A Better Story: Sex and the Gospel

A mentor of mine, Glynn Harrison, wrote an excellent book in 2017 with the title ‘A Better Story: God, sex, and human flourishing’. I recommend you read it. Central to what he writes about is that Western culture has changed sexual norms by telling a particular ‘story’ about sex. The story is compelling and attractive, bound up with important values like progress and freedom. In contrast, the church’s response has too often been characterized by stating biblical sexual ethics as a kind of ‘line in the sand’ seeking to resist the changing sexual norms of the culture around it. However, merely stating norms without the accompanying story of the gospel makes at least two errors. First, it risks moralism and drifts easily to a condemnatory and self-righteous tone of voice. Second, it is not very compelling, particularly when compared to the cultural story. 

‍

To be clear, Scripture does have a compelling story about sex, and it was a story with such transformative power that it turned the Greco-Roman world upside down. If the church is to engage redemptively with Western culture’s sexual norms and equip pastorally those who follow Christ, then we need to articulate and live out the Better Story of the gospel. 

‍

Listening to the cultural story

Before we can engage our culture and think about how to live distinctively for Christ within it, we need to first listen well and understand the cultural story about sex. 

‍

Here is an attempt to summarize the Western cultural story about sex:

“The sexual revolution of the 1960s-70s was about liberating sex from ‘taboo’ (external constraint through shame) and ‘repression of desire’ (internal constraint through guilt). Before this revolution only that which served child-birth within marriage was permitted but the revolution allows fulfilment and fairness through the free expression, acceptance, and adoption of diverse sexual orientations and activities. In contrast, traditional religion (particularly Christianity) denies fulfilment and fairness because of its outdated sexual ethics and its propagation of taboo and repression.”

‍

Notice the emphasis on fulfilment and fairness, which brings with it concerns about shame (taboo) and guilt (repression). Notice also the contrast between a progressive narrative about self-expression and the contrasting representation of traditional religion (particularly Christianity), which is the opposite: outdated and repressive. Let’s explore these themes some more, focusing on progress and expressive individualism. 

‍

1. Progress

Shifting sexual ethics became seen as part of the West’s wider narrative of progress. It was taken for granted that just as there had been progress in industrialization (the Industrial Revolution), science (particularly contraception), and social development (the rise of the middle class, disposable income and leisure), so the accompanying changes in sexual ethics were similarly ‘progress’. Therefore, the flip side of this narrative also emerged; to resist or to question these new sexual norms was to be ‘outdated’ and ‘traditional’ (using the term negatively). 

‍

2. Expressive-Individualism

Alongside the story about progress, there is also a focus on fulfilment, freedom and fairness. Some commentators call this ‘expressive-individualism’ because it is a focus on the individual (as opposed to the family, community, or nation) expressing their desire for self-actualization and fulfilment. 

‍

There are at least two things that seem very intuitive now to us in the West related to this, that previous societies did not envision. The first is that sexual self-expression is an issue of freedom. 

The coming-out narrative framed in liberation/slavery terms, intentionally co-opting the civil rights story, has become familiar. Notice, for example, how Freddie Mercury frames his coming-out in Bohemian Rhapsody’s lyrics: ‘Too late, my time has come. Sends shivers down my spine, body's aching all the time. Goodbye, everybody. I've got to go. Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth.’ 

‍

Second, sexual self-expression became an issue of fairness. Why should it be that only heterosexual people should have access to sex? The reasoning goes, just as women were once unfairly denied equal sexual and social rights, so now homosexual people or transgender people need to have equal access to these rights. Linked to this, moral ‘laws’ are seen (particularly in the area of sex) as restrictive and therefore potentially harmful to sexual self-expression. Instead of moral laws and taboos, people should follow their desires, and express their freedom and no one has the right to deny them this. 

‍

The Gospel’s better story

First, it is worth exploring the culture’s story. 

‍

1. Progress?

Have changing sexual norms over the last 50-100 years represented progress? 

Yes to…

• Sex is more than just about procreation. Romance, desire and pleasure are very much part of the Biblical picture of sex (see for example The Song of Solomon). 
• Desires should not be repressed. Scripture never sees repressing desires as a good thing. Desires can be wrong or unhealthy but they are not to be hidden away in the dark but brought into the light. 
• It is not only men who have sexual rights. This is not a secular value first and foremost but a Scriptural value articulated (for example) in 1 Corinthians 7 (long before the recent sexual revolution) and flowing from what it means for men and women both to be the image of God. 

But…

• What about the first sexual revolution which was a Christian revolution? This first sexual revolution took place in the first centuries during the growth of the early church. In fact, many of the values we hold so dear today about sex (equality, consent, protection of the vulnerable) arose from Christianity 1900 years before the recent sexual revolution. 
• What is progress? C S Lewis memorably writes, 

‘We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.’ 

And this links to the second part of the story…

2. Expressive-Individualism?

Yes to…

• Fulfilment, freedom and fairness. These are all Christian virtues originating from the first sexual revolution. 
• Personal self-expression, the idea of the self as a distinct entity originated with Christianity too. 

‍

But…

• Fulfilment, freedom and fairness are not unqualified ‘goods’. They all presuppose a positive vision of flourishing and what is that? E.g. I am happy to restrain my freedom for multiple sexual partners for a better vision of commitment and trust with my wife. Or, if we want freedom and fairness for children, then there need to be constraints on unfettered sexual self-expression. (e.g. the concept of paedophilia didn’t exist negatively in the Greco-Roman world but was brought about by the first sexual revolution of the gospel)
• Looking inside to our feelings for self-expression is a psychologically damaging project (as shown by worsening mental health outcomes). We are made to receive our identity not seek to define it internally. 

