CHRISTIAN

SEX

ETHICS

AND

HOMOSEXUALITY

BY UWANURUOCHI KELECHUKWU SW/DP/08/363

ORIGINALLY A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO TRINITY THEOLOGICAL NSUKKA) IN COLLEGE PARTIAL UMUAHIA OF (IN THE AFFILIATION WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA FULFILMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF DIPLOMA IN THEOLOGY

JUNE 2013 DEDICATION

I dedicate this book to the upcoming Christian generation. With divine inspiration, the gospel of truth will shine brighter in your days, being confirmed by the Holy Spirit and the fruit of righteousness that follow it.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful to God who took me up from the dust. I must start by remembering my babie, Ndie, who makes home for me. My children, Emmanuel, Delight and, Uzoma who have all gone down Ndagwurugwu, I love that you all love the Lord. I use this medium to express my heartfelt gratitude to Rt Rev Emmanuel Ugwu, who ordained me into the priestly ministry and sent me to Trinity. Most Rev Ikechi Nwosu who is a true missionary for the gospel and a living sacrifice and wife Mrs Nne Patience Nwosu a good Christian leader. Rt Rev and Mrs Chidi and Joy Oparaojiaku I appreciate you for encouragement especially in my wilderness days. Ven John Ogbonna, Ven C U Kelechukwu and Ven Emma Ogundu, I appreciate your fatherly roles in my life. Ven Prof and Prof Mrs Onwasigwe were real mentors, Ven Prof Sam Ike encouraged me in good measure, likewise Elder K K Agwu and Dr J C Eze. I also appreciate Ven Gideon Ilechukwu, a good Christian leader. Ven Nwanekwu also gave me a great lift. God will remember him.

I appreciate the teachers I met in trinity, Rector Ven M N Nwoko, Registrar Ven A U Onuoha, Ven S N Nwaekpe and Ven S C Anwasia, Ven N S Nwigwe, Canon F Ogbuehi, Former Rector Ven G C Molokwu, Former dean of Academics Ven Oliver Igwe, Former Registrar Ven Kingsley Okoro, Former lecturer Ven Chima Onyebuagu, and others for sharing their lives with us. My parents Sir and Lady Martin Edoh. Sir and Lady Christian Ohaga and Brother Kingsley, Sister Ngozi and Vincent Uzomefuna are among those who helped specially in my upcoming days. I love you all. My partners in Gospel Seeds, Pastor Justice, Dauta Ogbonna, Obi Uwaham, Ambrose Ugbogu, Sister Chibuzo, Henry Ogbuji, Chijioke Anyanwu, Kingsley Ojimba, and numerous others who I cannot mention here, God will reward you all.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page......i Approval page. ....ii Certification page..iii Dedication.iv Acknowledgement...v Abstract.vii Table of contents..1 Chapter One METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 1.1 Statement of Problem.4 1.2 Purpose of Study.5 1.3 Significance of Study6 1.4 Scope of Study....6 1.5 Organization of study .7 1.6 Method of Study..8 1.7 Definition of terms ..8

Chapter Two REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ....12 Chapter Three THE MAN PAUL 3.0 Birth.....21 3.1 Career22 3.2 Conversion and Call23 3.3 Ministry 25 Chapter Four PAULINE SEX ETHICS 4.0 Relevant Scriptures28 4.1 Non-acceptance of sexual immorality.31 4.1 Sinfulness of lust ...32 4.2 Celibacy, a special calling.34 4.3 Heterosexual marriage, the right context for sex.35 Chapter Five IMPLICATION OF ST PAULS SEX ETHICS FOR THE CONTEMPORARY CHURCH 5.0 Faith, as opposed to biological, determinism of sexual behavior.37

5.1 Sex Education in the days of AIDS..43 5.2 Marriage, ordination and acceptance of homosexuals in the Christian community......48 5.3 Cohabitation and premarital sex.....63 5.4 Evaluation and Conclusion..65 References..67

CHAPTER 1 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

1.0

Statement of Problem

That the world is undergoing a sexual revolution is no longer news. We live in a time and age where the church seems to appear helpless as different means are being applied to upturn previously sacrosanct moral norms. Seemingly the orchestrators of this new morality apply to advantage the benefit of information technology and the claims of scientific research. The problem has become multi-faceted with the entertainment and advertisement industry steamrolling the attack on sexual ethics. Political sentiments and considerations have become implicated and even ministers of the gospel have joined the chorus. The result is a world where nudity is not frowned at on television, sex in publicized in the guise of big brother, boundaries to sexual behaviour are being pulled down, Christian pornography has become websites, nudity is an acceptable way of social pressure and school children are taught Find out by

practice if you are homosexual. This has also reduced the confidence which many have today in the gospel message as a whole. Sincere ministers of the gospel are often puzzled if they have missed it somehow, if there may be something wrong with the traditional sex ethics, and if it is just but a matter of years before the church succumbs to the generational trend. In the moral confusion of the present, there is then the need to capture the true sex ethics contained in the gospel, and demonstrate the untruth in alternative ethical postulations. This is the task which this work sets out to address. 1.1 Purpose of Study

This study therefore sets out to explore contemporary sex ethics, to recapture Christian sex ethics as expounded by Apostle Paul, to demonstrate the relevance of Paul sex ethics to the contemporary sexuality question and to expose and correct flaws and misconceptions in contemporary sex ethics.

1.2

Significance of Study

The significance of this study is obvious as there has not been satisfactory objective response from Christian apologists to contemporary sexuality issues. Many Christian apologists have concentrated on attacking politico-legal structures and seeking the denial to homosexual practitioners of certain civil and social liberties and such a posture has only helped to win sympathies for the new morality which has successfully presented itself as a persecuted minority. This work will also provide the Christian community a formula for coping with todays sexuality, as well as encouraging a pragmatic approach that neither compromises the truth of divine revelation nor panders to sophistication of socio-scientific manipulation.

1.3

Scope of Study

It is not realistic for considerations of time and money and other logistics to explore the full spectrum of sex ethics in the world of today. To avoid the errors of overstatement and exaggeration,

10

this discussion will be limited to Pauline sex ethics and its implication for the following issues: sexual orientation, sex education, cohabitation and pre-marital sex. 1.4 Organization of study

The first chapter of this study takes on methodology. It starts with the statement of problem, gives the purpose of the study, and the significance to contemporary Christian scholarship. It then gives a scope of the area the study will cover, the organization, the method of study, and ends with a definition of the relevant terms. The second chapter reviews relevant literature concerning the various issues on human sexuality from a Christian perspective. In the third chapter effort is made to X-ray the life of Paul, his birth, career, conversion and call and subsequent ministerial and apostolic engagement in the Gentile church. The fourth chapter is used to analyze Pauls sex ethics; Chapter five handles the implications of this sex ethics on the contemporary church. The areas of discussion here will include

11

research on sexuality and orientation, sexual education in the light of HIV/AIDS pandemic, Marriage, ordination and acceptance of homosexuals in the Christian community, cohabitation and premarital sex, and attitude of Christians to homosexuality and homosexuals. 1.5 Method of Study

This study will depend mainly on published materials in journals including theology, medicine and sociology. The following accepted sources of Christian ethics: scripture, reason, experience and divine inspiration (Lanoue, 2011: 6) will be employed. The scriptural texts will be taken from the King James Version of the Bible.

