read the whole section of 1 Corinthians 6:12-20; I’m certain you won’t find it in there. If you follow Christ, you need to follow the directions He gives us for life, the Bible. If the Bible says it’s sin, then it’s sin.

Fortunately, we can always be forgiven of our sin, thanks to Jesus. I challenge you today to honor God not only with your life but with your body from this day forward.

There have been several recent examples in the world of sports of how children allow the athlete to put his struggles into perspective. Less than an hour after the Denver Broncos were blown out by the Seattle Seahawks in one of the most lopsided games in Super Bowl history, Broncos defensive end Shaun Phillips texted his son Jaylen and said, “Sorry I let you down”. His son responded, “It’s okay daddy, you’re still my hero”. Phillips was so touched by it that he shared it with the media. Two weeks later, PGA golfer William McGirt was entering the final round of a tournament with the lead for the first time in his career. I watched his interview where the reporter asked him about the pressure and he said, “At the end of the day, there’s a 13-month old at home who I’ll get to see tomorrow and it won’t make any difference to her whether I shoot 65 or 75”. Finally, if you’ve watched much of the Winter Olympics, you probably saw the commercial of the skier who goes into the locker room after a frustrating performance and is visibly upset when he gets a notification out of the blue on his phone. He checks it and it’s a video message from his son saying he can’t wait to see him. The athlete’s demeanor changes instantly when he realizes what’s truly important.

In Monday’s post, Katie talked mainly about the importance of marriage to children. For the sake of providing something new, I’d like to address why children are important to a marriage. You see, athletes aren’t the only ones who lose perspective sometimes. It’s easy for husbands and wives to get so immersed in the problems and frustrations they have with one another that they literally can’t remember what brought them together. Instead of thinking good and loving thoughts when they interact with each other, all they can think about is pain and disappointment. It is in those moments that the couple could use a reminder of humility, unconditional love, and trust from their children.

Jesus himself recognized the proper attitude displayed in children. In Matthew 18, he used it to teach his disciples about what’s necessary to enter heaven. The disciples had just asked Jesus who would be the greatest in heaven (v. 1). To answer the question, Jesus calls a little child before them and says, “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (vv. 3-4). What? But these are his DISCIPLES. Aren’t they like super-Christians or something? Evidently, whatever standing we think we have with Jesus is irrelevant if we can’t adopt a childlike faith, trust, and humility. But this wasn’t the only time Jesus used children to demonstrate his point.

We see in the very next chapter that Jesus addresses something that was unfortunately connected to marriage back then just as it is today – divorce. You can read the story in Matthew 19 on your own, but I’ll tell you that the Pharisees were putting Jesus to the test with questions about divorce. According to Enduring Word Media Commentary, there were two separate Jewish rabbinical schools of that day that had opposing views on grounds for divorce, and whichever one Jesus sided with would either make him unpopular or show that he disregarded the Law. According to this same source, the Jews of that day considered marriage to be a sacred duty and if a man remained unmarried after the age of 20, he was breaking God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply”, which we have discussed in other blogs this month. However, their very lax views toward divorce showed that they had a low view of women. Knowing this, Jesus addressed marriage instead of arguing grounds for divorce, saying, “What God has joined together, let man not separate” (v. 6). Jesus’ point was that it is God who brings together two very different people to become one, meaning the married couple should do everything they can to honor and uphold what God has created.

After the Pharisees and even his own disciples didn’t seem to be changing their view of women and the marriage covenant, Jesus tried another approach. Right after this teaching on marriage, he allows children to be brought to him so he can lay hands on them, pray for them, and bless them (vv. 13-15). Again, he addresses the need for a childlike attitude to enter heaven. “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these” (v. 14). Do you think Jesus was making a point to his disciples about their attitudes by presenting children to them two different times that were so close to each other? And why allow these children to come to him after his teaching on marriage and divorce? I’m thinking he was trying to remind both his disciples and the Pharisees of the unconditional love, trust, and humility that are needed to preserve the marriage that God has made.

You can’t expect to make a marriage work without humbling yourself and changing your view of your partner, loving them despite the pain you’ve experienced, and trusting them completely. Those are exactly the attributes we see in children. Even when you’ve failed, you know your children still love you. You know they trust you even when you don’t feel trustworthy. Most importantly, children willingly humble themselves and depend on you. If you are married and God has blessed you with children, or even if you don’t have your own children but interact with those of others, I encourage you to let them be a reminder to you of how you should treat and view your spouse. Be willing to completely trust your spouse no matter what. Learn to love them even when they fail you. Commit to being humble to the point of depending on them because God has made it a PARTNERSHIP for a reason. When you have a hard time practicing any of these things in your marriage, just take some time to watch children. It will put things back into perspective for you.



When I first saw the blog topic for this week I had to laugh. While I have been married for over ten years, we do not have any children, so it is somewhat ironic for me to write about how children are important in a marriage. But, I do truly believe that children are vitally important.

So why are children so important? Well first off, none of us would be alive if it weren’t for children! God didn’t create every person on this planet all at once; he created two people, a man and a woman. God commanded them to “be fruitful and multiply” in Genesis 1:28. So, that man and woman had children, who also had children, who had more children, et cetera. Many many generations later, here we are. If my parents didn’t have children, I wouldn’t be writing this post to you today. As Psalm 127:3 says, “Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from him.”’

