Posted on 01/26/2010 2:03:24 PM PST by SnakeDoctor
I think the point of Paul's teaching is to never deny your spouse anything good which youj have to give. Going beyond that, never resist any impulse to be generous to anyone, to do someone a favor, to show love. But the idea that one must perform umpteen times a week is a warped legalistic perversion of that idea.
Sex is an idol to the world, something that secular culture puts above every consideration of morality, health, common sense, or concern for others. The church needs to be very cautious about going down that road.
I agree. What the church should be teaching is agape love, not eros. I don’t think the ministers in the original post are following the injunction to be “in the world but not of it.”
The emphasis needs to be on what must satisfy and fulfill us ABOVE and BEYOND sex, namely Christ Himself--and true intimacy with God--> so that even something as beautiful and amazing as sex takes a secondary (if not lower than secondary) role in the lives of married Christian couples...Think for example, of a couple of which one of the spouses is a veteran amputee or is paralyzed...so it wouldn't be physically possible for those couples to have sex. Obviously, God still intends for the couple to stay married, to enjoy each other, and to glorify Him...
So yes, there always runs the risk of elevating sex to a place it's not meant to be. The emphasis must always be on the beauty of Christ and the satisfaction that should come from Him alone, and then everything else will follow from that. Otherwise, sexual fulfillment in marriage can become an idol and the end in and of itself, rather than a means...
Very well said.
I do see your point, but I think you’re misconstruing some of the emphasis.
Though I do not attend Driscoll’s church, he seems to target an audience of young adult males (20-35) — a demographic largely ignored by the Protestant Church, and one that is very suceptible to secular images of sexuality. “Hotness” is appealing to this demographic, and the marketing machine for hedonism is winning.
I don’t think Driscoll is saying that “hot Christian sex” is the emphasis of a Christian marriage — I think he is saying that, in most cases, it is a component of a Christian marriage (and a component which is often overlooked even within the faith).
He is fighting against the stereotype that Christian marriages are stuffy and sexless (i.e. in the dark, missionary-only, and only for procreation). This stereotype of Christian sexuality has done a LOT of damage to marriage as an institution — and that Christian sexuality needs a PR makeover.
I agree (and I think Driscoll would also) that marriage is about loving and committing to your wife as Christ commits to His church. It is about forgiving and sacrificing for your spouse. But, there is no reason that a couple cannot enjoy themselves — and no reason that Christian circles cannot acknowledge that enjoyment.
SnakeDoc
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.