1.6 Definition of Terms

To clarify issues, some basic terms need to be defined. i) Sex

12

According to the Oxford Advanced learners dictionary (2011: 1), Sex can be defined as 1. The state of being male or female. 2. Either of the two groups that people, animals and plants are divided into according to their function of producing young. 3. Physical activity between two people in which they touch each other's sexual organs, and which may include sexual intercourse. In this research, sex, depending on the context, will imply sexual intercourse and gender.

ii)

Ethics

This has been defined (Oxford Advanced learners dictionary, 2011: 1) as 1. Moral principles that control or influence a person's behaviour

13

2 A system of moral principles or rules of behaviour 3 The branch of philosophy that deals with moral principles

A Christian theological ethic can be defined as an understanding of what ought to be, a willingness on the part of individual believers to be saved and to become disciples of Jesus Christ, and a commitment on the part of both individual believers and communities to practice their faith with reference to human, social and physical reality (Botha, 2005 as cited in Le Roux, 2006: 9)

iii)

Homosexuality

The Merriam-Webster dictionary, on the other hand, defines Homosexuality (2013: 1) as 1. Erotic activity with another of the same sex or 2. The quality or state of being homosexual.

14

Merriam-Websters also defines the word homosexual (2013: 1) as 1. Of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex 2: Of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

iv) Church A number of concepts will apply when the word church is used. I will be use it primarily to refer to the family of all Christians who have accepted the lordship of Lord and believe in his saving deed on the cross, and are his followers in their way of life, and not just the nominal meaning of Christians as those who worship in Christian churches. This is in line with the scriptural, and Pauline, understanding of the word, as shown in Ephesians 5:24a The church is subject unto Christ

15

Contemporary usage however will be reflected in some citations, either as referring to all persons who accent to the Christian faith or to membership of a local Christian

congregation.

Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Many developments have occurred worldwide, especially in western countries, challenging the traditional sex ethics. Sex ethics that run counter to Christian concepts are not new. For example the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries saw the free love movement, which advocated freedom to express sexual love according to an individuals preference, without any limitation to the bounds of marriage (McElroy, 1996:1).

16

In the fifties, Alfred Kinsey published his works on sexual behaviour of thousands of men and women ("Human sexuality," 2012, "Modern developments,": 1). He reported frequent practice of masturbation and oro-genital sex, and finding of homosexual experience among a good number of men seemed to suggest acceptance of these practices to the wider society. His work was also a stimulus for the barrage of research that has been done in modern times on sex. The sixties and seventies witnessed what has been referred to as The sexual revolution, a social movement that challenged traditional codes of behavior related to sexuality and interpersonal relationships (Sexual revolution, 2012: 1). Sexuality of today is also influenced significantly by the internal commercial society within societiesmainly western. According to a Time Magazine/CNN survey, 74% of teenagers said that friends and television were their main sources of sexual education ("Human sexuality," 2012, "Sociocultural aspects": 1)

17

The result today is that sex has lost much of its past sanctity. At the same time forms of sexual practices that were once regarded as taboo have become accepted, especially in the western world, as alternative but normal practices (Hargreaves, 1991:68). What has followed it is a campaign against the traditional sex ethic of the church. This has come to a situation whereby Christian churches are labeled as sinners for holding onto the traditional sex ethic. In line with this Olivia Le Roux has this to say: I do by no means suggest at all that homosexual persons are sick because of their orientation, rather sick because of the rejection and wounds inflicted on them by the church and/or other people (2006: 2). His statement suggests he has taken the position that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, but rather that condemning homosexuality is wrong. The question this raises is? Where is the divine mandate for taking such a position on a practice clearly condemned in scripture and obviously unnatural; or has it become so difficult to know what is a biological order? It becomes needed that the right divine order for sexual ethics be discovered and up-held.

18

Keenan James (2010: 3) summarized the two main schools that have engaged in debates over sexual ethics in the past decades, the traditionalists who insist on maintaining the long accepted sex ethics of centuries, and the revisionists who would have the society and the church inculcate changes in perspective that have been driven mainly by socio-scientific pressure groups. In his work he described a debate between theologians on two sides of the case. Salzman and Lawler had made a case that a nonbiological, but personal and affective, complementarity between homosexuals can be considered grounds for natural and moral sexual relationships. George and Lee respond that complementarity as such derives from biological claims. They argue that Salzman and Lawler are not making their case and that magisterial teaching on the matter stand. Salzman and Lawler respond that they are revisionists with a personalist and relational anthropology in a historicist theology, but that George and Lee are classicists with a fixed anthropology that does not yield to experience or contemporary social-scientific claims. Gerald Caron (2007, as cited in Keenan, 2010: 1) in his own contribution to the sexuality question argues from Genesis 19

19

that the sin of Sodom was not homosexuality, but that of aggression towards strangers. He faults associating homosexuality with Sodom. It is also important to note that Salzman and Lawler have also taken on premarital sex (2008, as cited in Keenan, 2010: 1). They claim that it is no sin, so long as there is commitment between the partners. Another area of contemporary dispute is that of sex-education. For example, Jane Fraser (2005, as cited in Keenan, 2007: 1) had put some of the blame for teenage pregnancy on churches. She argues that teenagers on into faith-based abstinence programs almost always abandon their pledge but are less likely to use contraceptives in their sexual relationships because they were not prepared for the experiences they promised to forego. Margaret Farley's (2006, as cited in Keenan 2007: 1) takes a look at the issues of sexuality, love, and relationships. She investigates traditions in various parts of the world, and from these she derives variety in expressions of human sexuality.

20

Turning to gender, she investigates three ways that gender ought not matter so much. "(1) Gender ought not to divide us, one from another.... (2) The notion of the gender divide, however, does not lie in an uncritical notion of complementarity.... (3) Gender may have importance, but it is not in the differentiation of roles." Based on these investigations, she then presents a normative ethic of sexuality based on a love that is just. From this framework she articulates a set of norms that are bottom-line requirements. They are justice, free consent, mutuality, equality, commitment, fruitfulness and social justice Based on her investigations, she then proposes an ethic of sexuality that is based just on love. On the issue of relationship of Christians to homosexuals, Lull David (2007:1) opines that homosexuality is mentioned in just about seven verses of the entire canon of scriptures; and that the insignificance of this number, as well as Gods unbounded love emphasized by Jesus and Paul, is a warrant for granting homosexuals full citizenship and participation in the church.