‍

3. The Better Story: Loving others as God loves us

So, let’s ask the tough question. What is sex for?

• In Traditional Society, sex was seen as for procreation and the maintenance of society (ultimately a functional view).
• In Modern Society, we have seen that sex is for self-fulfilment and therefore, is ultimately about the ‘self’ or is literally ‘selfish’. 

The gospel offers a story that is neither of these: Sex is for Loving others as God loves us. Notice that this is ultimately about selfless love, the glory of God, and the good of others. This is the better story. 

We see this when we consider the following Scripture passages::

• ‘So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.’ (Gen 1:27) Both men and women are equally in dignity and value and therefore should have equal sexual rights. 
• ‘The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is uniteda to his wife, and they become one flesh. Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.’ (Gen 2:23-25) Both men and women are made for an intimate relationship, of which marriage and sex is one expression. 
• ‘Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away,b and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bridec beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.’ (Rev 21:1-3) We are made for a loving relationship with God of which marriage is a picture and shadow. This relationship with God is what is ‘ultimate’ and human marriage, whilst important and dignified, is of relative importance. Therefore, it should not define us. 
• ‘Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scripturesa or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage;a they will be like the angels in heaven.’ (Mat 22:29-30) There is no marriage or sex in heaven because the shadow gives way to the reality in and through our relationship with Christ.

‍

3. Applying the better story

If this is (at least in part) the better story of sex and the gospel what are its implications?

‍

1. Dignity: All human beings are equal in dignity and therefore have rights over their own body e.g. 1 Cor 7:3-4 

‍

2. Sin: All sexual activity in thought, word, or deed must be only within the context of heterosexual marriage. This is not grounded in abstract ethical commands but in the nature of sex. Since the ultimate marriage between God and his bride the church is a covenantal marriage of two parties who though equal in dignity (because the church is precious ‘in Christ’) are different. Therefore when God gits human marriage as a foreshadowing of this relationship, he makes it between two equal but different parties (men and women who are ‘like-opposites’). Sex is given as a gift within marriage. some text
   1. Therefore, sexual actions outside of marriage are wrong and do not lead to human flourishing (not only the act of sexual intercourse) e.g. Lustful thoughts, pornography, seeking to arouse your partner. 
   2. Same-sex actions are not according to God’s design for sex because they are not between two equal but different parties. 

‍

3. Judgement: There is a difference between ‘sin’ which is rejecting God and the symptoms/actions that flow from sin (See Rom 1:21-23, and 24, 26-27, 29-31). some text
   1. Sin keeps us from God, and this is why we are under his judgment. This judgment is shown in the various ‘sins’ we commit. 
   2. We all sin in this way and therefore we all, without Christ, are under God’s judgment which is shown in the many and various ways we deviate from God’s good story for sex. There can be no self-righteousness. 
   3. Therefore, it is not having committed certain sexual ‘sins’ or having a particular sexual orientation that keeps us out of heaven but rejecting God and therefore rejecting his saviour Jesus Christ.  

‍

4. Forgiveness: Since we all sin in this area, we all need forgiveness and the Spirit’s power to be godly.some text
   1. Same-sex attraction or actions are not worse than other sexual sins. 
   2. Sexual sin should not lead to a particular ‘shame’ or ‘guilt’ that is more or worse than other areas (e.g. Greed, idolatry, lying etc.). All sin is forgiven in Christ and he takes both our shame and our guilt. There is now no condemnation for those in Christ. 

‍

5. Fulfillment: Since sex and human marriage are just a picture of the divine marriage we are all heading for. some text
   1. A person who never marries or has sex is not missing out.
   2. Everyone is called to costly discipleship in this area (as in all areas)

E.g. A person with same-sex attraction and a person who is not married; both are foregoing sex and marriage (the shadow) for the fulfilment of living for Christ (now) and gospel hope of the real thing (to come)

A married person who has an attractive colleague at work when their spouse is being inattentive but who walks away from being unfaithful is living for the fulfilment of living for Christ (now) and the gospel hope of the real thing (to come). Whilst being empathetic to the particular struggles each person faces, we need to be careful not to tell the story that homosexual attraction is a particularly difficult or ‘unfair’ path for a Christian to have to walk. All Christians face particular and varied paths of costly discipleship on this side of heaven. 

‍

6. Witness: Since the gospel is the ‘better story’ in sex, we need to not be ashamed of this story but heed Peter’s exhortation, 

‘But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.’ (1 Peter 3:15-16)

1. Christians should expect that people will notice a difference in our sexual ethics if we are living distinctively and we should expect people to ask us about this. 
2. When we reply, we have a better story to engage with, not just ethical ‘rules’ to tell others about. We want to draw people into the kingdom not just draw lines in the sand. 
3. In an area characterized by hurt and hurtful words and actions, we need to be distinctively gentle and respectful. 
4. We should not be naive and expect that people will necessarily ‘speak well of us’ even if we do all of the above. It was not this way for the early church, and it may well not be this way for us. But the gospel is powerful and just as it changed the Greco-Roman world and their sexual ethics, so it can change ours. 

‍