I am an asexual. Yes, someone who is asexual experiences little to no sexual desire. Still, I understand that sexual ethics and longings are a significant part of human life and that people need a rational ontology and epistemology of sexual morality, for there are many baseless ideas about sexuality and sexual desire which are exchanged in churches and Christian conversations without rebuttal and refutation.
One of these ideas is the belief that sexual desire is largely depraved or disgusting in and of itself. People may even appeal to the Bible in an effort to "prove" their perceptions from the text, but a legitimate examination of the Bible reveals a different understanding. Sexual desire is not a negative thing that can have positive contexts; it is a positive thing that can have negative contexts.
A syllogism will demonstrate this.
1. God created his handiwork good (Genesis 1:31).
2. God created people with sexual desire.
3. Therefore sexual desire is good.
This deductive reasoning is very simple, yet Christians seem to relentlessly draw the wrong conclusions from the first two premises. From demonizing all sexual feelings or impulses as "unholy" or "animal-like" to placing absurd man-made limitations on interaction between the sexes in order to prevent any possibility of sexual sin, Christians do not seem to understand the perspectives on sexuality proposed in their own holy text. People in American society, especially Christians, can find discussing sexual issues "awkward" or may even brand such talks "inappropriate", and this may lead to an absence of conversations about the topic. This is dangerous, because when people do not acknowledge sexuality openly or discuss their questions about it they may not ever arrive at truths about the matter. When Christians refrain from verbally addressing sexuality openly there is a higher risk of people assuming false foundational beliefs about it. Silence on some issues only protects false ideas about them because no one is willing to share their perceptions about them (such as the sometimes unspoken feeling that sexual desire is inherently shameful) and thus they go unmentioned and unchallenged.
The Bible explicitly clarifies which specific sexual activities the Christian religion opposes and it also explains the morality of sexual desire itself. The only three manifestations of sinful sexual desire condemned by the Bible are described below. Yes, there's only three.
1). Do not desire to commit sexual sins. When Jesus labeled lust "like adultery" it was because there is a difference between natural attraction and having the desire to commit a sexually immoral act like adultery. In Matthew 5:28 Jesus reminds people that to internally seek to commit a sin is not amoral just because no action necessarily results. To mentally or emotionally long to engage in rape, adultery, pedophilia, and other sexual wrongs is to succumb to sinful desires.
2). Do not wish to take someone's spouse from them--do not covet. In a stricter sense, this is all the word "lust" in the New Testament means (see words of Jesus in Matthew 5:28). The Greek word for "lust" is just the Greek version of the Hebrew word for "covet" (Exodus 20:17) that appears in the Decalogue. Obviously, you can look at an object like a car or at someone's husband or wife and admire them but not desire to take them for yourself.
3). Do not sexually objectify someone. According to the definitions of the words "lust"/"covet" in the Bible, sexual objectification is technically a different sin than the one condemned in Exodus 20:17 and Matthew 5:28. Why? Sexual objectification is viewing someone as only their sexual dimension without acknowledging or appreciating the other components to their personhood. People were designed in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27) and their nature contains a distinct sexual dimension but also many other aspects, none of which should be ignored or suppressed. According to the Biblical definition of lust/coveting, people cannot covet what already belongs to them--their spouse. However, one can still sexually objectify his or her spouse by reducing them to an object of sexual desire while ignoring other aspects of their humanity. See the difference?
This is all that the Bible labels evil with regards to sexual desire. These three principles make rational sense and actually can be defended as promoting human wellbeing and dignity, whereas the ideas of some Christians on the matter come across as irrational, unbiblical, inconsistent, and lacking true ethical or theological justification. That's because they often are irrational and without justification. Thankfully, the Bible contradicts the words of misguided preachers and laypeople. Sexual desire or attraction is not sinful, nor is finding other people attractive or sexy, regardless of their marital status. Incorrect motivations behind sexual desire and evil manifestations of those desires into sinful actions are depraved, not the presence of sexual attraction.
Now, I am definitely asexual. By that I mean that I have no active desire to have sex with anyone. But I still have an interest in learning about sexuality and sexual morality because they are part of God's creation and revelation respectively. Christians need to stop opposing natural and innate sexual desire, a good thing--a sacred thing that originated from God--and to stop inventing false morality that contradicts what God has clearly defined. In the Old Testament we can find Deuteronomy 4:2 at the beginning of a recitation of Mosaic Law, which commands us as follows: "Do not add to what I command you or subtract from them, but keep the commands of the Lord your God I give you." In the New Testament, Jesus himself harshly confronted certain religious leaders of his generation for adding to the Law as if they could improve on the objective morality revealed by God. It infuriates me when I see Christians commit these very fallacies God so strongly warned against, and sexuality is an aspect of human life which numerous well-meaning Christians have illicitly opposed. The misconceptions and legalism need to be abolished.
No comments:
Post a Comment