21

He then goes ahead to highlight that homosexuality was not mentioned in the Ten Commandments. He claims that the current focus on homosexual sex is a strategy to shift attention to sex lives of a minority instead of the sexual misconduct of the majority. Citing the Genesis account whereby God created mankind male and female, he sees no further implication as to sexual orientation even as he affirms that gays are still male, and lesbians still female. In Genesis 19 he sees no condemnation of the homosexuality being practiced by the mob, but only of sexual violence and xenophobia.

Turning over to Leviticus 18:22 which says You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, Lull David understands it to be an injunction to a woman not to lie with a male as she would lie with a fellow woman. He then tackles the clear description of homosexuality in Romans. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that

22

which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. Romans 1:26-27 While acknowledging that Paul condemned all same-sex sexual intercourse, Lull David insists that Paul was merely echoing his own culture's concepts of human sexuality. His support for this is the church has moved beyond so many other concepts about human sexuality and gender in his culture. John Boswell has argued against the translations of the Greek words usually applied to homosexuals in1 Cor 6:9 Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (1980, as cited in Smith 2006: 15). Boswell translated the first Greek word, malakoi (for effeminate), as unrestrained or wanton" and the second, arsenokoitai (for abusers of themselves with mankind) , as male prostitutes rather than homosexuals. Our interest will centre on

23

the second word. It is a combination of two Greek words, arsen meaning male and koitai meaning beds, which he admits is an euphemism for sexual intercourse, but he infers it in Pauline usage to be limited to just male prostitutes. Dale Martin, on the other hand, claims that the meaning of the word is obscure (2010: 1). Lull David (2007: 5) however has pointed out an analogy with metrokoites, another compound Greek word formed from mother and the bed euphemism, which refers to a male who has sex with his mother, suggesting that arsenokoitai is better translated males who have intercourse with males. Still on the issue of homosexuality, Lull David observes cases of inappropriate responses to disputes over the issue of homosexuality. He faults some churches for taking defaulting ministers to ecclesiastical courts, on the basis that Paul condemned lawsuits in the community of faith. William Barclay (1973: 161) draws interest because he says some homosexuals are so constructed, made that way. His well-publicized work show the extent to which secularized

24

interpretations have been adopted even by the clergy considering that William Barclay is an ordained minister as well as a Professor of Divinity.

Chapter 3 THE MAN PAUL 3.0 Birth The year of Pauls birth is disputed. However many biblical historical scholars believe he was born at around the first few years of the Christian era (Wallace, 2002: 4) He was born in Tarsus, the capital city of Cilicia, a province in what is now Turkey (Bornkamm, 1971: 3), probably somewhere around 0-5 A.D. According to Acts 22:28, though he was a Jew he was

25

born a Roman citizen. Roman citizens commonly had two names, one which indicated their background or heritage apart from Rome, and the other, which would be their Roman heritage. Paul's Roman name Saul Paulus was such a name. "He bore two names, the Hebrew Saul meaning "desired" or "asked for," and the Roman Paulus, meaning "small." Of Pauls mother nothing is known (Stalker, 1884: 22); he never mentions her, either because she died in his infancy or because of some alienation or because he simply had no particular occasion to do so. He had at least one sister. His father was a citizen or burgess of Tarsus and obviously wealthy, for in a reform fifteen years earlier, the rank of citizen had been removed from all householders without considerable fortune or property (Wallace, 2002: 9). It is likely that his family moved to Jerusalem when he was still quite young, although the exact timing is uncertain. In Jerusalem the young Saul sat under Gamaliel, one of the most eminent of all the doctors of the law. Not much is known about his physical stature but a second century description in the apocryphal Acts of Paul was as

26

following: small of stature, balding, bow legs, large eyes, eyebrows meeting, nose slightly hooked (Hubert, 1979: 3).

3.1 Career Paul was a tentmaker by trade (Mouton, n.d.: 6). Cilicia was known for a black goats haircloth called cilicium, which was made into tents and used by caravans, nomads, and armies all over Asia Minor and Syria (Pollock, 1072 as cited in Wallace, 2002: 2). 3.2 Conversion and Call Paul's conversion can be dated to 3136 by his reference to it in one of his letters (Paroschi, 2000: 344). According to the Acts of the Apostles, his conversion took place on the road to Damascus, where he testified to have experienced a vision of the resurrected Jesus, after which he was temporarily blinded (Acts 9:131;22:122; 26:924). I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this

27

purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me 26:15-18 It is probable that Luke, the author of Acts of the Apostles, may have learned of the conversion from Paul (Hedrick, 1981: 344). The import of this encounter is in the divine authority behind Pauls doctrine, and the fact that his commission and message by extension was from God, and ought to be received as such. Paul actually on a number of occasions affirmed this as to the source of his message. But I certify you, brethren that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it Acts

28

of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal 1:11-13 Paul actually pointedly warned the church about any deviation from the gospel he brought to them. I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Gal 1:6-8 3:3 Ministry Paul engaged in three major missionary journeys (Falconberry. 2009: 1) in his ministerial career and through his writings his prophetic calling as Apostle to the Gentiles has carried on to subsequent generations. First missionary journey

29

At the first, Barnabas seems to have been the team leader, but it was not long Paul took over as a result of Gods special gift in his life. Their first circus takes them from Antioch to Cyprus, southern Asia Minor, Perga in Pamphylia, Antioch in Pisidia. Their trip was mainly evangelistic, and was characterized by miraculous signs. The scriptures also recorded that the two actually completed the work for which God had called them (Acts 15:26). Second missionary journey The second missionary journey was after the council in Jerusalem. It began as a visitation proposal raised by Paul. There was a disagreement which led to a split of the ministry team, Barnabas going off with John Mark, and Paul went along with Silas. This time Paul visited Derbe, Lystra, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens and Corinth, before returning to his base in Antioch. It was the same experience of large conversions, accompanied by signs and miracles and attendant persecutions. At Corinth, he had a remarkable vision when God spoke to him: Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy

30

peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city (Acts 18:9-10). Third missionary journey In the last of his recorded missionary trips, Paul went through Galatia and Phrygia and then Ephesus where he stayed for two years. It was here in Ephesus that he wrote to the Corinthians; But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8). He next visited Macedonia (Philippi), Troas, Miletus, Tyre and Ceaserea en route Jerusalem where he was taken prisoner and subsequently taken to Rome. Writings Majority of the New Testament epistles are traced to Paul. These include Romans, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, 1st and 2nd Timothy, Titus and Philemon. There is controversy among biblical authors over the authorship of Hebrews (Gastrich, 1998: 1). The works of Paul have been respected from early times as canons of scripture.

