Perhaps the first thing to clarify is why there should be a specifically “Christian” way of thinking about sex at all. What is it about Christianity that could make a difference? And the answer surely lies in the doctrine of the incarnation.
Christians, as distinct even from Jews (their closest theological neighbours), believe that God has been “embodied”. The word of God, himself God from the beginning, “became flesh and dwelt among us” in the person of Jesus (John 1:14).
Therefore the body, the locus of our sexuality and the vehicle of its expression, is also a vehicle and means of expression of God’s own self. And whatever Christians think about sexuality, it has to be integrated with this specifically Christian understanding.
Why are we to prioritize sexuality as the mode through which we understand the theological implications of “embodiment”? Why is Venus more divine than, say, Mars?
Could we replace each instance of “sexuality” in this essay with “aggression” or “violence,” and feel it just as appropriate, much less any of the more civil appetites? If not, why not?
#1 – actually your comment is much more relevant and serious than merely a simple substitution. The fact is that for most of human history, sex, aggression and violence have been linked, and that one of the merits of traditional teaching is that it fosters peace between the sexes. It takes sex out of the realm of commerce and competition, and creates a space for men and women to be partners. It is equally true that violence is of interest in the scriptures; as is property.
But as long as we forget that sex, violence, property and death are inextricably linked in scripture we will remain in the chasm of miscommunication.
“There is neither reverence nor admonition when God first speaks about human reproduction.”
I’m still digging through the text. So far I’ve run into:
[blockquote]So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them[/blockquote]
Which sounded vaguely reverential to me each time I read it.
I also keep running into:
[blockquote][A]nd God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. [/blockquote]
That just seems like an admonishment. I also admit that to my untrained ear it has a shade different meaning that the earlier commands to Creation.
[blockquote]And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.[/blockquote]
Well, if the earlier developments are just the fusion of two gametes to form a zygote, then I guess this is the- the what?- I guess the very just fusion of very gametes.
I’ll read more tomorrow. I haven’t run into any violence, property or death yet. But then, I’m only at Chapter 1.