Odd Christian Beliefs About Sex And My Response

Recently, I came across an article by The Economist with the title “How odd Christian beliefs about sex shape the world: Despite their shaky grounding in Scripture.” You can find it here . I’d like to respond to some of the arguments in the article. My goal is to provide Biblical thinking and responses that seem to be lacking in the article.

While I am not expecting a secular news organization to hold Biblical Christian viewpoints, I would hope they represent them clearly and fairly. So my intent is not to demean them for “getting it wrong,” but to supply a perspective the authors ignore and omit.

Solid Thesis, Silly Labels

One section in the beginning of the article states: 

First, it would be good to define “odd” as that descriptor is in the title and in the main thesis of this article. Odd is defined as: “differing from what is ordinary, usual, or expected.” 

On this matter I’d say: I agree. This is spot-on by the authors. The biblical ethic on sex IS going to be different than how the rest of the world will see things. A Christian who bases their worldview on Scripture (is it possible to do otherwise as a Christian? I submit not) will find themselves “at odds”/in disagreement from how someone from another religion (Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, etc) will view sex.

However, the article seems to describe Christian beliefs as “sexual hang-ups.” This tactic is unfair and unhelpful. Would it be acceptable to write about someone else’s point of view and describe their beliefs and values as “hang-ups?”  If I disagree with someone I can still show respect to their beliefs by calling them “beliefs,” not “hang-ups.”

Third, a worthwhile goal is set forth as the author says “this is a good time to try and understand sex and Christianity.” Again, I applaud the authors for aiming at a deeper understanding of an opposing viewpoint – this is a positive.

What we would anticipate next is: the author getting input from actual Christian thinkers/writers who will explain a sex from a biblical worldview. Perhaps faithful pastors who have preached the Bible clearly for decades? Maybe a Christian apologist who deals with these types of questions often? 

That…..isn’t what happens.

Instead, we are told “clear answers are impossible to find” and much of the rest of the article will reference and build off arguments from Diarmaid MacCulloch, an Oxford academic who engages in homosexual activity and considers himself to be, at best, a “friend to Christianity.”

Would you consider that fair and helpful? Would that be a good-faith effort to understand an “odd” viewpoint – to basically seek out a man who has, by his own admission, “split” with the Anglican Church? Does this seem like the right approach to find “clear answers?” Me neither.

“Problems” And Problems

Let’s look at the next section of the article:

Another “problem” is assigned to Christians: the Bible contains stories about a variety of sexual actions and attitudes. I would agree here as well –  just going through Genesis will be shocking to those who’ve never read the Bible. 

However, as they again reference Mr. MacCulloch who says there is “no such thing as a single Christian theology of sex.” 

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of HOW to actually read a text. One foundational thing to keep in mind for the authors (and MacCulloch): what’s narrative isn’t normative. In other words, just because the Bible records people doing a certain thing DOES NOT mean that thing is approved or considered obedient to God. It is in the narrative because the Bible is truthful about the sinful nature of humans, but its not normative, its not righteous in the sight of God.

(Consider Samson’s many moral failures with women, David and Bathsheeba, Peter denying Christ, etc, etc, etc. – are all those things “acceptable” just because the Bible records those events?)

So, as you read through the wild stories and choices people make in Genesis and other parts of Scripture what should you do? Keep reading.

Look what happens in those scenarios. Every time a person in Scripture engages in polygamy (for example) it goes BADLY. The Bible doesn’t just record this “broad range of sexual attitudes,” it also records the consequences that follow. Sowing and reaping.

The basics of reading a text do come into play. Just because a Biblical story contains people sinning against God’s plan does not mean that behavior is surely acceptable. Keep reading and noting the outcomes. 

When people step outside of God’s design for sex and marriage (one man, one woman, united together for life) – it ALWAYS goes poorly. That is in the Bible. Those consequences are there for a reason and readers should be able to see that…very clearly.

But What DID Jesus Say?

The article continues: 

Another fundamental misunderstanding of how to read the Bible emerges. We have the “but Jesus didn’t explicitly say no to this/that sexual choice!” argument. 

Is that how you should make “biblical” arguments?” Just look for what is not 100% explicitly named and assume that it must be pleasing in the sight of God? 

Jesus never explicitly said you shouldn’t marry a pack of cigarettes – do you just assume Christians should get past their “hang-ups” and bless your union to the Marlboro Man?

Jesus never explicitly said you shouldn’t be intimate with a refrigerator – should Christians get more progressive and let you “Netflix and chill” like you want?

These satirical examples hopefully illustrate the folly of limiting the thinking to just “well, Jesus never said this one exact thing is wrong.” Biblical wisdom goes much deeper.

The real biblical worldview looks first and foremost at what God DOES say. Over and over the Bible affirms God’s design for marriage (as stated above). It starts in Genesis and continues through Revelation. The Bible begins with a marriage and it ends with one as well – the marriage of the Bride (the church) and Groom (Christ).  All throughout the pages of Scripture, what is affirmed and blessed is God’s one design for marriage and sex.

Additionally, if you want to play the “Jesus” card then look at what Jesus DOES positively affirm. In Matthew 19, Jesus is questioned about marriage specifically. If there was EVER a chance to deviate – it would be now. However, Jesus affirms and quotes God’s design from Genesis once more. 

There is a remarkable consistency from beginning to end. What God declared, He blesses. When people follow that design, they live in obedience. When they reject that design, the Bible shows the consequences of it. 

Why stop at just “but Jesus didn’t say this one thing,” type of reasoning? Why not actually look at what is declared, affirmed, blessed, and repeated from beginning to end?

Serious Questions, Unserious Searching

One last section of the article: 

Some interesting questions are asked – why do Christians care about protecting the integrity of each life? Why are Christians against homosexuality?

Alas, the authors really didn’t seem interested in actually hearing from Christians on any of this. Instead, one last assault is fired: “the Christian church…described as the most powerful persecuting force that the world has ever seen..”

Ok.

And with that, the article ends. It raised a few issues and questions and set out with a fine premise. However, the authors of the piece never seem to take it seriously. Instead of getting real answers from Christians, they settle for jabs (“hang-ups” instead of “beliefs”, “most powerful persecuting force,” etc) and arguments from outsiders. 

Additionally, the authors never seem to entertain the question: What if the world practiced the God’s design for marriage and sex? What would happen to things like: hunger, poverty, crime, prison, spousal abuse, child abuse, STDs, education, homelessness, and many other devastating issues in our world today? What does the data show when a father and mother get married, have kids, stay together, love each other, and do things by God’s plan? Might want to look into that….

It’s fine to question Christians and their beliefs – we have solid answers, if the questioner is interested in really listening. Wouldn’t it also be refreshing to see the “acceptable” societal approach to marriage and sex questioned?

One could look at this “journalism” and think it is quite different than what is expected. Real journalism would handle these matters another way. So, I’m left with a feeling that is hard to describe when I think about The Economist article.

I know there’s a word for it.

Ah yes, how odd.

Thanks for reading.  Your comments and insights are always welcomed.  If you enjoyed this, please share it.  Want more content?  Check the archives, my youtube channel, or listen to me on the Cross-Cutting Culture Podcast.