31

Chapter 4 PAULINE SEX ETHICS 4.0 Relevant Scriptures The sex ethics of Apostle Paul can be derived from a number of verses in which he addresses sex-related issues. These include For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is

32

unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. Rom 1:26-27, Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 1 Cor 6:9, Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. 1 Cor 6:1520

33

It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.1 Cor 7:1-7 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God Gal 5:19-21

34

For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 1 Thess 4:3-5 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God Eph 5:3-5 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; 1 Tim 1:10 4.1 Non-acceptance of sexual immorality.

35

Paul makes it clear that fornication should not even be named among the believers. The reason he gives is precisely because this is Gods will. (Yarbrough, 1996: 71)That is exactly what God wants. Sexual immorality was a form of idolatry, and all those given to it would not partake of the kingdom of God. Avoiding it was a minimum requirement for the body of Christ (Drake, 1998: 3) Paul highlights that in sexual conduct, the believers must not be like the Gentiles who do not know God. He add to this the consequence of sinful living, be it sexual immorality or other forms of idolatry. Paul does not vilify sex. He acknowledges it that it is a gift from God, inasmuch as to some, celibacy is a gift. To those who are tempted and find it difficult to control their passions, Paul advises marriage. Paul also teaches about the spiritual significance of sex. He that engages in sex joins himself with the partner, just as the

36

believers spirit is joined to the Lord. So joining ones body with that of a harlot is disregard to the Lord that owns the body. 4.2 Sinfulness of lust. It is not only fornication and adultery that is sin. Uncleanness and lasciviousness which imply showing a desire for or unseemly interest in sex are also listed as works of the flesh in the following passages: (i) Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness (Gal 5:19), (ii) That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God (1 Thess 4:4-5) and (iii) Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted (1 Cor 10:6). Unlike sexual sins of the act which can be expressed in fornication and adultery, sexual sins of the heart can be expressed in things such as lust, pornography and masturbation. Though less visible they are as much sin, just as the seed has

37

the same nature as the fruit. This is also in line with the teaching of Christ. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Matt 5:27-28

4.3 Celibacy, a special calling Inasmuch as Paul reveals his personal interest for a life of celibacy, he also reveals that he understands others have their God-given gifts. While some are called to celibacy, others are called to marriage. In Pauls time, many of the other apostles were married. This is clear from 1 Cor 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?.

38

Misunderstanding of this has led to the situation where some clergy must be celibate in some churches (Walsh. 1999: 1). This is not what Paul would have advised. He acknowledged the fact that people had their individual, God-given grace and gift. Acting contrary to this would lead to the expected problem of fornication by clergy who find themselves in a temptation for which they do not have the God-given grace. Paul acknowledges that not all have his grace of celibacy: For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that (1 Cor 7:7) .

4.3 Heterosexual marriage, the right context for sex We must also observe that Paul says Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. This shows that marriage is understood as between a man and a woman. It is not too difficult to deduce that it was never thought of, in Pauls times, that same-sex marriage should be an issue within the body of Christ. Of course, Paul does not treat homosexuality as a subject

39

so his perspective on it must be derived. This is however not difficult to deduce, the only references he makes to homosexuality being as a practice among men living under Gods wrath (Rom 1:18, 26-27), the unrighteous (1 Cor 6:9-10) and those living contrary to sound doctrine (1 Tim 1:10). These show that homosexuality was a heathen practice (Coulter, 2012: 9). It is also observed that the notion of unnaturalness is strong in Pauls (Smedes, 1976: 62). It is understandable that he does not dwell much on the subject of homosexuality because it was not thought of among believers. Even fornication was not to be as much as mentioned among the believers, But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named, among you, as becometh saints (Eph 5:3). The point must also be made that the early church was an evangelical church, and like evangelical churches today maintain a high standard of sexual practice. It is in the same vein that the major inroad homosexuality has made has been in the organized churches, rather than the evangelicals (Anderson

40

(2011): 1). Even in the orthodox churches, segments which have undergone an evangelical revival like the Anglican Communion have been highly intolerant of deviant sexual practices (Yip and Keenan. 2004: 1). The light in which Paul discusses homosexuality makes it clear enough that was not just condemned, (Malick, 1993: 492) it was not even considered. It was well understood to belong to the old life, not to the new life of the saved (1 Corinthians 6:9-11a). If impurity characterized their pre-Christian existence, their Christian existence ought to be characterized by sanctification (Ernest, 1972: 168).

Chapter 5 IMPLICATION OF SEX ETHICS FOR THE CONTEMPORARY CHURCH 5.0 Acceptance of faith, as opposed to biological, determinism of sexual behaviour There is a growing acceptance of homosexuality in the western countries. This has largely been the result of a campaign by

41

homosexual groups to change the public perception about homosexuality. This may be traced to the work of Alfred Kinsey who reported an incidence of about 37% of homosexual experience among men, and extrapolated that it was a normal behavior occurring in a certain percentage of every population (Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin. 1948: 895). It has however been found that the prevalence of homosexual behaviour is much less, 0.9% according to a study by the Office for National Statistics in the United Kingdom (Joloza, Evans, OBrien & Potter-Collins. September 2010: 10). It has also been reported that the sample Kinsey studied was not representative of the U.S. population (Knight.2002: 1) He had also interviewed co-workers, those who volunteered for his extracurricular lectures, homosexual communities in Chicago, and disproportionate numbers of male prisoners, and yet he extrapolated his finding to the general population. This shows how science could be used to create a false impression.