Whether you have children of your own or not, it is likely that you are an influence in at least one child’s life. You may have nieces or nephews, young siblings, young cousins, or close friends who have young children. I would guess that everyone reading this can think of an adult from their childhood years who was not a parent and had a significant impact on their lives. I have a great relationship with many children in my church family, and to the children of close friends. Even if I am not directly raising them and providing for their daily needs, I do have an impact on their lives. I strive to be a good example of Godly living for them.

If you do have children, it is important to raise them in a Godly way. The Bible explains this in passages such as Ephesians 6:4, Deuteronomy 6:6­-9, Proverbs 22:6, and 2 Timothy 3:14­-15, among others.

But what does this have to do with marriage? Children can be raised by an unmarried, single parent. Because of the sinful nature of the world we live in, there are circumstances where this can be better than living with an abusive parent, for example. But when children are raised inside a marriage relationship, there are two parents to love them and direct them in their lives. Mothers and fathers have different gifts and abilities; with just one parent, the child misses out on experiencing the gifts of the other parent. By being raised in a household with married parents, a child can experience firsthand what marriage looks like and why it is important. A child has two examples of Christ in their life, right there in their own household, living life together through all of its ups and downs.

It has been said that it takes a village to raise a child. Whether you biologically have a child or not, we should all play a key role in the lives of children close to us. We should strive to be the example of Christ in that child’s life.

It never fails that God provides the perfect material at the right time for me to begin a post when I am struggling with how to get started. Yesterday, I was watching the movie “Face Off” as it was on television. The movie stars John Travolta and Nicholas Cage and is about a police officer who undergoes a surgery to literally have his own face replaced with that of a crazed murderer while the latter is in a coma. The purpose is to enter a prison and get needed information from the criminal’s brother. It is supposed to be temporary, but the murderer wakes up unexpectedly and forces the surgeons to put the officer’s face on him. The two then go throughout the movie living each other’s lives because even those closest to the officer weren’t allowed to know about the special assignment. The line that struck me was when the murderer (disguised as the cop) was talking to the cop’s wife (his assuming wife) and walked away muttering, “Lies, distrust, and mixed messages…this is turning into a real marriage”!

Isn’t it amazing how negatively marriage is often viewed in our culture? Something that many spend their whole lives waiting for turns out to be a major disappointment. For this reason, the bride and groom often throw huge parties to celebrate their last night of “freedom” before the wedding. People talk about how difficult marriage is and even sitcoms and movies portray it as an unpleasant experience filled with pain. Maybe that’s why so many in our culture are looking to “redefine” it. Maybe it’s our way of dealing with the pain and brokenness that we have seen in marital relationships that have been marred by violence, deception, and infidelity. We figure that if it’s not working out so well with one man and one woman, maybe it would work better with same-sex couples or with couples who mutually agree to allow each other to have multiple partners.

The problem with looking at marriage that way is that it is trying to take ownership of something that we did not create. As you may have read over the past few weeks in our blog posts, we believe that God instituted marriage when he created Adam and then created a woman to be united to Adam as one flesh. This intimate, committed relationship became the only thing we have in this world that could give us a glimpse of the relationship between God and his followers (Israel in the Old Testament and the Church in the New Testament). People have been given the free will to choose to go against God in whatever ways they want, but that doesn’t mean something is “redefined”. How can we RE-define something when we didn’t come up with the first definition? Can the Ten Commandments be rewritten? Can we change where the oceans and mountains are because we don’t like the setup? I’m reminded of the rhetorical questions that God asks Job in Job 38-39. I encourage you to read them all. Job and his three friends had questioned God’s plan because of suffering. God begins his response with, “Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge?”(38:2) Wow!

Job was not unlike you and me. When we don’t like the way things are going and can’t seem to make sense of it, we either try harder to take control or we completely surrender to God and his will. Usually we do both, with the latter coming after the former didn’t work like we’d hoped. Job questioned God for answers and when he got put in his place, he surrendered. “I am unworthy – how can I reply to you? I put my hand over my mouth. I spoke once, but I have no answer – twice, but I will say no more” (Job 40:4-5). It took a long time for him to get to that point. Let’s face it, surrendering is tough!

At Worldview Warriors, we don’t say that marriage can’t be redefined because we arbitrarily hate those who seek to do so. We say that it can’t be redefined because we have surrendered to God in this area. That doesn’t make us any better than anyone else, for we also have areas where we have struggled to surrender, as well as areas that we STILL need to surrender. We meet together and encourage one another to surrender to Christ those areas of our brokenness that we are seeking to control on our own, and we’d love to do the same with you. We know that he is not truly our Savior unless he is also our Lord, and he is not our Lord unless we are willing to surrender even the most difficult areas of our lives. We have also learned, likely through our own stubborn attitudes toward him at times, that ultimately we can’t change his sovereign will anyway. “These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open” (Revelation 3:7). In other words, any decision we make to go against him only hurts us. He is bigger than our choices and bigger than our redefinitions. The issue really isn’t about marriage. It’s about who is on the throne of your life. That’s not up to the government, pop culture, what’s accepted by the majority of society, or what your parents taught you. God alone is on the throne, and only YOU can choose to live accepting it or denying it.