42

James Jones has also revealed that Kinsey, the father of the use of science to market homosexuality, had a gamut of extramarital affairs (1997. as cited in Sharp. 1997: 1) David Sharp reporting in Lancet observed that Kinsey was bisexual, had encouraged one younger male colleague to have sex with his wife (maybe so as to obtain information); had indulged in homosexual activities with research colleagues and in casual anonymous sex with men outside Bloomington, Indiana, where he lived and worked (Sharp. 1997: 1). The question must be asked how objective and unbiased do we expect his report to be? The point must also be made; does finding that a percentage of men practice adultery justify the practice? Does the biblical assertion that all have sinned justify sin? Kinsey at a time also asserted that nearly 30% of the population had at least attempted sex acts with animals (Sharp. 1997: 1). That will also justify sex with animals. A number of other scientific claims have also been made, which on further examination shows no valid substance. LeVay, has

43

reported that that a tiny region in the center of the brain--the interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH) 3--was, on average, substantially smaller in nineteen gay men who died from AIDS than among sixteen heterosexual men.(LeVay, 1991: 253). But it is known that AIDS causes several brain abnormalities (Levy, Bredesen, Rosenblum, & Davis.1989. PMID: 2489119) which could be responsible for such observed differences if at all they exist. Some convincing argument has also been made on the issue of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. (Meyer-Bahlburg, Dolezal, Bake, & MI, 2008, PMID: 2489119). Such women have excess testosterone levels, masculine characteristics and reportedly high frequency of lesbianism. It is also understandable why females with predominantly male hormones will behave like males, as sexual development and behaviour are hormonally determined. Actually such females have genital changes that are male in pattern such as enlarged clitoris. Suffice it to say that medical disorders need medical

44

treatment, and as such is no support for homosexuality (Deaton, Glorioso, & Mclean, 1999: 1). In the light of Christian revelation, we must then address the need or use of such scientific research in an area where the scriptures are clear. There are medical issues, and there are moral ones, just as with the intelligence we understand the natural order, for example of sowing and reaping, while with the conscience we know which things are morally right or wrong. The Christian faith imparts to the believer a revelation light which guides him into spiritual truths. Paul affirms this illuminating power of the gospel: To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God (Acts 26:17-18). So it must be appreciated that there is an illumination which only the believer can have. In as much as the non-believer does not have it, such a person may not even know what he lacks in terms of spiritual illumination, For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts (2 Cor 4:6).

45

It should therefore not be strange that believers and nonbelievers do not agree on these issues. That such men claim to be believers makes no difference, as is clear from the scriptures: Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away (2 Tim 3:5). It is also of note that homosexuality have been associated with scholarly Greece, just as it is today in the enlightened West. Paul had also alluded to this tendency among the intelligentsia of the world in Romans 1:21-22: Their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools and also in 1 Cor 1:19-25: Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of

46

God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. It is therefore clear enough that there are spiritual truths which mere human wisdom cannot grasp; these truths include issues that bother on morality, of which sexual behaviour is inclusive. It must also be noted that Paul in his sex ethics is consistent with the rest of scriptures (Genesis 19:4-11; Leviticus 18:22; Judges 19; 1 Kings 14:24) in proscribing homosexual relationships (Milne, 2009: 134; Gumbel, 1996:73-87).

5.1 Sex Education in the days of AIDS Christians are the arrowhead of good sex education in schools. Sex is a moral arena that is addressed by faith. It is an area of weakness over which many became victorious courtesy of the faith. Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with

47

mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Cor 6:9-11 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 1 Cor 6:17-19 The fact is that sexual relationship is sacrosanct. Christians as citizens of a heavenly kingdom need to represent Christ as his ambassadors. Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation. 1 Peter 2:12

48

Sexual morality is one of the vital areas in which the believer defers from the non-believer. His conduct with regard to sex is predicated on the premise of the Lordship of Christ. Therefore, just as we saw the high level of sexual discipline in Pauline ethics (Yarbrough, 1996: 71), sex education to the Christian church demands of nothing less. The difference must however be appreciated when the class being addressed is not the church, such as a school class. In such atmosphere, it is only reasonable that a comprehensive education includes the fact that condom use reduces the risk of transmission of HIV infection, for it does. It could actually save the life of a person whose spouse is infected. We cannot however deny that abstinence is an almost 100% chance of avoiding pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. This suggests that efforts should be channeled to reducing the sexually polluted nature of atmosphere in which people live. This will involve responsible advertising and media to practice. It is clearly the responsibility of adults to create an environment conducive for teenagers whose power of ethical choice is limited.

49

Sexual health differs in meaning depending on the faith of the interpreter. A secularist may understand this to mean absence of sexually transmitted diseases (Gold & Nash, 2001: 1) while the believer understands this to mean a way of life where sexuality is fully in line with the will of God. We can also see this from Pauls sentence: But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth (1 Tim 5:6). Properly understood, it will then be appreciated that for a truly Christian community of singles, advice on condom use has no direct application as sex is sinful behaviour. Understanding of Pauls sexual ethics, and by implication the Christian sexual ethics will seek for nothing less than a return to the highway of holiness to which God call His people. This in no way denies the need for sex-education for non-Christians, but the church cannot be detracted from its higher mandate to call men to sanctification. Actually only in this way will the church be the light it is called to be in the world of today. Blaming churches for not teaching condom use (Genrich and Brathwaite, 2005: 1; Aguwa 2010: 1) is akin to upbraiding an evangelistic team for

50

not offering a course on stock-investments; it is simply not their mission. The fact that religious faith has also prevented millions from contracting HIV/AIDS is also an issue which is often neglected and deserves investigation (Green 2009: 9). It leaves much to be desired when one remembers that few scholarly articles have highlighted or even studied this positive aspect. The importance of this role of abstinence is borne out in the experience of Uganda. Infections in the East African country, which once had the highest rate in the world, dropped from 30 percent of the population in the early 1990s to around 10 percent today. Although promotion of condom use has been a part of Uganda's HIV/AIDS prevention strategy, the concept of "True Love Awaits" - an abstinence-until-marriage program launched in 1994 and supported by schools and religious organizations - is credited with helping to bring down the infection rate (Trafford, 2002: 1). It also will be observed that secular authors usually approach the discourse as if the major danger is such things as teenage pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. The Christian

51

perspective however is that the real danger for any life is to be outside of the will of God. Some of the problems of ungodly living such as teenage pregnancy actually help men to get right with God. Paul illustrates this point in the verse below. Like a father who chastises his son, he is not happy that the church was hurt, but that a hurt led to repentance. Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. 2 Cor 7:9-10 A typical example is in the parable of the prodigal son. Repentance is of much more value even when bought at the price of physical affliction like sexually transmitted diseases.

5.2 Marriage, ordination and acceptance of homosexuals in the Christian community.

52

Right now, the Anglican Communion is a state of brokencommunion. (Vanderbeck, Valentine, Ward, Sadgrove & Andersson. 2010: 1; Guinness, 2011: 4). Relationships between provinces have become strained and the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, had even proposed a new structure of communion (Williams, 2009: 1). All this has been traced to inroads made by those with revisionist agenda, especially on homosexuality, into the communion. Varied perceptions to the current situation exist. Yip and Michael argue that the development is a welcome one, seeing in it a colouration and acclimatization of Christianity to local norms (Yip & Michael, 2004: 1) Le Roux Olivia has argued that inclusion and hospitality constitute the thrust of the ethics of the bible and the church through the ages (Le Roux, 2012: 105). He sees homosexuals

as brothers and sisters who happen to differ with heterosexual brethren, but that the difference should not hinder their full embrace and recognition as members of the body of Christ. But does this point withstand Pauline ethical interrogation. A study of

53

the scriptures show that membership is well defined within a context of conduct. Paul puts it this way: I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no not to eat. 1 Cor 5:9-11 God love for everyone surely means everyone is actually invited into the brotherhood of faith; we must reach out in love to those who practice homosexuality. This temptation is no different from other temptations. In this sense, the church must accept homosexuals just like all persons, inasmuch as it does not condone homosexual behaviour. On this note, I propose that there are no homosexual persons, but only people who practice homosexuality. Seeing a man as practicing sin, but not a sinner,

54

implies we see the great potential for change, and this is what the grace of God promises. And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting 1 Tim 1:14-16 However for a sinner to belong, such must yield their lives to the Lordship of Christ. Paul actually went on to emphasize this fact in the very next chapter Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.1 Cor 6:9-10

55

At this point, we can consider the justification for the attention given by Christian leaders and apologists to the issue of homosexuality. It has been acknowledged that church response to the issue is a major challenge (Montoya, 2008: 234). However, whenever there is a challenge of wrong indoctrination, a response is warranted by Christian teachers because, in Pauls words, A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? (1 Cor 5:6). We can also catch glimpses from Paul of scriptural response to false doctrine. that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. Titus 1:9-11 However the minister needs to guard against needless controversies. He needs to know when his instructions are valued, and also when he faces men who are caught in the spirit of error; such mens love and passion for error will not permit

56

them to acknowledge the truth. Such are best avoided as Paul advised two leading church doctors of his time, Titus and Timothy. But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain... A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself Titus 3:9-11 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 2 Tim 2:16-18 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose

57

themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 2 Tim 2:2325 In as much as a host of theologians have taken up the case for homosexuality as seen in the multiplicity of scholarly publications, shepherds of Gods flock dont have to respond in the same vein. Paul advice against theological disputations is quite apt in that the Christian response is not a theological one, but a spiritual one. And only through this can the church hold her ground-knowing that only through prayer and the power of the Spirit she can survive the onslaught of false doctrine. For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; 2 Cor 10:3-5

58

Lull David J had also claimed that the focus on homosexual sex is a strategy to shift attention sex lives of a minority instead of the sexual misconduct of the majority (David, 2007: 2). How this can be understood remains to be seen when one considers that this is a campaign that changes a clear teaching of the scriptures. Reinterpretation of scriptures to favor human choices obviously denies the whole canon of scriptures of its sacredness. Any other scripture can be given peoples preferred interpretation. By seeking to preserve the integrity of one verse of the scriptures, church fathers preserve the integrity of the whole. Lull David J also gives no evidence for his assertion that that attention is being diverted from sexual misconduct of the many (David, 2007: 2). The church is playing its role of sound teaching. I am not aware that the church is teaching that adultery is not sin, but revisionists want the church to teach that homosexuality is not sin. The claim therefore falls aground. When one considers the fact that a number of congregations have given support for gay marriage, it must not be forgotten,

59

as has been acknowledged, that the stand of many church leaders on the issue is motivated by political correctness (Peter, 2006: 1) On Roman 1:29, Lull David J insists that Paul was was merely echoing his own culture's concepts of human sexuality (David, 2007: 5). It would have been interesting to know how David came to know that Paul was here, not Gods mouthpiece, but an echo of contemporary culture. What is at contention is the truth of Gods revelation, over which we men need to know who is the true prophet, saying what God says and not just parroting for culture. It does not seem far-fetched to allude that Lull David J is actually the one echoing contemporary cultural trends. Some scholars have tried to downplay on Pauline sex ethics as only applying to cultural situations of his time. Margaret Farley for example had asserted that human beings can continue to learn more about themselves and their sexuality. Insights can be found in many areas, including the conclusions of alternative sexual ethical frameworks proposed by contemporary thinkers. New knowledge may press beyond past conclusions, resulting in

60

the development of new normative positions. (Farley, 2006. as cited in Dolores, 2006: 1) Subtly, what Farley has proposed is that the Christian culture is evolving, that normative positions are defective. The question that must be asked then is Is the Christian culture truly evolving? Paul strongly asserts otherwise. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed Gal 1:8-9 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.2 Cor 1:3-4

61

And we must not also forget Paul warning about future developments in doctrine, Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils (1 Tim 4:1). In the light of the foregoing, the question is Where does revisionism fall in? Revisionists actually do just that, they present a departure from orthodox Christian sex ethics. The support which Farley (2006, as cited in Keenan 2007) advances for same-sex relationships from sexuality practices in various parts of the world only shows she does not appreciate that Christianity is an other-worldly way of life. That perversion is practiced in every culture is the very reason the gospel commission is for the entire world. unto whom (the Gentiles), now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins Acts 26:17-18

62

Her assertion why gender ought not to matter also shows a blatant disregard for the magisterial role of God. She proposes an ethic of Justice, but the questions this begs is What is justice? Is it Gods ordinance or human proposal? The very word she uses assumes the existence of a judge. Sexual behaviour is essentially private, and only He that sees in secret can be judge of mens lives. In a world where God rules; his ordinances constitutes the true frameworks of justice, if we could use Farleys language. Farleys just love sexuality ethic must also be addressed. The problem with her position is that love is about the most misused word worldwide. The drug addict is in love with drugs. The promiscuous is motivated by love. Children who did whatever they loved to do would soon be dead and we are just thatchildren- before God. Not that the ethic of love is not upheld, but, more than that, the ethic of Gods love. The ethic of a father love that, wholesome being, involves compassion as well as discipline; entail pleasure as well as boundaries; provokes

63

reciprocity as well as reverence; an essence probably best illustrated in Pauline injunction; Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. 2 Cor 6:17-7:1 One would also observe in Farleys work an attempt to replace divinely inspired teaching with sound human logic. It is philosophy contending with revelation. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal 1:11-12

64

And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; ...But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Cor 2:4-14 Suffice it to say that the essential weakness of all other alternative philosophies of life is their inability to bring wholesomeness to the lives of men, to bring the healing and wellbeing to interpersonal and spiritual relations; the real potent in healing mens spiritual lives is the revealed faith Christ gave to Paul for his entire body, .. the foolishness of God is wiser than men (1 Cor 1: 25).

65

Farley may well keep her logic, but Pauline ethics has brought healing to souls of men, it has brought light to men whose lives were once in spiritual darkness, and this is its own evidence. Would one expect one that has been redeemed to depart from the message that brought salvation? This does not stand to reason as Paul deduces in Ephesians 5:8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light. The Christian does not reflect contemporary conventions, but gives to light to the world. Indeed, were the Christian not to be a moral compass to call the world to godly living, were the Christian to be a mirror, and not a light, the Christian soon loses his relevance to culture. Victorian culture was undoubtedly highly influenced by the Christian body. If modern culture seems to depart farther and farther from Gods revealed pattern of living, then perhaps it is a call for the body of Christ, not to compromise, but to seek to rediscover it original call to distinctiveness from the world, as Paul beckons the church in this clarion call.

66

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 2 Cor 6:14-16

5:3 Cohabitation and premarital sex Salzman and Lawler offer a revisionist understanding for sexual ethics, arguing, for instance, that premarital intimacy ought not to be seen as compromising the integrity of the forthcoming marriage but rather as a developmental procession to marriage (Salzman & Lawler, 2008 as cited in Keenan, 2010: 1). Actually cohabitating with an unmarried partner and having sexual

67

relations prior to marriage have become increasingly normative in most Western societies (Ogland & Hinojosa, 2012: 1) Salzman and Lawler had claimed that premarital sex was not sinful as long as there was commitment (2008, as cited in Keenan, 2010), but commitment is a moral quality with a wide range of spectrum. What degree of commitment was permissible? Is human nature so predictable as to exclude a break-up even when commitment has been demonstrated? And is marriage not the more tangible evidence of commitment? We may agree that increased intimacy goes with increased commitment, but would it not be more appropriate that marriage (the height of physical commitment) should go with sex (the peak of physical intimacy)? Christian tradition has stressed that marriage is the appropriate realm for sex and this accords with the Pauline tradition, Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge (Heb 13:4).

68

Understanding the spiritual union with the Lord and the ownership of the believer by the Lord also implies that the Lord must be respected in the conduct of the believer. This bears out in the experience of many young people. Not respecting God in sexual matters often leads to loss of Gods blessing in such relationships. Joining oneself with a harlot is an insult to the Lord. Sex being a spiritual union with the mate, and not just a physical union, will only be appropriate where the partners are married. Without marriage, it would be fornication. Paul actually advised marriage where one cannot condone the temptation of sex: Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband (1 Cor 7:2). So claiming that cohabitation will preserve unmarried relationship must be unacceptable. The self-control which abstinence among intending couples learn is more definitely a vital contribution to eventual success of marriages. Also, the respect intending couples render to the Lord by allowing God rule in the areas of their tendencies boils over to submitting to

69

God in the way they live as marriage partners, helping such marriages last. This has not even touched on the consequences of cohabitation such as pregnancy in a relationship from which a partner may easily walk away. I am also not aware of any study showing that cohabiting couples have fewer divorces or happier marriages. The reverse appears much more likely.

5.4

Evaluation and Conclusion

A work of this nature cannot explore many more contemporary issues of sexuality. Enough light however has been shown to shown that the traditional stance of the church represents the spirit of the gospel, while revisionism is an exercise to give a religious connotation to deviant humanism. The church needs to break the silence and clearly teach the wholesome message on sexuality to counter false indoctrination. In the process of doing so, however, the church should minister in love to all sinners by presenting the gospel, and not just try to label out one set of sinners. The modern heresy should not be allowed to become a distraction to the task of presenting a wholesome gospel.

70

Furthermore, in the body of Christ, discipline must be maintained so as to prevent spread of the chancre among weaker believers. Lastly, we need to seek the face of the Lord for revival in congregations which is the true antidote to the immorality and idolatry of the age.

References Barclay, William. (1973), The Plain Mans Guide to Ethics. London: Collins Fontana Books. Bornkamm, Gunther. (1971), Paul. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Bruce, Milne. (2009), Know the truth. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press. Gumbel, Nilky. (1996), Searching Issues. Colorado: David C. Cook Publishing.

71

Ernest, Best. (1972), A Commentary on the first and second epistle to the Thesalonnians. London: Adam and Charles Black. Hargreaves, John. (1991), A Guide to Corinthians. London: SPCK. Hubert, Richards. (1979), St Paul and his epistles. London: Darton, longman and Todd. Smedes, Lewis. (1976), Sex in the real world. Tring Herts: Lion publishing. Internet references Aguwa, Jude. (2010). Religion and HIV/AIDS prevention in Nigeria. The Free Library. (2010). Retrieved February 15, 2013 from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Religion and HIV/AIDS prevention in Nigeria.-a0230438614. Alex, D. Montoya. (2008). The Churchs response to homosexuality. TMSJ 19/2 (Fall 2008) 233-248. Downloaded from http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj19j.pdf, Anderson, J J. (2011). "Incompatible: The Construction of the Homosexual Subject in American Mainline Protestantism" Dissertations. Paper 142. Retrieved from http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/142. Coulter, P B. (2012). Christian Sexual Ethics. Retrieved from www.paulcoulter.net/Writing/Christian%20Sexual%20Ethic s.pdf. Dale, B. Martin. (2009). Arsenokoits and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences. CLGS 2009. Retrieved from http://www.clgs.org/arsenokoit%C3%A9s-and-malakosmeanings-and-consequences. Dolores, L. C. (2006). (Review of the book Just Love: A

72

Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics, by Margaret Farley). Retrieved from catholicbooksreview.org/../ farley.htm. Drake, H. (1998). Paul and Sexual Sin. The free library March 1 2010. Retrieved from Sinhttp://www.thefreelibrary.com/ Theological+Studies/20 10/March/1-p52704. Ethics (2011). In Oxford Advanced learners Dictionary. Retrieved February 4, 2013, from http:// oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com. Gastrich, J. (1998). The Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hebrews - Spring April 15, 1998. Retrieved from http://www.jcsm.org/Education/authorshipofHebrews.htm Falconberry, R G. (2009). A Biography of the Apostle Paul. Retrieved from http://suite101.com/article/the-apostlepaul-a-biography-a121760. Genrich, G. L. and Brathwaite, B A. (2005). Response of religious groups to HIV/AIDS as a sexually transmitted infection in Trinidad. BMC Public Health. 2005; 5: 121. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1310629. Gold, R. B. and Nash, E. (2001). "State-Level Policies on Sexuality, STD Education," The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy 4.(4) (Aug 2001); Retrieved from http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/04/4/gr040404.html. Green, E. C.(2001). The Impact of Religious Organizations in Promoting HIV/AIDS prevention. Revised version of paper presented at Challenges for the Church: AIDS, Malaria & TB. Christian Connections for International Health, Arlington, Va., May 25-26 2001. Available @ siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVDIALOGUE/ Resources/Impact...

73

Guinness, R. (2011). Continuing with the global Anglican Communion but departing from the Anglican Church of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.anglicannetwork .ca/pdf/ANiC_Paper_Continuing_Departing_011011.pdf. Hedrick, C. W. (1981). Paul's conversion/call: A Comparative Analysis of the Three Reports in Acts JBL 100/3: 415-432. Retrieved from http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ jbl/1981_hedrick.pdf. Homosexuality (2013). In Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved February 5, 2013, from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/homosexuality. Homosexual (2013). In Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved February 5, 2013, from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/homosexual. Human sexuality, (2012) In Wikipedia. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human sexuality. Keenan, J. F. (2007). Can we talk? Theological ethics and sexuality Theological studies (2007 March 1). Retrieved February 07, 2013 from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Can we talk? Theological ethics and sexuality.-a0160481357. Keenan, J. F. (2010). " Contemporary contributions to sexual ethics." Theological studies (2010 March 1). Retrieved from http:// http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Contemporary contributions to sexual ethics. Kinsey, A. C. Pomeroy, W. R. and Martin, C. E. (1948) Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Am J Public Health. 2003 June; 93(6): 894898. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447861/pdf/0930894.pdf.

74

Joloza, T. Evans, J. OBrien, R. and Potter-Collins, A. (2010). Measuring Sexual Identity: An Evaluation Report. Retrieved from http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/ rel/ethnicity/measuring-sexual-identity---evaluationreport/2010/index.html. Knight, R. H. (2002). How Bad Science Helped Launch the 'Gay' Revolution. Retrieved from http://www.cwfa.org/ content.asp?id=2099. Lanoue, S. (2011). "Just Sex: Sexual Ethics for Twenty-first Century Christians". FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 498. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons. fiu.edu/etd/498. Le Roux, O. (2006). Inclusion or exclusion?, A Christian ethical investigation into biblical perspectives on homosexuality (Masters thesis). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/19638. LeVay, S. (1991). A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men. Science, New Series, Vol. 253, No. 5023 pp. 1034-1037. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2878803. Levy, R.M. Bredesen, D.E. Rosenblum, M.L. and Davis, R.L. (1989). Central nervous system disorders in AIDS. Immunol Ser. 1989;44:371-401. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2489119. Lull, David. J. (2007). Jesus, Paul, and homosexuals. The Free Library. (2007). Retrieved February 07, 2013 from http://www.wartburgseminary.edu/uploadedfiles/Campus_ Community/Faculty_Pages/Lull_JesusPaulandHomosexuals. doc. Mouton, B. (n.d.)The life and letters of Paul. Retrieved from http://abarc.org/Resources/THE%20LIFE%20AND%20LET TERS%20OF%20PAUL.pdf.

75

Malick, D. E. (1993) The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9, Bibliotheca Sacra 150: 600(1993): 479492. Retrieved from http://www. biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_corinthians6.pdf. McElroy, W. (1996). The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism. The Libertarian Enterprise Number 19, (December 1, 1996). Retrieved from http://www.ncc1776.org/tle1996/le961210.html. Meyer-Bahlburg, H.F. Dolezal, C. Baker, S.W. and MI, N. (2008)Sexual orientation in women with classical or nonclassical congenital adrenal hyperplasia as a function of degree of prenatal androgen excess. Arch Sex Behav. 2008 Feb;37(1):85-99. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/18157628. Michael, A. Deaton, John, E. Glorioso, and David, B. Mclean. (1999). Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia: Not Really a Zebra. Am Fam Physician. Mar 1;59(5):1190-1196. Retrieved from http://www.aafp.org/afp /1999/0301/p1190.html. Ogland, C. P. Hinojosa, P. (2012). Religion and Social Attitudes: Examining the Contours of Religion in Moral Judgments Toward Premarital Sex and Cohabitation in Contemporary Brazil. Sociology of Religion. 73 (4). 411-428. Retrieved from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org/content/ 73/4/411.full. Paroschi, W. (2000). The Prophetic Significance of Stephen. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society , 9/1-2 (1998): 343361. Retrieved from http://www.atsjats.org/ publication_file.php?pub_id=184&journal=1&type=pdf. Trafford, S. (2002). Uganda Winning the Battle Against AIDS Using Abstinence. Culture and Family Institute (July, 2002). Retrieved from http://www.catholiceducation. org/articles/ sexuality/se0074.html.

76

Sex, (2011). Oxford Advanced learners Dictionary. Retrieved 4 February 2013 from http://oald8.oxfordlearners dictionaries.com. Sexual revolution, (2012). In Wikipedia. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index. php? title=Sexual_revolution&oldid=508101753. Sharp, D. A. (1997). Missionary zeal from non-missionary positions. The Lancet, Volume 350, Issue 9094, Pages 1862 1863. Retrieved from http://www.thelancet. com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)63691-4/. Smith, C. (2006). Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate. Paper presented at Tyndale Fellowship Triennial Conference, 2006,July 5. Regents Park Conference Centre, Nantwich, England. Retrieved from http://www.calvinsmith.org/attachments/File/homosexualit y-revisited-final.pdf. Stalker, J. (1884). The life of St Paul. Retrieved from. http://www.archive.org/stream/lifeofstpaul04stal#page/78 /mode/2up. Val, J. Peter.(2006). Political correctness: How they market homosexuality. CatholicCulture.org. Retrieved from http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id =7368. Vanderbeck, R. M., Valentine, G. Ward, K. Sadgrove, J. and Andersson, J. (2010). The Meanings of Communion: Anglican Identities, the Sexuality Debates, and Christian Relationality. Sociological Research Online, Volume 15, Issue 2, http://www.socresonline.org.uk /15/2/3.html 10.5153/sro.2106. Wallace, Q. E. (2002). The Early Life and Background of Paul the Apostle. The American journal of biblical theology.

77

Retrieved from http://www.biblicaltheology. com/Research/WallaceQ01.ht ml. Walsh, H. A. (1999). Mandatory celibacy and sexual ethics in the Latin rite of the Roman Catholic Church. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 2, Feb. 6, 1999 Retrieved from http://www.ejhs.org/volume2/walsh/walsh1.htm. Williams, R. (2009) 'Communion, Covenant and our Anglican Future', 27 July 2009a. Available at: http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/2502. Yarbrough, R. W. (Fall 1996). Excellence in Christian Living: Sex Ethics a la First Thessalonians 4:3-8. A Quarterly Journal for Church Leadership. 5(4). Retrieved from http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ref-rev/05-4/54_yarbrough.pdf. Yip, A. K. T. and Keenan, M. (2004) 'By Name United, By Sex Divided: A Brief Analysis of the Current Crisis Facing the Anglican Communion'. Sociological Research Online, vol. 9, no. 1. Retrieved from <http://www.socresonline.org.uk /9/1/yip.html>

78